| This is an archived forum, so it is here for read-only purposes only. We are not accepting new members and members cannot post any longer. Members can, however, access their old private messages. Strawberry Fields was open from 2006 until 2011. There is a Strawberry Fields Beatles Forum on Facebook. If you are registered with Facebook, join us at the group there! |
| 2008 U.S. Presidential Election | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Feb 22 2007, 05:49 AM (37,440 Views) | |
| bluemeanie | Feb 1 2008, 02:50 AM Post #601 |
|
is now a happily married woman x
|
Can't wait to meet her in Liddypool in May/June
|
|
Jayne x is loving life and is so happy xxx | |
![]() |
|
| scottycatt | Feb 1 2008, 06:23 AM Post #602 |
|
Linda is a Bar-ROCK STAR!!
|
|
Why? | |
![]() |
|
| scottycatt | Feb 1 2008, 07:50 AM Post #603 |
|
Here's where I went tonight.![]() |
|
Why? | |
![]() |
|
| scottycatt | Feb 1 2008, 07:53 AM Post #604 |
|
The courtyard at Hollywood and Highland, just outside the Kodak Theatre. CNN set up a jumbotron with a live feed of the debate and supporters of both candidates put on quite a show.
|
|
Why? | |
![]() |
|
| scottycatt | Feb 1 2008, 07:54 AM Post #605 |
|
|
|
Why? | |
![]() |
|
| scottycatt | Feb 1 2008, 07:54 AM Post #606 |
|
|
|
Why? | |
![]() |
|
| scottycatt | Feb 1 2008, 07:56 AM Post #607 |
|
|
|
Why? | |
![]() |
|
| scottycatt | Feb 1 2008, 07:57 AM Post #608 |
|
For Linda.;)
|
|
Why? | |
![]() |
|
| scottycatt | Feb 1 2008, 07:58 AM Post #609 |
|
For John.
![]() |
|
Why? | |
![]() |
|
| maccascruff | Feb 1 2008, 02:07 PM Post #610 |
|
Sing the Changes
|
Thanks, Beverly. Lucky you. Wish I could have done that, too. After the speech, we were taken to the gym for a meeting on how to get people to the caucus on Tuesday. Barack had to do some satellite thing, so they had to kill time before the man finally appeared. He thanked the precinct captains for all their hard work and shook some hands. Unfortunately, I was on the other side of the arena, so by the time I got to the gym, I was at the far end and did not get to shake his hand. Doesn't matter. He's still my man. My captain's kit arrived yesterday and I'm ready to go. Will spend Sunday afternoon calling all my caucus goers. Figure calling during the Super Bowl isn't a good idea.
|
![]() |
|
| fab4fan | Feb 1 2008, 03:19 PM Post #611 |
![]()
Caretaker
|
|
| Mnisthiti mou Kurie! | |
![]() |
|
| Blondie10 | Feb 1 2008, 06:24 PM Post #612 |
![]()
|
I'm not voting for MCcain, but I'm curious....why do you think he is a war monger... I don't think he is....I know he fought in the vietnam (experience) WAR? I don't know what the correct political way to say it is..... :wacko: but I don't think that makes him a war monger... My parents called Ronald Reagan the same thing!! <_< |
| There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. -- Douglas Adams <a href='http://eapr-1/@' target='_blank'></a> | |
![]() |
|
| Queenbee | Feb 1 2008, 06:55 PM Post #613 |
|
Moderator
|
Did you know Senator McCain was a POW in Viet-Nam? I'm for Senator Obama. |
|
PEACE and love to my friends, Judy When the Power of Love over comes the Love of Power, the world will know Peace. -Sri Chinmnoy Ghose Till me meet again ~ I Love you Mike! You were one of a kind. | |
![]() |
|
| Blondie10 | Feb 1 2008, 08:26 PM Post #614 |
![]()
|
I thought he was by one of the videos I saw.....but I wasn't sure... what horrible experiences he had to endure I'm sure...
I'm checking Obama out.... I've always voted Republican but it's not about the party, it's about the person...glad i registered independent... |
| There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. -- Douglas Adams <a href='http://eapr-1/@' target='_blank'></a> | |
![]() |
|
| Bag O' Nails | Feb 1 2008, 08:53 PM Post #615 |
|
MaccaMomma
|
Let me ask the Demos on this board a question... If Hillary wins the nomination, will you vote for her? If so, why? |
![]() One sweet dream came true....London & Liverpool '08 | |
![]() |
|
| beatlechick | Feb 2 2008, 12:48 AM Post #616 |
|
In Paul's Arms!
|
He is in favor of the war in Iraq and wants to add more troops. He has stated that we should be there for like 100 years. Heidi, if Hillary is my party's nominee than yes I would vote for her. I would vote for her because she would be closest to my ideals for America and the lesser of two evils no matter if it comes down to her vs McCain, Romney (who I like even less than McCain) and Paul. |
| |
![]() |
|
| beatlechick | Feb 2 2008, 12:51 AM Post #617 |
|
In Paul's Arms!
|
Beverly, how cool you went down there. I don't live close enough to have been there but pass the Reagan Library on my way to and from work. Very happy to see that there was at least 10-15 Obama supporters there for the Republican debates. Linda, can I get your autograph? I, too, saw you on our local news. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Feb 2 2008, 03:04 AM Post #618 |
|
How does that follow? Being a war veteran doesn't make one a war monger. I like McCain. It disappoints me that he has pandered to the base so much and parroted stupid talking points like "If we leave Iraq, they'll follow us home." Like how? Are they suddenly going to raise a navy and air force? Even so, I think he would make a responsible president precisely because of his war experience. He knows full well what it's like and he's the only Republican front-runner who has made a stand against torture. You'd think that would be a no-brainer in America in 2008. :hmm: It's sad that throughout the campaign, McCain seems to have had one foot on the straight-talk express and the other in bullsh*t town. But I hope that if he were president, he would then be off the leash and not have to pander to the party. I think at heart he's a traditional conservative, not a right wing robot. I do worry about his age though. If he had won in 2000 (as he well might have before the Bush/Rove dirty tricks came out) then he would be retired now. |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| maccascruff | Feb 2 2008, 03:21 AM Post #619 |
|
Sing the Changes
|
I would have to think about that if, horror of horrors, that should happen. I would probably end up voting for her because we have to have change in this country. McCain will keep us mired in Iraq forever and we have to figure a way out. However, I do not believe, as Hillary said at the debate the other night, that it takes a Clinton to clean up after a Bush. :angry: I believe Obama would do a much better job of cleaning up after this Bush. Cathy, you may have my autograph. I've gotten stopped in two grocery stores and the beauty shop by people who recognize me from the news stories. Today, one of my clients recognized me and told my Republican boss that he had hired a good person!
It is McCain's stance on the war that makes him a war monger to me. Has nothing to do with Viet Nam or his POW time there. His age is truly against him and conservatives don't like a lot of his message. Loved Obama saying that Romney has already shown that he would not be a good CEO because of the return he has gotten on his huge investment in the presidential race.
|
![]() |
|
| modgirl1964 | Feb 2 2008, 06:14 PM Post #620 |
![]()
|
I'm still a bit upset about John Edwards bowing out. I do think America's lost the one canidate who wasn't afraid to take on the real issues about the nation. With that, I think I'll wait and see what he does (like if he endorses anyone or becomes another canidate's running mate, if those two are smart, they'd make him one!) or I can turn to Mr Ralph Nader who is now setting up his exploration of the race. If he does jump in all the way, I'll just go indie this year. |
Bridget![]() Imported from Detroit | |
![]() |
|
| maccascruff | Feb 2 2008, 06:20 PM Post #621 |
|
Sing the Changes
|
I was told on Wednesday that Edwards wants to be Attorney General and is trying to broker that deal before endorsing. |
![]() |
|
| DCBeatle64 | Feb 2 2008, 06:20 PM Post #622 |
|
Wings nutter
|
Was having a chat with someone the other day about this, we were discussing the press that we in the UK have been getting about this, We both agreed that considering this isn't the US we have been hearing a hell of a lot about an election which technically shouldn't be a concern for us, of course when I said 'what happens in the US effects the rest of the world so we should care about it' the conversations mood changed slightly |
|
I'm a BIGGER Beatles fan than you and I'm an even BIGGER Wings fan than that... 'You're a Paul McCartney fan? No you're a Wings fan'. 'Thankyou Scotland' Ho Hey Ho... ![]() I am the buttplug goo goo goo joob | |
![]() |
|
| BeatleBarb | Feb 2 2008, 08:25 PM Post #623 |
![]()
|
I prefer Obama over the Mama, but anything is better than Republican trauma...nyuk, nyuk, nyuk. |
![]() |
|
| tagandolfo | Feb 2 2008, 09:01 PM Post #624 |
|
I would vote for Hillary or Obama - A Democrat to change the direction this county is going in. I can't understand a policy of an unended war where not only thousands of our people have died and been maimed but thousands of Iraqi. I also don't think that we can continue to justify the direction the economy is going under this Republican president or the lack care being given to our own citizens in the form of affordable health care and an education system where billions are being spent but little results are truly being felt. I just hope we can get on a better track under a new person. |
![]() |
|
| Queenbee | Feb 3 2008, 04:13 AM Post #625 |
|
Moderator
|
I would actually cry if Senator Obama doesn't win the nomination. IF I voted for her, I would be choking as I was punching the key. I think Senator McCain is too old. They should have an age limit if you want to run for president. IMHO ((Linda)) How cool of you to be right behind Senator Obama. I had a celebrity sleep at my house. I'll be voting for Senator Obama Tuesday. |
|
PEACE and love to my friends, Judy When the Power of Love over comes the Love of Power, the world will know Peace. -Sri Chinmnoy Ghose Till me meet again ~ I Love you Mike! You were one of a kind. | |
![]() |
|
| Mia Culpa | Feb 3 2008, 06:02 AM Post #626 |
|
This space intentionally left blank.
|
CNN International is American-election crazy. At least it's taken some focus off Iraq. But they do seem to think only 4 people are running. I wonder how many Americans know there are more than 4 choices. |
| If you read my posts backward there's evidence that Paul is dead. | |
![]() |
|
| Bag O' Nails | Feb 3 2008, 06:12 AM Post #627 |
|
MaccaMomma
|
Cathy, Linda, Barb & Judy... Thanks for answering my question. I know that you all love Obama so much and seem to really dislike Hillary; so I was curious what would happen if he didn't win the nomination. Bill, this goes to support my view that voting your party line is usually what people do, even if they don't necessarily like the candidate. You had been commenting on voting for the person vs your party, but usually the people you agree with are on opposite parties..."a lesser of two evils" is how it is usually put. I'm a staunch Republican...a Reagan conservative....proud of it. The party has not always done everything that I've totally agreed with; no party has...I will vote for whomever gets the Republican nomination. Out of McCain and Romney, I prefer Romney; but we won't know until next week.Whomever wins on either side, it will be an interesting election. I bet it will be very close, and I fear neither side will go down easily. I look forward :rolleyes: to the weeks of complaining and re-counts...it will happen.
|
![]() One sweet dream came true....London & Liverpool '08 | |
![]() |
|
| Bag O' Nails | Feb 3 2008, 06:14 AM Post #628 |
|
MaccaMomma
|
I agree with that, on both counts. If McCain gets the nomination, we'll need to pay close attention to his VP is... :rolleyes: |
![]() One sweet dream came true....London & Liverpool '08 | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Feb 3 2008, 07:07 AM Post #629 |
|
Either that, or rethink your choice. Heidi, I understand your reasoning but surely there must be some critical mass that makes you think again? It's a comment I hear a lot from Republicans. "I could never vote for any Democrat because they don't represent my values." "Fair enough, but the Republicans have drifted so far to the radical right that they don't reflect your values any more than the Democrats." "Oh well, nobody's perfect." I find it interesting that you've resolved to vote Republican no matter who the nominee is, especially when you've expressed serious reservations about some of the candidates. What if McCain gets the nomination and names Rudy as his VP? Would that be time to change old habits? Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to change you, just trying to follow the logic. I find it just as interesting people have resolved to vote Democrat regardless of the candidate. If it came down to Clinton vs McCain, I'd be rooting for McCain. If it came down to Clinton vs Romney, it would be very hard to figure out what the lesser of two evils is there. If it came down to Romney vs Obama, that's a no-brainer.
|
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Feb 3 2008, 07:11 AM Post #630 |
|
If endorsements count for anything (and I don't think they do) then this means Hillary is toast. http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/02/01/a...illary-clinton/ Funniest thing Fox has ever broadcast! :lol: |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| Dorfliedot | Feb 3 2008, 07:28 AM Post #631 |
![]()
Beatlelicious
|
If truth be told I do not want Hillary to win. I did not like her husband. and , I know sure won't like her. |
![]() Add Glitter to your Photos | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Feb 3 2008, 03:19 PM Post #632 |
|
Deleted User
|
Well I was all for Obama until he started talking how great Reagen was. Turned me off him right there and then. Will see who the third party candidates are and make a decision then. Won't vote for the lesser of two evils. |
|
|
| beatlechick | Feb 3 2008, 06:07 PM Post #633 |
|
In Paul's Arms!
|
Heidi, the reason why I would vote Hillary over Romney and McCain is not because I am voting Democrat over Republican, it is because she is closer to my ideals than they are. Until this election my State, California, has always had the primary in early June. By that time many candidates have already dropped out so all we would get would be the leftovers and little choice. The only Republican that would come somewhat close to my ideals, and that was only because of his anti-war stance and nothing else, was Ron Paul. Being anti-war is great but most of his other issues I can not agree with. There has yet to be a Republican or many other political parties that has come close to my ideals. Not all Democrats would either. |
| |
![]() |
|
| beatlechick | Feb 3 2008, 06:10 PM Post #634 |
|
In Paul's Arms!
|
Tony, it takes a big man to say that he liked (he never said Reagan was great) someone from another party. When was the last time you have heard that coming from a Presidental contender? |
| |
![]() |
|
| BeatleBarb | Feb 3 2008, 06:15 PM Post #635 |
![]()
|
I feel the same way, Cathy. I'm not ruling Hilary out - I do like her - in fact, if she had explained herself better about her stance on Iraq I would be supporting her more. |
![]() |
|
| scottycatt | Feb 3 2008, 06:51 PM Post #636 |
|
Well, at the risk of getting berated and being ostracized, I'll admit that I'm voting for Hillary. I am originally from Little Rock and had the opportunity to see firsthand what she is all about. She "walked the walk" long before she "talked the talk". She has stayed true to her ideals throughout her life and her public career, and she was a champion of many women's and children's causes, as well as an advocate for education and opportunities for the underprivileged long before it became popular to do so. I also admire her courage and tenacity to stand up to the "old boys' club". I admire her strength and courage, and she can hold her own with anyone, anywhere. One only has to take a look at Chelsea Clinton to see what kind of mom Hillary was and is. There. I may be the lone wolf here, but that's OK. It won't be the first time. !Btw, I also like Obama and much of what he has to say. I will be happy with either of the Democratic nominees and will do my part to make sure that one of them winds up as our next commander in chief. I can't wait until Bush et al are out of the White House! Hurry up, 2009!!
|
|
Why? | |
![]() |
|
| BeatleBarb | Feb 3 2008, 07:02 PM Post #637 |
![]()
|
My daughter is proudly voting for Hilary as well as my 30 year old son. Both her and Obama share some very similar views and I would welcome either one! |
![]() |
|
| beatlechick | Feb 3 2008, 07:04 PM Post #638 |
|
In Paul's Arms!
|
Bev, my boyfriend and I got each other the Bush countdown to out of office calendar for Christmas. We now have 352 days left!
|
| |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Feb 3 2008, 07:24 PM Post #639 |
|
Deleted User
|
There are many great republicans, Reagen was far from being one. The man who made ketchup a vegitable, come on. |
|
|
| modgirl1964 | Feb 3 2008, 07:52 PM Post #640 |
![]()
|
Hmm.. I think I can see him as that. I do like the fact he's been a gentleman the whole way through this and bowed out gracefully. True politican I think. |
Bridget![]() Imported from Detroit | |
![]() |
|
| scottycatt | Feb 3 2008, 07:56 PM Post #641 |
|
Or maybe he's just a truly nice person.
|
|
Why? | |
![]() |
|
| maccascruff | Feb 3 2008, 08:31 PM Post #642 |
|
Sing the Changes
|
I think Edwards is a very nice man and he was my candidate in 2004. Didn't get the nomination. Doesn't sound like he wants to be the VP candidate for either one of the two Democrats left in the running. Whoever you are voting for on Tuesday, just get out and support your candidate. That is what this country should be about. |
![]() |
|
| scottycatt | Feb 3 2008, 08:35 PM Post #643 |
|
I can sincerely and wholeheartedly agree with that statement, now that Bush/Cheney are no longer on the ballot.
|
|
Why? | |
![]() |
|
| beatlechick | Feb 3 2008, 08:49 PM Post #644 |
|
In Paul's Arms!
|
I didn't say that any of us would say great Republican just saying that how many times have you heard a Presidential contender compliment a former President from another party? |
| |
![]() |
|
| maccascruff | Feb 3 2008, 08:53 PM Post #645 |
|
Sing the Changes
|
When Obama said that about Bush and his cousin Cheney is when John thought I threw my back out!
|
![]() |
|
| tagandolfo | Feb 3 2008, 09:37 PM Post #646 |
|
Bev, you said it very clearly. for the same reasons I voted for Hillary in our caucus and will support her at our convention. She is very much behind issues that are important to my heart - education, woman's issues and children. Over the 30 years I have been in education and worked for children and families with preschoolers and children with disabilities, I haven't heard a candidate come out as solidly behind what is good for these groups. She is willing to say let's scrap NCLB - and lets work on universal health care - let's get help to families with children with disabilities who can't pay for therapies or devices to improve their outcomes ------ I have to vote for someone who is willing to stand up for the less fortunate. Thanks for saying it so eloquently |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Feb 3 2008, 09:51 PM Post #647 |
|
Deleted User
|
I know you didn't say that, commenting on the fact that there are many great republicans that he could have mentioned other than diaper boy. and John Kerry said many great things about McCain |
|
|
| scottycatt | Feb 3 2008, 10:28 PM Post #648 |
|
Wow, Tony. I didn't care for Reagan, either, but to call him "diaper boy"??
|
|
Why? | |
![]() |
|
| scottycatt | Feb 3 2008, 10:30 PM Post #649 |
|
Theresa!!
Glad to know that I'm not a *party of one* here.
|
|
Why? | |
![]() |
|
| JeffLynnesBeard | Feb 4 2008, 02:08 AM Post #650 |
|
Administrator & Moderator
|
Well, as we approach 'Super Tuesday', it appears that the Republicans have virtually already opted for a young, dynamic, diverse, shock candidate - 71-year old White Christian John McCain. What a strange world we live in. McCain would be deemed too old to get a job working at his local supermarket, but millions of Americans would vote for him to run the country. Something isn't right there.
The Democrats are, literally, too close to call but if their party wins the Presidency then we will either see the first woman President or the first black President. Although my personal preference is Obama because I like his policies, the things he says and the way he says them, plus, I believe that he has the greater dignity of the two candidates, I wouldn't be displeased if Hillary became the candidate and won. Of the two, however, I think that Obama has a better chance of winning against McCain. --- Clinton lead dwindles ahead of Super Tuesday · Democratic frontrunner attacks buoyant Obama · McCain confident of win in final hours before vote Suzanne Goldenberg and Ewen MacAskill in Washington -Monday February 4, 2008 Hillary Clinton tried yesterday to bring Barack Obama's aspirational candidacy back to earth, repeatedly accusing him of misleading voters in an attempt to halt his poll momentum ahead of tomorrow's Super Tuesday contest. With opinion polls showing Obama making significant gains ahead of the contest in 22 states, Clinton tried to undermine Obama's central appeal of being a politician who operated above the fray. In an appearance on ABC television, she repeatedly accused Obama of being "misleading" or making statements that were "untrue" on issues from diplomacy to healthcare. "I really hope Senator Obama will quit deliberately mis-stating what I have said," she complained. Obama, on the morning chat shows, was just as combative. In an interview on ABC, he suggested Clinton's history made her a polarising figure and that he was more electable. "I think I can get votes that Senator Clinton can't get," he said. The two contenders for the Democratic nomination are now in a virtual dead-heat for the party nomination ahead of Super Tuesday. The two are spending $19m (£9.5m) on ads in the final hours of the contest. Obama is advertising in 21 of the 22 states, while Clinton is targeting 19, having apparently given up on Alaska, Colorado, Kansas and Missouri. Neither is running television ads in Obama's home state of Illinois. In the Republican race, John McCain could barely disguise his confidence that he would emerge tomorrow as the winner. "I assume that I will get the nomination of the party," McCain told reporters. Clinton, asked about the erosion of her poll lead on early-morning television interviews, said: "This was always going to be a close election." She used the talkshows to claim that Obama's healthcare plan represented a surrender to the health industry lobbyists who oppose universal coverage. "It looks like it was written by the health insurance companies," she said. "He is playing right into all the arguments against this core issue of the Democratic party." She stressed that as a battle-scarred veteran she could better withstand Republican attacks. "General elections are much more contested. The other side has no compunction about raising any issue against anyone they are running against," she said. Weekend polls confirmed the trend that Obama is closing the gap. A Washington Post-ABC news poll yesterday showed Clinton on 47% to Obama's 43%. MSNBC-McClatchy, polling in key battleground states, also had Obama gaining on Clinton. He was ahead in Georgia, which has a large African-American population, by 47% to 41%. The poll even showed him catching up with Clinton in her own backyard, with a gap of only 7% in New Jersey. In Arizona, which had been thought to be for Clinton because of its large Latino population, she was on 43% and Obama on 41%. The Pew Research Centre for the People and the Press said in its poll that Obama had made important inroads among white male voters, especially middle-aged and middle-income voters who had previously been solidly behind Clinton. It said he had picked up a significant share of John Edwards's support following his exit from the race last week. The poll put Clinton on 46% of the vote nationally, against 38%. In addition, the poll detected growing unease among Democratic voters at the idea of having Bill Clinton back in the White House, with 41% expressing concern, up from 34% in October. Both camps were using the final hours of the campaign to appeal to core constituencies - although there was an agreed pause for last night's Superbowl. On the Republican side, Romney managed to chalk up a victory on Saturday in the caucuses in Maine but polls suggest McCain will be hard to stop tomorrow. Pew gave McCain a formidable lead nationally, with 42% of the vote against 22% for Romney. McCain now dominates all segments of the Republican electorate, except for evangelical voters, where he is level with Mike Huckabee, the poll said. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections08/hi...2251976,00.html |
| ...and in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make. | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Feb 4 2008, 03:10 AM Post #651 |
|
If you agree with any of the above, find out who said it and support that candidate. |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| maccascruff | Feb 4 2008, 03:20 AM Post #652 |
|
Sing the Changes
|
Why I Support Obama: Reasons I support Barack Obama (this list does not come from the Obama campaign, these are my own personal reasons that I support him. 1. Obama demonstrated exceptional judgment by opposing the Iraq War from the start, and at the same time supports using all means necessary to eliminate Al Qaida, the group responsible for 9/11. The fact that Obama opposed the war from the start is important because when the Democratic nominee is debating the next GOP candidate over removing our troops in Iraq, it is a better argument if our nominee always believed that invading Iraq was a flawed mission - not just a problem of execution. Invading Iraq was a bad strategy to protect our long-term security. There are numerous other global threats we face (Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc), and this war costs $200 billion every year, is killing and seriously injuring thousands of our soldiers, is not making us safer (Al Quaida and terrorists are a global threat, therefore not confined to Iraq), is wearing down our military, and it is leaving a trillion dollar debt for our children. This is also important because "Whoever is in office in Jan 2009 will be tasked with redeploying forces in and out of Iraq, negotiating with neighboring states, engaging America's estranged allies, tamping down regional violence. Obama's interlocutors in Iraq and the Middle East would know that he never had suspicious motives toward Iraq, has no interest in occupying it indefinitely, and foresaw more clearly than most Americans the baleful consequences of long-term occupation." (from Andrew Sullivan - see article link below) We need exceptional judgment to ensure we are using our military power wisely. 2. Obama can unite the country around common goals and inspire hope for our future. Obama carries support not only from Democrats, but Independents and Republicans. He is leading a unified movement to create the majority needed to allow us to pass universal health care, end oil dependency and end the war in Iraq. This country has not seen a leader come along like this since John Kennedy and Robert Kennedy, and we may not see another leader like this again in our lifetime. We should seize this momentous and historic opportunity. 3. He represents fundamental change in Washington due to not accepting money from PACs or lobbyists. Obama helped pass two of the toughest ethics laws in Illinois history, and both of them attempted to reduce the influence of lobbyists. It was Obama who led the successful landmark effort in the US Senate to pass the most comprehensive ethics and lobbying reform bill since Watergate. That bill strictly banned gifts and meals from lobbyists, and the use of corporate jets. He has the experience, both as an Illinois State Senator and as a US Senator, of working throughout his entire political career for transparency and honesty in government. 4. His foreign policy stresses diplomacy and economics as important tools of negotiation with foreign dictators; he will use new tactics for diplomacy in Iran. The biggest beneficiary of our invasion of Iraq has been Iran. We need a President who is making decisions not based on flawed ideology, but based on knowledge of the region, based on the players that are involved, based on what's good for our long-term national security. Barack Obama has the education (specialized in Intl Relations at Columbia University), the support of strong and influential foreign policy advisors, and the unique world perspective that I believe has given him insights into repairing our standing in the world. He also states, "I have repeatedly said I would not take military options off the table. I don't think any president can in any circumstance. What I have said is that until we have exhausted those efforts [of diplomacy and economics], then we are not doing what's right for the American people." 5. He will bring new global respect to the U.S., which is needed after the collapse of America's prestige and moral reputation. As he stated on Meet the Press (Nov07) "part of the reason it's important for us to talk to countries we don't like and leaders we don't like, it's not that I think that in a conversation with somebody like Ahmadinejad that I'm going to somehow change his mind on everything, but what we do is, we send a signal to other leadership in Iran, to the Iranian people and to the world community that we are listening and that we are willing to try to resolve conflicts peacefully. That's the kind of work to repair our standing in the world that I believe the next president's going to have to engage in." He stated in the last debate that "the last [national intelligence estimate] suggested that if we are meeting with [Iran], talking to them, and offering them both carrots and sticks, they are more likely to change their behavior. And we can do so in a way that does not ultimately cost billions of dollars, thousands of lives, and hurt our reputation around the world." 6. He has shown remarkable honesty to the American public by not pandering to interest groups (ex: he has championed merit pay while speaking to teachers and also fuel-efficiency standards while talking to automakers) He has pledged to fight special interests in Washington. 7. He is Qualified. In his endorsement of Obama, Sen. Ted Kennedy, with over 40 years of experience, said: "I know that he's ready to be President on day one..." When Obama is inaugurated, he will have served 11 years in elected office (4 more years than Hillary), and he'll be 47 (Teddy Roosevelt was 42, JFK was 43, and Bill Clinton was 46). 8. He brings CHANGE. Bush-Clinton-Clinton-Bush-Bush-??Clinton?? Having a sixth consecutive President with the name Bush or Clinton cannot possibly inspire us to believe that we live in a country with opportunity for all. In contrast, imagine what it will mean to people around the world when Barack Obama becomes the face of America's newest President. As Andrew Sullivan writes, "Think of it as the most effective potential re-branding of the U.S. since Reagan. Such a re-branding is not trivial--it's central to an effective war strategy. The war on Islamist terror, after all, is two-pronged: a function of both hard power and soft power. We have seen the potential of hard power in removing the Taliban and Saddam Hussein. We have also seen its inherent weaknesses in Iraq, and its profound limitations in winning a long war against radical Islam. The next president has to create a sophisticated and supple blend of soft and hard power to isolate the enemy, to fight where necessary, but also to create an ideological template that works to the West's advantage over the long haul. There is simply no other candidate with the potential of Obama to do this. Which is where his face comes in. Consider this hypothetical. It's November 2008. A young Pakistani Muslim is watching television and sees that this man--Barack Hussein Obama--is the new face of America. In one simple image, America's soft power has been ratcheted up not a notch, but a logarithm. A brown-skinned man whose father was an African, who grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii, who attended a majority-Muslim school as a boy, is now the alleged enemy. If you wanted the crudest but most effective weapon against the demonization of America that fuels Islamist ideology, Obama's face gets close. It proves them wrong about what America is in ways no words can." (from Article, "Goodbye to All That") 9. He has the unique ability to unite the Blue and Red divide in our country by not carrying divisive baggage from the past, and he carries an exceptional reputation for being able to see the merits on both sides of an argument. Andrew Sullivan writes, "At its best, the Obama candidacy is about ending a war--not so much the war in Iraq, which now has a momentum that will propel the occupation into the next decade--but the war within America that has prevailed since Vietnam and that shows dangerous signs of intensifying, a nonviolent civil war that has crippled America at the very time the world needs it most. It is a war about war--and about culture and about religion and about race. And in that war, Obama--and Obama alone--offers the possibility of a truce. (see article by Andrew Sullivan: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200712/obama/) "We may in fact have finally found that bridge to the 21st century that Bill Clinton told us about. Its name is Obama." 10. Independents will determine the next election. The Democrats or Republicans need Independents to win. Barack has the ability to gain more Independent and dissatisfied Republicans than Hillary. Hillary has the highest negative rating of any candidate. Her disapproval rating has consistently been high. About 49% of Americans have said that under no circumstances would they ever vote for Hillary. I personally know many Democrats would never vote for her. We want to support a winner. |
![]() |
|
| BeatleBarb | Feb 4 2008, 02:54 PM Post #653 |
![]()
|
It was a brilliant speech. |
![]() |
|
| fab4fan | Feb 4 2008, 04:59 PM Post #654 |
![]()
Caretaker
|
Sounds like a convenient excuse for east coast liberal "institutionalized racism." :rolleyes:
|
| Mnisthiti mou Kurie! | |
![]() |
|
| fab4fan | Feb 4 2008, 05:41 PM Post #655 |
![]()
Caretaker
|
![]() :lol: P.S. Please do NOT mistake my previous post as accusing any one individual. That's why the name was taken off the quote. A debate starter for sure, but NOT a personal attack. As for the debate we'll see with tomorrow's results. |
| Mnisthiti mou Kurie! | |
![]() |
|
| MaccasGirl | Feb 4 2008, 05:56 PM Post #656 |
|
Born To Be Wild
|
HILARIous!!! :lol: I'm getting out to vote tomorrow!
|
|
And in the end...The love you take..Is equal to the love you make. | |
![]() |
|
| beatlechick | Feb 5 2008, 12:42 AM Post #657 |
|
In Paul's Arms!
|
Can't wait to vote tomorrow! I would loooove to vote before going to work but I start work an hour before the polls open! Linda, well said m'friend! No matter what happens in the Democratic convention, one thing we know is historty is being made and about damn time, too!!
|
| |
![]() |
|
| maccascruff | Feb 5 2008, 01:54 AM Post #658 |
|
Sing the Changes
|
History will be made in Colorado tomorrow and I will be part of it. I do hope the snow stops or the turnout could be affected. We have a conference call in a short while for last minute ideas. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Feb 5 2008, 02:34 AM Post #659 |
|
Deleted User
|
Why should I pay him respect when he had so little for the poor? What goes around comes around and I for one am hoping he is burning in hell. |
|
|
| Deleted User | Feb 5 2008, 02:40 AM Post #660 |
|
Deleted User
|
John there are/were many republicans who I would support, Reagen was not one of them. You can call it anything you like, I wouldn't support anyone who supported someones ideas I didn't believe in. I didn't vote for Gore or Kerry as I disliked them both, so Nader got my votes those times. A third party may still get mine this time. We as Americans have choices, no one states we have to follow the two parties. The time for change is now. |
|
|
| Bag O' Nails | Feb 5 2008, 04:38 AM Post #661 |
|
MaccaMomma
|
<_<
|
![]() One sweet dream came true....London & Liverpool '08 | |
![]() |
|
| Bag O' Nails | Feb 5 2008, 04:53 AM Post #662 |
|
MaccaMomma
|
I understand, Cathy, and it's the point that I keep trying to make...Democratic and Republican ideals differ; it's what makes you a Demo or a Repub! Liberals = Democrats and Conservatives = Republicans. If anything, it's the Republicans that have a divided party. When they don't like the Republican choice, they may tend to split their vote and go Independent. Many times it's a reason why elections are lost to the other side. Bill, I watched something on tv today where they were talking to undecided Democrats (Obama or Hillary). Despite the fact that they had divided opinions on which person to choose, when asked, all of them strongly said they if their candidate didn't get the nomination, they would never vote for any Republican. It again comes down to party lines. And it always will. If anything, this mentality will come back to bite the Republicans in the butt. Many of the conservatives are dismayed with McCain's "liberalism" and when push comes to shove, may vote "Independant" rather than vote McCain. This will definitely give the election to the Democrat. My prediction is that McCain cannot win against Obama. He may have a slight chance against Hillary. We've had 8 yrs of Bush, 8 yrs of Clinton, another 8 of Bush...I think it will be Obama.
|
![]() One sweet dream came true....London & Liverpool '08 | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Feb 5 2008, 05:04 AM Post #663 |
|
You only had Bush 41 for 4 years. I can understand if it felt like 8. :lol: I understand how things work. Mt question is WHY? McCain is NOT a liberal by any stretch of the imagination. He's a true conservative in the traditional sense of the word. What's he's not is a right-wing automaton like the Bush/Cheney/NeoCon crowd. Some hardcore righties object to that but as many Republicans view it as a breath of fresh air that might just be their only hope against a genuinely inspirational candidate. |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| Bag O' Nails | Feb 5 2008, 05:43 AM Post #664 |
|
MaccaMomma
|
Oooops....thanks for the correction on Bush 41... In the conservative world, McCain is considered liberal on many fronts. An interesting read; it's a couple of years old but has some main thoughts: John McCain: Liberal In Disguise by Matthew A. Roberts as seen in National Ledger (May 2006) Over the past three decades, America in some respects has moved slightly to the Right. Although conservatives have not yet won the wars on political correctness, education, and culture, Americans nevertheless are now more skeptical than they were thirty years ago of big government, high taxes, entitlements, judicial activism and secularism. In these areas, conservatives have proven most successful. The word "liberal" has become a bad word in most states, and consequently many leftists hesitate to label themselves as leftists. In many states it now rings popular to call oneself a conservative, even if one truly resembles a liberal. As with any popular movement, dilution occurs, opportunists blow with the wind, and pretenders abound. John McCain is one of these pretenders. He is a leftist in disguise, using his popularity and charisma to masque his liberal leanings. In reality, McCain resides as far to the Left as John Kerry. Anyone who thinks otherwise deludes himself. McCain has most feigned conservatism in his militarism. McCain, a Vietnam veteran, is hawkish and patriotic. These attributes support his political stump. As long as he can play the veteran card and remain pro-war, he can downplay all his other shortcomings. Appearing hawkish, however, does not necessarily constitute conservatism. (Recent history shows that leftists can be militaristic too: Stalin, Mao, Castro). Military force always will remain crucial in many cases, but willingness to use it does not incontrovertibly make one a conservative. And when one gets beyond McCain's bellicism, his true liberal character crops up. Outside martial matters, McCain sides with the American Left on most key issues. The greatest irony of McCain's masquerade is that he packages himself as a principled conservative, one with character, who rises above partisan politics. In reality, however, he is as disingenuous as the Clintons and presently bends whichever the way the wind blows to bolster himself for 2008. Analyze him issue by issue. First, regarding religion, McCain looms as no lover of Christians. Recall his comments about key religious leaders in 2000, calling them "agents of intolerance." And McCain's vitriolic vilification of Christians was not limited to a single occurrence, for he later said, "I must not and will not retract anything that I said in that speech at Virginia Beach. It was carefully crafted, it was carefully thought out." (Hardball, 3/1/00). More recently, however, McCain, positioning himself for 2008, has repackaged himself as pro-Christian, lauding key religious leaders and duping the devout. (Is this not as reptilian as Bill Clinton's waffling?) Second, on the issue of gay marriage, in 2005 McCain opposed a federal gay-marriage ban (Los Angeles Times, 1/25/ and 3/8). Now, however, likely realizing that most Americans think otherwise, McCain says he supports a gay-marriage ban (Meet the Press, 4/2/06). Which is it? Given his penchant for progressive politics, we can only assume the former. Then, regarding abortion, McCain most certainly is pro-choice. In the San Francisco Chronicle (8/20/99) McCain sided with the pro-abortion camp, suggesting that overturning Roe v. Wade would lead to illegal abortions. Realizing, however, that he could not inveigle the GOP nomination with such views, McCain more recently has resold himself as pro-life, even saying he would support the South Dakota ban on abortions. What are Americans to believe? He either is pro-choice or lacks any real conviction on the subject. Furthermore, regarding campaign-finance reform, the McCain-Feingold Campaign Reform Act is perhaps one of the more left-wing acts of Congress in the past twenty years. As recently exposed by Brian C. Anderson, "The Plot to Shush Rush and O'Reilly" in City Journal, McCain-Feingold (which passed with overwhelming Democrat support) is a convenient contrivance to silence conservatives. As noted by a whole host of commentators (George Will, Jonathan Rauch, and even Justice Clarence Thomas), this act poses blatant restrictions on political speech. It especially affects AM Radio and political internet blogs -- the only two spheres of popular media where conservatives can truly compete. Critics remain divided why McCain supported a dictate so damaging to conservatives. Was it perhaps so that he could silence many on the Right whom he laconically loathes? Last, but not least, McCain's liberal tendencies show in the immigration debate. McCain has proven to be farther Left on the immigration issue than even many Liberals. At the very basis of most conservative thought is the idea of law and order, which are essential for the continuity of society. Bypassing tradition and sanity, and slapping in the face those who have come here legally, McCain has sought to sweep aside law and order to engage in the unbecoming business of pandering to ethnicities. (Isn't this the dominion of Democrats?) McCain's radical views on immigration threaten numerous components of the wellbeing of the United States and, more generally, Western Civilization: national security, standards of living, and cultural homogeneity, to name a few. McCain has courted the cheap-labor lobby for some fast cash for 2008 and now attempts to convert the U.S. into a third-world country. McCain's liberal laundry list goes on and on. Senator Lindsey Graham, another liberal in disguise, comments correctly that the present is a defining moment for the Republican Party, although his underlying analysis is wrong. The choice is between a party of McCain's vision, a party indistinguishable from the Democratic Party, or a party that at least maintains a modicum of conservatism. If McCain loses, hopefully he will depart for the Democratic Party (where he belongs); but if he wins, expect to see a mass exodus of conservative voters from the GOP, probably over to a third party. -------- Matthew A. Roberts is a freelance columnist and maintains a weblog at http://www.conservatoroccidentalis.com |
![]() One sweet dream came true....London & Liverpool '08 | |
![]() |
|
| Bag O' Nails | Feb 5 2008, 05:45 AM Post #665 |
|
MaccaMomma
|
Not everyone finds him "inspirational." I find him a good orator but where's the substance? |
![]() One sweet dream came true....London & Liverpool '08 | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Feb 5 2008, 06:11 AM Post #666 |
|
Oh come on Heidi! You can't go posting an article like that and then ask, "Where's the substance?" about Obama! That piece was full of the right-wing groupthink that I've been talking about about. McCain is a real conservative. It's only the hard-core reality-challenged, far-right nutcases that claim he isn't conservative - Ann Coulter being the latest.... what more do you need to know? :lol: Who out there has more substance than McCain and Obama and why? It's an honest question, because all I hear from the right is people saying Obama doesn't have the experience or the substance but they never back up the blanket statement. How ironic that the arguments saying he lacks substance are so lacking in substance. |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| Bag O' Nails | Feb 5 2008, 06:30 AM Post #667 |
|
MaccaMomma
|
I KNEW you'd say that about the article...lol!
OK, here's a more recent one...although I doubt I could ever find one you'd ever agree with: http://www.vdare.com/buchanan/080124_mccain.htm Many people are mesmerized with Obama's ability to speak and "inspire" people. Add the disillusionment with the current administration, and you have the perfect recipe for a democratic president. It's really that simple. p.s. oh and I might as well add...and you'll love this...two of your favs....Hannity and Limbaugh, both don't like McCain's "liberalism." Hannity for sure is for Romney. Notthatyoulikeeitherofthosetwo.
|
![]() One sweet dream came true....London & Liverpool '08 | |
![]() |
|
| Bag O' Nails | Feb 5 2008, 06:37 AM Post #668 |
|
MaccaMomma
|
Bill, Some more right-wing propaganda for you to read:
http://www.marklevinshow.com/index.php February 4, 2008 On Monday's Mark Levin Show: Mark discusses the Constitution and what John McCain would do to it - especially the 4th and 5th amendments. Do we really want John McCain to give al Qaeda terrorists Constitutional rights? McCain has spent 20 years destroying the Republican party - and we're just supposed to give in right now? Rush Limbaugh calls in live and discusses an e-mail that Bob Dole sent him regarding why he should support John McCain. Rush gives analysis on the letter, and where Bob Dole is wrong, and what parts of McCain’s record he overlooks. Also, National Review’s Andrew Mccarthy calls in and gives his support for Romney. |
![]() One sweet dream came true....London & Liverpool '08 | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Feb 5 2008, 06:39 AM Post #669 |
|
Oh really? How did you know?
Now you're using Bush's incompetence as a pretext for minimising Obama's qualification. So where, as you say, is the substance? The point Buchanan (that well known moderate ) is making is that McCain actually has bipartisan credentials. The extreme right seems to think that bipartisanship means we decide and you shut up. It doesn't, It means actual co-operation. Which is exactly Obama's point too. There's your substance. And one more question: If McCain is such a screaming leftie, why are so many Republicans voting for him in the primaries? Could it be that they too are aching for a return to true conservatism and reject the discredited neocon ideology? I think so. |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| Bag O' Nails | Feb 5 2008, 06:39 AM Post #670 |
|
MaccaMomma
|
More bathroom reading:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDEzM...ZWNkMWQ1NjI4MGI |
![]() One sweet dream came true....London & Liverpool '08 | |
![]() |
|
| Bag O' Nails | Feb 5 2008, 06:46 AM Post #671 |
|
MaccaMomma
|
I never said McCain is a screaming leftie; I just don't think he's the right choice for a conservative party, and neither do many of the mainstream popular conservatives. I'm not alone in this! Yes, Obama or Hillary will have a much better chance at winning the election because of Bush's low ratings! Absolutely! Ever hear of the phrase, "it's hard to follow a hero?" IF Bush would've gone down in history as one of the best presidents ever, the Repubs would have a very good chance at continuing that record in office. But we all know that "change" is the key word that is being touted. Not all of us want the same kind of change. |
![]() One sweet dream came true....London & Liverpool '08 | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Feb 5 2008, 06:48 AM Post #672 |
|
Seriously Heidi, you don't expect me to take Rush Limbaugh seriously do you? You were the one who brought up the issue of substance so don't insult my intelligence by bringing that cretin into the equation. If you want to talk about changing the constitution, then Huckabee is the one you should be scared of. He's the one on record as wanting to change the constitution. What McCain is about is America being America again. Does your America torture? Does your America imprison people without charge? This again proves my point. McCain is a REAL conservative and not a right-wing ideologue. There IS a difference. But you'd never know that if you got all your information from Limbaugh. The thing is Heidi, I'm asking what YOU think. I don't care what discredited idiots like Rush Limaugh or Bill Kristol think, I'm asking how YOU justify your position. That's a question that can't be answered by linking to a bunch far-right hatemongers. The cognitive dissonance is just bewildering. I mean, just get this:
This from a publication that supports (in every way) the Bush administration? The most pig-headed bunch of idiots ever put in charge of a democracy? Dammit, it was the National Review that virtually wrote Bush's Iraq policy. How did that turn out? Give me a break! :rolleyes: |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Feb 5 2008, 06:59 AM Post #673 |
|
No, you just posted a bunch of articles that did. What's the difference?
You haven't quoted any real conservative, only right-wing ideologues and self-confessed water carriers like Limbaugh. Where is the substance. What do YOU think and why?
Since none of the candidates are in that position, it's a moot point
IF he were a great president, then a Republican would have a good chance. But he isn't. He mas made a mockery of conservatism and that's why people of all sides are flocking towards candidates that actually represent the people and not a small cartel of self-interests. Are you seriously telling me that you do not want a change from the disasterous Bush policies? Are you seriously suggesting that another four years of this crap is just what America and the world needs? :hmm: And if you do want change, then what kind of change are you advocating? Again, where is the substance? You brought it up!
|
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| Bag O' Nails | Feb 5 2008, 07:05 AM Post #674 |
|
MaccaMomma
|
You may not take him seriously but whether or not you like it, he is a public voice out there that influences people (just like your other favorites like Hannity). After all, he was responding to a letter from Bob Dole... Don't worry so much about the messenger in this case; I'm trying to answer your questions about what makes McCain not a favorite for the conservative point of view. You're asking me to justify my position but how can I attempt to substanciate my position if every time I refer to an article/person which helps explain my view is blasted by you? Is there any "right-wing" publication that will suffice for you? No, it's an impossible task, and one in which I can never win. You will believe McCain is a conservative, no matter how many of us out there don't agree. |
![]() One sweet dream came true....London & Liverpool '08 | |
![]() |
|
| Bag O' Nails | Feb 5 2008, 07:12 AM Post #675 |
|
MaccaMomma
|
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/elec...-match-game.htm |
![]() One sweet dream came true....London & Liverpool '08 | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Feb 5 2008, 07:42 AM Post #676 |
|
People who allow themselves to be influenced by the likes of Limbaugh are idiots. Just because some people are silly enough to take him seriously doesn't make anything he says true. It's not shooting the messenger. It's just that the message is a lie. I have better things to do with my time then to point out all the individual falsehoods and inaccuracies in an opinion by someone who trades in falsehoods and inaccuracies all the time. Why should the latest one be any different? I prefer to talk about real idea with real people like you. What do you think? Heidi, I think you're missing the point. As I said, I'm asking what YOU think. If you can only explain your point of view by referring to other people's opinions, that leaves me with the impression that you really haven't thought things through at all and are just repeating what you've heard from your favourite pundits. What I am showing you is that the position you're putting forth just doesn't add up. It's self contradictory. Like the McCain constitution thing. The torture camps in Guantanamo exist to subvert and sidestep the US constitution. Yet McCain gets blasted for trying to UPHOLD the constitution. That's what makes him a real conservative as opposed to a neo-fascist. Either the constitution is set in stone or it isn't. If the right to bear arms is not negotiable, then neither is the right to habeas corpus. Which way do you want it? So if you want to talk about your own views and why you hold them, that's great. That's what I do. If you're going to post a bunch of articles from people who have been consistently wrong about everything for the last 8 years, then don't take it personally if I call them for what they are. And it's also nothing personal if I point out the contradictions in your argument. You're welcome to point them out in mine too. But you have to think for yourself.
|
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| Dorfliedot | Feb 5 2008, 07:46 AM Post #677 |
![]()
Beatlelicious
|
Clinton didn't care about the poor at all him self. He was for the rich. I do not want Hilary in office at all. |
![]() Add Glitter to your Photos | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Feb 5 2008, 07:49 AM Post #678 |
|
Deleted User
|
Quite right , dotty, i do not see anything in either of those two parties that addresses the needs and concerns of the poor. |
|
|
| Bag O' Nails | Feb 5 2008, 08:09 AM Post #679 |
|
MaccaMomma
|
Bill, let me ask you...are you at all influenced by others' opinions? How do you come to your conclusions? I do try to credit myself for making decent decisions, but I'm not ashamed to say that I am somewhat influenced by what I hear out there. But isn't everyone? Why else do people like Kennedy and Schwarzenegger endorse candidates? And what about commercials? Millions are spent on trying to sway the vote their way through the media. So I'm not alone here, Bill. I am not a "dittohead" by the way...just so you know. While I think Limbaugh is arrogant yet entertaining, I only cited him because he brought up some of the points of the consensus of why many conservatives out there feel the way they do about McCain. I cite articles simply because I can't and don't have the time to list point by point why I agree/disagree. |
![]() One sweet dream came true....London & Liverpool '08 | |
![]() |
|
| ThirdHarmony | Feb 5 2008, 08:10 AM Post #680 |
|
Sometimes it feels a bit odd, being a non-US citizen, but still caring very much about, and following so closely what happens in the US presidential primaries and general election. (And before someone suggests, perhaps with some justification, that I should mind my own country's business instead - I *do* care deeply about the politics of my own country, and was very much engaged in the last election, just as in previous ones). While all elections are important, I feel this particular election holds a special significance for the following reason: Given the fact that the next President may be in the position of appointing as many as 4 Supreme Court Justices (they're not getting any younger!) - the type of President elected may have a decisive, very long-term impact on whether or not America would resemble the beacon of freedom for free-thinking individuals I once considered it to be. The kind of country that everyone from world-renowned scientists and artists to everyday people sought (and seek) refuge in when their own country curtailed and threatened their freedom to think, express themselves and even exist. I would certainly feel that, should the SCOTUS become dominantly socially conservative (read: heavily inspired by religious doctrine) - someone like me could never feel welcome, and I would be deeply concerned about the ramifications of the policies put forth by such a constellation. I am not talking about suppressing religious-right-wing opinions just because they differ from my own, but to ensure they do not gather such momentum as to quash the very traditions of freedom they often claim to protect. (I myself would probably be considered politically conservative in my home country, but that would probably mean just left of center in US politics, if compared.) Left or right, it is always possible to go too far, regardless of direction. For this reason, a continued Republican administration in 2009 is something I fear could be very damaging in the long run, not only for the world in general, but for the US itself. Thus, I do hope one of the Democratic candidates is elected this time around - imperfect though they may be (like all politicians), be it Hillary or Obama (though I currently prefer the latter). But this is just my lonely little opinion from way overseas... |
|
"My definition of a free society is a society where it is safe to be unpopular." - Adlai Stevenson "Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith. I consider the capacity for it terrifying." - Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. | |
![]() |
|
| Dorfliedot | Feb 5 2008, 09:09 AM Post #681 |
![]()
Beatlelicious
|
Excatly peter.. |
![]() Add Glitter to your Photos | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Feb 5 2008, 09:25 AM Post #682 |
|
Influenced, yes. But not conclusively so. There's a difference between opinion and analysis. You are correct that Limbaugh is an entertainer. He appeals to his listeners' existing prejudices. He is not an analyst. So while I listen to the views of others, I'm the one who makes the judgement and I'll never use the logic of "He's on my side and he said this so that has a greater influence on me." Sure, I'll listen to people who have some credibility when it comes to political analysis but it won't override my own personal reaction to what the candidate has said - as opposed to what a pundit claims he said. Case in point: Limbaugh took Bill Clinton out of context recently to claim he (Clinton) said something that was in fact the exact opposite of what Clinton had really said. That's how Limbaugh operates. That's his business. That's his schtick. That's why I will not take him seriously or those who take him seriously seriously. Let's not beat about the bush here, they LIE. Limbaugh was also the one who gleefully broadcast the overtly racist song, "Barrack the Magic Negro." And I haven't even mentioned the phoney madrassa story yet. Don't get me wrong, if people want to let racist liars like Limbaugh and his ideological brethren at the National review influence their votes, that's their own lookout. But when their inane ramblings are presented as informed analysis, that the point where I turn around and say Don't take the p*ss! :lol: We all like to post articles that represent a view we agree with, but when that's all someone offers without any of their own original input, that makes me suspicious. It's nothing personal. And there are plenty of conservative columnists who have interesting things to say. But the thing is again that they are genuine conservatives and not part of the right-wing echo chamber that the likes of Limbaugh, Coulter, Townhall.com, Newsmax and the National Review exist in. As to why Kennedy and Schwatzenegger (another real conservative) endorse candidates, for the life of me I don't know. The conventional wisdom has been wrong at every turn so far. Yet I still hear Dem-leaning pundits saying that Ted Kennedy's and Al Gore's endorsements will be critical. What a load of crap! What we are seeing this election is people making their own minds up. Ted Kennedy gets a worse rap than he deserves but I would very much like to meet the person whose votes swings on who Kennedy endorses. As Jon Stewart said (be fair, this is my first quote from anyone for today ), Rudy Giuliani was the Republican front-runner..... until people started voting. Likewise (and this is me talking again) John McCain was down and out.... until people started voting. It's so heartening to see people on both sides taking their votes back from the punditocracy. |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| Mia Culpa | Feb 5 2008, 03:48 PM Post #683 |
|
This space intentionally left blank.
|
I follow the election for the laughs. Really whichever blowhard is elected won't change my life one bit. |
| If you read my posts backward there's evidence that Paul is dead. | |
![]() |
|
| BeatleBarb | Feb 5 2008, 04:00 PM Post #684 |
![]()
|
Off to the polls before I go to work! |
![]() |
|
| Blondie10 | Feb 5 2008, 05:11 PM Post #685 |
![]()
|
Britian(I'm guessing your from Britian?) and the US will always be politically and emotionally tied..... What nationality were our founding fathers??? :lol: AND We should all be concerned with world events as we ALL live in this world.. AND BILL...I'm still curious about the POW comment regarding MCcain....maybe Queenbee meant something else.... |
| There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. -- Douglas Adams <a href='http://eapr-1/@' target='_blank'></a> | |
![]() |
|
| beatlefan2010 | Feb 5 2008, 07:27 PM Post #686 |
|
I don't live in the States but I do wish and hopes that Barack Obama wins and be the first back Us president in history. He is sexy and intellengt. Here in Europe we do favour Barack more than Hillary Clinton. |
|
http://cactusflowersmaccaandbeatlesblog.blogspot.com/ | |
![]() |
|
| Bag O' Nails | Feb 5 2008, 10:20 PM Post #687 |
|
MaccaMomma
|
Talk about someone full of hot air...
|
![]() One sweet dream came true....London & Liverpool '08 | |
![]() |
|
| JeffLynnesBeard | Feb 5 2008, 11:13 PM Post #688 |
|
Administrator & Moderator
|
Jon Stewart? Are you kidding me? The guy is smart, funny and on the ball. What's more, I've seen him give both Republicans and Democrats a good verbal kicking when they've needed it - although there's no question of which direction he leans, politically. |
| ...and in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make. | |
![]() |
|
| bluemeanie | Feb 6 2008, 12:49 AM Post #689 |
|
is now a happily married woman x
|
Obama as won Georgia |
|
Jayne x is loving life and is so happy xxx | |
![]() |
|
| Nick2006 | Feb 6 2008, 12:51 AM Post #690 |
|
Steve Colbert is my favourite :lol: |
| |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Feb 6 2008, 12:58 AM Post #691 |
|
Okay, now back that comment up. In your own words please. I did.
|
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| bluemeanie | Feb 6 2008, 01:05 AM Post #692 |
|
is now a happily married woman x
|
Clinton as won Olklahoma Obama won illinois |
|
Jayne x is loving life and is so happy xxx | |
![]() |
|
| tagandolfo | Feb 6 2008, 03:17 AM Post #693 |
|
Hillary won Massachusetts - that is big! |
![]() |
|
| fab4fan | Feb 6 2008, 03:58 AM Post #694 |
![]()
Caretaker
|
That's what her spin will be -- polls had her winning that state all along. Of course what is big is that the endorsements of the governor and both senators had so little effect on closing the gap. |
| Mnisthiti mou Kurie! | |
![]() |
|
| fab4fan | Feb 6 2008, 04:16 AM Post #695 |
![]()
Caretaker
|
11:00 pm eastern time, polls have just closed in California. Currently Obama is now leading in delegates. (Watching results on MSNBC, Obermann & Matthews. Why do they show Nevada in the Clinton column? Obama won more delegates even though Clinton got a higher vote total. Plus they show Michigan and Florida in her column. No delegates from either state for breaking party rules and moving their primaries earlier than allowed. Hmmm?) If Obama breaks even in California he is a clear winner. A month ago Clinton was supposed to clinch the nomination tonight. He has the resources (money) to go head to head with her now and the focus will be only a couple of states at a time now. Momentum is clearly on his side! |
| Mnisthiti mou Kurie! | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Feb 6 2008, 04:59 AM Post #696 |
|
Well, that's the "fair and balanced" thing for ya! If they hadn't shown Florida, surely some malcontent (maybe Ann Coulter now that she's a fan of Hillary :lol: ) would be jumping up and down saying "Why dintcha report Florida ya bunch a' leftist scum?" Such a pity that the media has internalised this crap. |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| Mia Culpa | Feb 6 2008, 06:19 AM Post #697 |
|
This space intentionally left blank.
|
Clinton vs. McCain, who would win? |
| If you read my posts backward there's evidence that Paul is dead. | |
![]() |
|
| fab4fan | Feb 6 2008, 06:22 AM Post #698 |
![]()
Caretaker
|
McCain. (okay, so I'm biased. )
|
| Mnisthiti mou Kurie! | |
![]() |
|
| Mia Culpa | Feb 6 2008, 06:35 AM Post #699 |
|
This space intentionally left blank.
|
Would Americans choose an old man over a woman or a black man? Which do they fear least: age, gender or race? |
| If you read my posts backward there's evidence that Paul is dead. | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Feb 6 2008, 06:45 AM Post #700 |
|
I think American voters (at least those who do vote) are a bit more sophisticated than that. |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Things We Said Today · Next Topic » |



















2:01 PM Jul 11