I say it again and again. There are a large portion of Americans that are very stupid.Mr.Bob wrote:Holy cow, now the McCain people are defending the maniacs who are yelling "terrorist!" and "kill him!" at their rallies. How on earth is this a mainstream party?
Ron Paul should have run as an independant. I miss that guy.Killbert-Robby wrote:A lot of them are democrats. Its not fair to say that idiots are limited to one political party.
Indeed, poor bastard. Lots of people said he was crazy as a loon, but I think he had some damn good stances.Mr.Bob wrote:Ron Paul should have run as an independant. I miss that guy.Killbert-Robby wrote:A lot of them are democrats. Its not fair to say that idiots are limited to one political party.
That's excellent, because nobody here said that.Killbert-Robby wrote:Its not fair to say that idiots are limited to one political party.
Considering that same article said:Mr.Bob wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7662820.stm
Yo so Sarah Palin was investigated and found guilty of abusing her power
This election thing is basically over isn't it?
I would say no. People are stubborn enough to ignore this unless the media really pounces on it and doesn't stop covering it."The US presidential race has now become so polarised both Republicans and Democrats will likely see the report's findings as vindication for their own trenchant views about Mrs Palin, says the BBC's Richard Lister in Washington. Alaska's governor will either be seen as the victim of a Democratic party hatchet job, or a hypocrite."
At least McCain did try to calm his supporters down...well, once anyway. But he should have expected this when he started trying to equate Obama with terrorism and danger.There's a couple flashes of that McCain every now and then. I kind of like how he's coming close to committing political suicide by correcting his voters on their views on Obama at his rallies.Dr Legostar wrote:i really did think mcCain was a good candidate... four years ago... but now, the bush administration removed his spine and apparently his brain.
Nah. The bipartisan panel that was formed well before Palin was nominated is a dirty partisan attack by Obama supporters.Mr.Bob wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7662820.stm
Yo so Sarah Palin was investigated and found guilty of abusing her power
This election thing is basically over isn't it?
He's kinda walking a tightrope. On one side, it's political suicide by correcting his supporters. On the other side, it's political suicide through fanning the fires of hate and character assassination.KWill wrote:[ I kind of like how he's coming close to committing political suicide by correcting his voters on their views on Obama at his rallies.
From here. Funny how things change, huh?In 2006, Sarah Palin wrote:A lot of people are apathetic about campaigns because you see a lot of the garbage that goes on in campaigns and the personal attacks and the character assassinations that are so unnecessary. They’re useless; they detract from the issues. [...] I’m not gonna go negative. I’m not gonna go throwing mud at any other candidate. And we will, we’ll stick with the issues.
I wouldn't say "found guilty". There was no trial or actual criminal charges.Mr.Bob wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7662820.stm
Yo so Sarah Palin was investigated and found guilty of abusing her power
This election thing is basically over isn't it?
Look, these aren't all trivial details. Barack Obama's political career was started in William Ayers' living room. This man led a domestic terrorist group that bombed the Pentagon. Just because he's in education now doesn't mean he's a different person now, and Barack Obama is stretching everyone's credulity by suggesting that he honestly thinks that Ayers has somehow reformed just because he's in a different line of work now. Read Ayers' own words if you don't believe me.McDuffies wrote:I'm starting to be pissed off about mcCain's campaign, it seems to be mostly based on mud slinging, dragging out some trivial details and blowing them out of proportion or taking them out of context. "That one" probably wasn't meant as racist, but regardless it's incredibly rude, shows total disrespect of the political oponent. But my impression from that segment (I watched that part of the debate on tv later) was that mcCain was clinging onto trivialities.
I would.BeefotronX wrote:I wouldn't say "found guilty".
LOL. Guilt by association. If guilt by association is actually valid, what does that make of McCain's pal, Gordon Liddy, convicted in Watergate...?: http://mediamatters.org/items/200810040004BeefotronX wrote:I wouldn't say "found guilty". There was no trial or actual criminal charges.Mr.Bob wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7662820.stm
Yo so Sarah Palin was investigated and found guilty of abusing her power
This election thing is basically over isn't it?
Really, if you look into the details of this particular incident there's nothing to it. Just because there's a personal connection doesn't mean the guy didn't still deserve to be sacked.
And I would say that it's not just the Democrats that would do a hatchet job on Palin. Those who actually read anything about the circumstances of her political career would understand that she made a lot of Republican politicians in Alaska rather upset, so even a bipartisan commission would not necessarily judge fairly.
Look, these aren't all trivial details. Barack Obama's political career was started in William Ayers' living room. This man led a domestic terrorist group that bombed the Pentagon. Just because he's in education now doesn't mean he's a different person now, and Barack Obama is stretching everyone's credulity by suggesting that he honestly thinks that Ayers has somehow reformed just because he's in a different line of work now. Read Ayers' own words if you don't believe me.McDuffies wrote:I'm starting to be pissed off about mcCain's campaign, it seems to be mostly based on mud slinging, dragging out some trivial details and blowing them out of proportion or taking them out of context. "That one" probably wasn't meant as racist, but regardless it's incredibly rude, shows total disrespect of the political oponent. But my impression from that segment (I watched that part of the debate on tv later) was that mcCain was clinging onto trivialities.
And beyond that, his associations with ACORN are also nothing to sneeze at. This organization is the very source of the economic crisis that faces us now. The Community Reinvestment Act was pushed by ACORN lobbyists and signed by President Carter in 1977, and significantly expanded under President Clinton in 1995, and is very much the cause of the real estate bubble (more people buying houses who can't really afford them) and the subsequent crash. We are now sitting in the mess that Obama's friends created. And furthermore, ACORN is being investigated in about half of the states in the US for voter registration fraud.
I really, really, honestly believe that Barack Obama represents more of this, more of the same. I don't really like John McCain all that much; the news media chose him by choosing to ignore the better candidates in the primaries. It's not as though Thompson or Giuliani forgot to run campaigns. They had campaigns, but those who rely on the news media wouldn't know to follow them since they were deemed "not newsworthy."
And anyone who doesn't believe Obama is a radical socialist is invited to look him up in an Internet archive under the "New Party" circa 1997.
And this may be a low blow here but if he wins, Michelle is going to be the next Hillary, without question.
Oh no! Not the next Hilary Clinton! Say it ain't so!BeefotronX wrote: And this may be a low blow here but if he wins, Michelle is going to be the next Hillary, without question.
