Campaign 2008

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

Damn...if I had known I could vote more than once the yes side would have won in a landslide.

[SuperJerk 0]

Also, McCain's officially fucked. Without counting toss-up states, Obama's at 277. I wonder what his cabinet will be.

 

I'll do both guys, because I don't want to get cocky about winning. It was only a couple of weeks ago that McCain is ahead, and while all indicators (formal and informal) point to Obama, there's still time for things to change.

 

President John McCain:

State-Lieberman

Defense-Tom Ridge. I'd say General Petreaus, but I think there's a time frame in which someone can't go from being in the military to a DoD person.

Treasury-Mitt Romney

 

 

President Barack Obama

State-Bill Richardson or Richard Holbrooke

Defense-Chuck Hagel

Treasury-Warren Buffet

 

[bob_barron 0]

I understand you don't want to get too cocky, but the economy has overwhelmed everything and well, Democrats usually win on the economy, and this year they have the added bonus that McCain REALLY sucks on the economy.

 

That's why AIG and those banks failed right when McCain got the nod.

[SuperJerk 0]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/o...s-on-bush-deal/

 

Obama tried to sway Iraqis on Bush deal

In private conversations on troop presence, candidate pitched delay

 

Mr. Obama's conversations with the Iraqi leaders, confirmed to The Washington Times by his campaign aides, began just two weeks after he clinched the Democratic presidential nomination in June and stirred controversy over the appropriateness of a White House candidate's contacts with foreign governments while the sitting president is conducting a war.

 

Some of the specifics of the conversations remain the subject of dispute. Iraqi leaders purported to The Times that Mr. Obama urged Baghdad to delay an agreement with Mr. Bush until next year when a new president will be in office - a charge the Democratic campaign denies...

 

 

 

"In the conversation, the senator urged Iraq to delay the [memorandum of understanding] between Iraq and the United States until the new administration was in place," said Samir Sumaidaie, Iraq's ambassador to the United States.

 

He said Mr. Zebari replied that any such agreement would not bind a new administration. "The new administration will have a free hand to opt out," he said the foreign minister told Mr. Obama.

 

Mr. Sumaidaie did not participate in the call, he said, but stood next to Mr. Zebari during the conversation and was briefed by him immediately afterward.

 

The call was not recorded by either side, and Mr. Zebari did not respond to repeated telephone and e-mail messages requesting direct comment...

 

 

Obama campaign spokeswoman Wendy Morigi said Mr. Obama does not object to a short-term status of forces agreement, or SOFA.

 

Mr. Obama told Mr. Zebari in June that a SOFA "should be completed before January and it must include immunity for U.S. troops," Miss Morigi wrote in an e-mail.

 

However, the Democratic nominee said a broader strategic framework agreement governing a longer-term U.S. presence in Iraq "should be vetted by Congress," she wrote.

 

She said Mr. Obama said the same thing when he met in July with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and Mr. Zebari in Baghdad.

 

First of all, you gotta love the Washington Times for running a headline that they couldn't support in the text of the actual story. The article itself is actually fair and well-written, despite the biased headline.

 

Second, Sarah Palin's already running with this, claiming that if Obama did this, he was putting his political ambition above his country, though I'm not sure if she explained exactly how Obama would gain politically by either reminding the Iraqis that an agreement would require Congressional approval (something also noted by Republican senators), or by keeping an agreement from being reached until next year.

 

 

[Just John 0]

Did anyone catch the highlights of that McCain rally today where he had to spend a considerable amount of time defending Barack Obama? The best/worst part was when one woman referred to Obama as "an Arab" and McCain was emphatically shaking his head as he quickly took the mic from her.

 

Part of me almost felt sorry for McCain, as he seemed like felt really bad during the whole deal. Sure, you could chalk it up to politics since being seen next to someone ignorantly calling Obama an Arab doesn't make for good press, but I think there's still a decent human being deep inside John McCain and he doesn't really want any part of all this terrorist and race-baiting nonsense his campaign has thrown out recently (also why his surrogates and Palin seem to be the ones actually making the inflammatory comments).

[Guest C*Z*E*C*H]

Let's continue to mindlessly rip Marvin for pages on end to feel better about ourselves!

Yeah, seriously. I don't like Marvin and I still think he's starting to get a raw deal here. The way I see it, Marvin and NoCalMike are mirror images: they try to inform themselves, but their fundamental problem is that they're both stupid. They both repost long rambling articles that nobody reads, they scatter punctuation and spelling errors like birdshot, and they both maintain tinfoil headwear. They try hard and mean well, but they aren't very bright. Then there's bps21, who is a human blown fuse box. Let's share our special brand of love a little better here.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

Let's continue to mindlessly rip Marvin for pages on end to feel better about ourselves!

Yeah, seriously. I don't like Marvin and I still think he's starting to get a raw deal here. The way I see it, Marvin and NoCalMike are mirror images: they try to inform themselves, but their fundamental problem is that they're both stupid. They both repost long rambling articles that nobody reads, they scatter punctuation and spelling errors like birdshot, and they both maintain tinfoil headwear. They try hard and mean well, but they aren't very bright. Then there's bps21, who is a human blown fuse box. Let's share our special brand of love a little better here.

I hope you feel better about yourself now.

[BigPoppaKev 0]

I was talking to one of my african american friends about the election and he voted for bush in '00 and '04 but this is what he had to say:

 

"If he sounded like Bush it wouldnt even be worth it,(voting for Obama) but i will say the fact that he is black and knows his issues really puts it to a whole other level ya know, it's just something black people have waited for, forever pretty much. All those racist people still think black people are absolutly good for nothin man and now that an intelligent black man is doing something big like this its like a kick in the face to them (white people) and you don't know what it means to us.

 

The good thing about it is that he's a black man representing everyone and knowing what a whole lot of people both black and white have gone through."

 

 

I know this may be exteme but I figured I would throw out the views of an african american on this issue.

[snuffbox 0]

http://lacrossetribune.com/articles/2008/1...news/00lead.txt

 

Assembly Speaker Mike Huebsch, St. Senator Dan Kapanke (possibly the creepiest man in American Politics), and former perma-governor Tommy Thompson were the opening acts this morning. What does Tommy do next? He probably should have ran vs. Herb Kohl in 2006 rather than try for the GOP nomination last year. He might have been taken seriously had he not looked like a drunken goon at every television appearance of 2007.

 

Long distance prediction: Dan Kapanke will challenge Ron Kind for the House seat in 2012.

 

I really don't think that McCain is being sent out there with very good speeches in a state like Wisconsin. He, sometimes Palin, and a cadre of Wisconsin Republican Powerhouses spoke of the economy, in particular the state of the middle-class and the job market, for a matter of seconds. Hardly anything specific. While I don't consider the size of McCain's crowds to be any legitimate indication of his standing in the race, the screams of "Terrorist!" probably don't play too well in the rest of the country outside of that exhibition hall. He almost seems to realize he's doing the wrong thing up there. Yeah, he's old, but I think he'd be much more energetic and believable if he was giving a speech he actually gave a shit about.

 

I'm interested to see what the McCain campaign will do if the current 10% lead in WI for Obama holds after this week's swing-through. Will he tour it again or will he do another Michigan and send the troops, led by Team Kapanke, off to North Carolina & Georgia.

[SuperJerk 0]

FactCeck.org has an article up about McCain's use of the Bill Ayers "controversy":

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/he...bill_ayers.html

Voters may differ in how they see Ayers, or how they see Obama’s interactions with him. We’re making no judgment calls on those matters. What we object to are the McCain-Palin campaign’s attempts to sway voters – in ads and on the stump – with false and misleading statements about the relationship, which was never very close. Obama never “lied” about this, just as he never bragged about it. The foundation they both worked with was hardly “radical.” And Ayers is more than a former "terrorist," he’s also a well-known figure in the field of education.

 

 

 

Andrew Romano of Newsweek also has an excellent take on it:

Here's how the strategy works. First, say the word "terrorist." Then characterize the Obama-Ayers relationship as murky, assuming that listeners don't know--or don't care to find out--that Obama has already characterized Ayers' past as "detestable" and discussed how the two crossed paths in Chicago. Next, insinuate that Obama's alleged evasions--and the mere fact that he encountered Ayers at all--call his character into question. And--last but not least--hope voters conclude that Obama is some sort of radical left-wing terrorist-sympathizer unworthy of the Oval Office. Ultimately, McCain is resorting to innuendo because when it comes to Ayers, he has more to gain from preying on ignorance than providing information.

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/arc...nformation.aspx

 

 

 

 

[milliondollarchamp 0]

He confused his followers. They were like WTF? this is what you and that chick have been telling us all week and now you turn your back on us.

[Timmy8271 0]

I bet if you took a picture of Ayers to a Mccain rally, 95% of the people there wouldn't know who he was.

 

Seeing that Mccain rally today scared the hell out of me. Whoever wins on either side, shit will probably go down.

[SuperJerk 0]

The conservative pundits and the McCain campaign have created a monster they are quickly losing control of.

 

 

[Dobbs 3K 0]

This thing is going to sink the McCain campaign. I don't think even the most ardent conservatives are really truly buying this crap. Anyone who really believe Obama is associated with terrorists weren't going to vote for Obama to begin with.

[chaosrage 0]

This thing is going to sink the McCain campaign. I don't think even the most ardent conservatives are really truly buying this crap.

 

Definitely not anymore after McCain said that people have no reason to fear from an Obama presidency.

 

 

It was good for him to say this of course, but his supporters must feel so confused. If Obama is really a good decent family man, then what the fuck is the point in bringing up his associations? Why are McCain ads saying that Obama is too risky for America when McCain himself says that we don't have to be scared of Obama being president? You kinda get the feeling that McCain is disgusted with his own campaign right about now.

[SuperJerk 0]

That was kind of a damned if you don't moment for him. Still, as much as I dislike the Republican Party, I'd rather live in a country with them in charge than live in another country. I prefer the Democrats, but its not like there haven't been Republicans that did a good job in office.

 

 

I bet if you took a picture of Ayers to a Mccain rally, 95% of the people there wouldn't know who he was.

 

Seeing that Mccain rally today scared the hell out of me. Whoever wins on either side, shit will probably go down.

I get the impression, especially after seeing clips of the Hannity interview with McCain and Palin this week, that Palin hadn't even heard of the Weathermen until recently.

 

 

 

Here's another controversy: The AP looks at Palin's history of using her offices to promote religious activities.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081011/ap_on_...hurch_and_state

 

An Associated Press review of the Republican vice presidential candidate's record as mayor and governor reveals her use of elected office to promote religious causes, sometimes at taxpayer expense and in ways that blur the line between church and state.

 

Since she took state office in late 2006, the governor and her family have spent more than $13,000 in taxpayer funds to attend at least 10 religious events and meetings with Christian pastors, including Franklin Graham, the son of evangelical preacher Billy Graham, records show.

 

Not THAT big of a deal since she's technically allowed to charge the taxpayers for ANY travel and lodging expenses (such as staying in her own home, which she has done), but I don't think she is allowed to do this:

 

Records of her mayoral correspondence show that Palin worked arduously to organize a day of prayer at city hall. She said that with local ministers' help, Wasilla — a city of 7,000 an hour's drive north of Anchorage — could become "a light, or a refuge for others in Alaska and America."

 

"What a blessing that the Lord has already put into place the Christian leaders, even though I know it's all through the grace of God," she wrote in March 2000 to her former pastor. She thanked him for the loan of a video featuring a Kenyan preacher who later would pray for her protection from witchcraft as she sought higher office.

 

In that same period, she also joined a grass-roots, faith-based movement to stop the local hospital from performing abortions, a fight that ultimately lost before the Alaska Supreme Court.

 

Palin's former church and other evangelical denominations were instrumental in ousting members of Valley Hospital's board who supported abortion rights — including the governor's mother-in-law, Faye Palin.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081011/ap_on_...hurch_and_state

 

[chaosrage 0]

That was kind of a damned if you don't moment for him.

 

The second question was, but for the first, he really didn't need to even address that the guy was scared of Obama. He could have just answered his question. Or he could have said "I understand why you're scared." I mean, his ads suggest that people should be scared.

 

 

Then after watching ads like these, someone naturally tells McCain that he's scared and McCain's reply is that he doesn't have to be scared? What?

[snuffbox 0]

John McCain doesn't speak for the John McCain campaign.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

This is getting more hilarious day by day.

[bobobrazil1984 0]

[SuperJerk 0]

 

Thanks for reposting this...I think most people missed it when I posted it a few days ago.

 

Some of the people at first seem very reasonable, but the further along it goes, more people sound like idiots.

 

The "sir, your point right there" chick seemed kind of...drunk. She made no sense and then acted like she'd just destroyed all liberal logic, ever.

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

Palin talking about abortion now in Pennsylvania. I guess they figure re-igniting the culture war and trying to get people to ignore the economy is their only shot at winning now that Ayers proved to be a bust.

[SuperJerk 0]

Abortions considered a winning issue? Because in her Couric interview, Palin was really trying to play down her abortion views.

 

The "choose life" catchphrase she uses makes it sound like she's actually in favor of the choice part.

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

Some of the online blogs have also suggested that the Connecticut court decision legalizing gay marriage is good news for the McCain campaign because they can use it as ammunition to fight the culture wars during the rest of the campaign.

 

I swear, if this election turns into "abortion, God, guns and gays" while the world economy spirals down the toilet, I am done with the human race.

[Nightwing 0]

I have to ask again: If the Republican Party does lose this election, is there going to be a reorganization, or a shift one way or another? It feels like this is a year where things are going to shift, particularly inside the GOP.

[JaMarcus Russell's #1 Caucasian Fan 0]

IMO, I think the Republicans are going to lose this election in a similar fashion the Conservative Party of Canada lost Canada'a general election in 1993. I think all of us are going to be surprised by the margin of defeat the Republicans are going to suffer in the federal, congressional and local races. I'm pretty sure that after this year, the Republicans are going to ditch the Religious Right once and for all, and we could see a dramatic return to power of the moderate wing of the Republican Party the nation saw pre-1980. Reaganomics and Reagan Republicans, I believe, will be history this year.

[At Home 0]

Palin's Abortion Speech

 

 

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

Let's continue to mindlessly rip Marvin for pages on end to feel better about ourselves!

Yeah, seriously. I don't like Marvin and I still think he's starting to get a raw deal here. The way I see it, Marvin and NoCalMike are mirror images: they try to inform themselves, but their fundamental problem is that they're both stupid. They both repost long rambling articles that nobody reads, they scatter punctuation and spelling errors like birdshot, and they both maintain tinfoil headwear. They try hard and mean well, but they aren't very bright. Then there's bps21, who is a human blown fuse box. Let's share our special brand of love a little better here.

 

I would say this argument might be valid if they were doing nothing other than exchanging partisan shots back and forth, but Marvin's "the economy is in a crisis because Mitt Romney didn't win the nomination" ranting transcends simple partisan bickering into a new level of political douchebaggery. It's not something that you will find offensive because you support Obama or McCain, it's something you will find offensive as a member of the human race who chooses to think in a rational manner.

[Nightwing 0]

Let's continue to mindlessly rip Marvin for pages on end to feel better about ourselves!

Yeah, seriously. I don't like Marvin and I still think he's starting to get a raw deal here. The way I see it, Marvin and NoCalMike are mirror images: they try to inform themselves, but their fundamental problem is that they're both stupid. They both repost long rambling articles that nobody reads, they scatter punctuation and spelling errors like birdshot, and they both maintain tinfoil headwear. They try hard and mean well, but they aren't very bright. Then there's bps21, who is a human blown fuse box. Let's share our special brand of love a little better here.

 

I would say this argument might be valid if they were doing nothing other than exchanging partisan shots back and forth, but Marvin's "the economy is in a crisis because Mitt Romney didn't win the nomination" ranting transcends simple partisan bickering into a new level of political douchebaggery. It's not something that you will find offensive because you support Obama or McCain, it's something you will find offensive as a member of the human race who chooses to think in a rational manner.

One of them has admitted they were wrong when bringing up a fairly ridiculous claim. The other comes in with even more ridiculous claims. I just don't see that as being the same.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

The voter fraud issue will ultimately be a non issue because theres 3 weeks time for them to clear out all the fake registrations but you are still left with a government/taxpayer funded organization who through the wonders of demographics seems to be biased towards registering only people who will more than likely vote for Obama over McCain.

 

post went here..

 

So, you going to make up any more bullshit?

 

 

source on Acorn Housing Association AHC

AHC is a federally recognized tax-exempt organization. As such it is not allowed to share funds or provide funding for ACORN. Over a three-year period

surveyed for the AHC report that organization took in 40% -- or more than $7 million -- in taxpayer funds. Over the same period, AHC gave grants and paid

fees totaling more than $4.6 million to ACORN-related organizations (including Citizens Consulting, from which the brother of ACORN founder Wade Rathke

embezzled nearly $1 million).

 

The affidavits from two former AHC employees, obtained by CRL following

the publication of its original report in June, "ACORN's Hypocritical House of

Cards," make further specific and damning allegations, including:

-- AHC and ACORN were at one time being funded from a joint account, which

would appear to violate the same laws highlighted by the AmeriCorps Inspector

General in 1994.

-- According to a former ACORN board member and AHC employee, AHC -- which

received taxpayer money -- directly used funds to support ACORN activities,

including paying for rent at an office where AHC was not even a tenant.

-- Perhaps most troubling, the sworn statement of former AHC staffer

Andrew Johnson suggests AHC leadership pressured employees to intentionally

hide information from HUD investigators.

 

Is that bullshit enough?