RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events Barack Hussein Obama in '08?

"Whoever the next president is, is going to have to know what he or she wants to do beyond a tactical move. In other words, there is a tactic and a strategy. Putting a cap on troops is a tactic, cutting funding is a tactic, making judgment about surging is a tactic, but at the end of the day how are America's interests going to be preserved, enhanced or diminished by whatever we leave behind. ... Let me put it this way, you didn't hear any one of them get in this (war) debate at all until they announced for president. I don't recall hearing a word from Barack about a plan or a tactic."


-Joe Biden

Obama's speech is about to start. I can't help but think what a big mistake he made by picking Biden.

Praise Allah!

FINALLY!!! Barack has come back to DENVER!!!

Surprise! He's wearing a flag pin. . . .but I thought that was a "symbol of false patriotism"?

it doesn't look like an american flag

Perhaps the French flag?

here's a closeup:

Of course. My bad.

Praise Allah.

I liked this because it was the John Mccain of old. He's been a bit of a douche in the campaign, no doubt because of the Roveites influencing his ambition for the office.
Hopefully this plus Obama's comments about disagreement over policy not being the same as personally disliking someone will lead to an honest campaign and a debate based on policy and plans.

Unfortunately there are the people like you who will follow Mccain with personal attacks and accusations about Obama.
Like:

Mccain actually admonished one of his supporters for this. I just wonder if you really support Mccain, or are just voting for the republican. Because if the guy you're supporting, the guy you want to be the leader of the country, abhores such attacks on Obama why would you continue on that tact? It seems if anything these kinds of attacks could be Mccain's undoing. If the left says "John Mccain is a great man, but he voted with Bush 90% of the time and we need a change not a third Bush term" and the right is saying "Obama is a terrorist muslim." Then undecideds might be more inclined to go for the more positive approach.

Either way, I feel very good about Obama after that speech. He was very clear in what he planned, had an interesting jabs at Mccain that essentially answered the main criticisms that will be used against him, and he made a very strong argument for Mccain's record being very much in line with Bush.
I think Mccain will have a more trying time next week. Bush is really the issue in this campaign, he has 28% approval. So while Obama had Clinton (high job approval and the Lewinsky stuff is a bit forgotten) Mccain has to walk a very fine line with Bush/Cheney. He has to let them into the convention and have them speak as part of the party line politics, but since those two are so unpopular he can't really praise their work. And where Obama can talk about change, the fine line for Mccain means if he talks too much about new ideas he'll alienate the Bushites and make people wonder why he didn't get that change in his time in the Senate (Obama had an interesting point about how Mccain has done nothing to limit foreign oil in 26 years, why would he start now), but Mccain also can't say too much about "stay the course" in terms of Bush's policies because that's not going to sell him.

Guess we'll have to just wait and see.

Funny you should bring that up. The day after McCain ran that ad, and the same day his VP pick was announced, here's what Obama's campaign said about Sarah Palin:

• Barack Obama's campaign is blasting John McCain for putting "the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency."
  
  The scathing description of Sarah Palin, from Obama spokesman Bill Burton, comes as Democrats scramble to gather a response to a selection that nobody in the political world expected.
  
  "Governor Palin shares John McCain's commitment to overturning Roe v. Wade, the agenda of Big Oil and continuing George Bush's failed economic policies — that's not the change we need, it's just more of the same," added Burton.

Furthermore, as I recall, McCain called Biden to congratulate him on being nominated for VP.

I guess we know who's the class act in this campaign.

that's valid to bring up, just like it is valid to question Obama's limited experience (which is why Obama picked Biden). They didn't call her a secret muslim terrorist.
I like how you talk about "class acts" while editing my post and removing the criticism of your actions.

I'm not running, ray...and the real issue was-as you presented it-McCain's actions vis a vis Obama and vice versa.

Finally, stop bitching about me "editing your post".

I made it a point to insert "****" in the place of the deleted material, which every one knows is done to indicated that quoted material was deleted precisely because I knew you'd whine about it otherwise.

[quote=the G-man]I'm not running, ray...and the real issue was-as you presented it-McCain's actions vis a vis Obama and vice versa.


yes, and those stars were the bulk of my post and my thoughts on the actual election. those were actually neutral ones too, an analysis of things. you obviously have no interest in an actual political discussion because you chose to only respond to the segment that would start another flame war. i thought i made a good point about Mccain having a harder time next week because he has to walk a fine line with bush.
this is like the third time this week that i've devoted time to putting down some thoughts to spark an interesting discussion, and you've just continued the fighting. i honestly think that you only come here to do that. most of us here reveal bits about ourselves, who we are, and have some points of real conversation, but you keep to being "g-man" the guy who starts shit.

Ray, seriously, you keep bringing up this idea that McCain=Bush, or some variation thereof. I've already told you-and others have already told you-why we disagree with that.

As I recall, in fact, we had that discussion yesterday...again.

How many times do you really want me to respond to that argument?

The question of whether or not Obama or McCain would take some sort of "high road" was your new point and the one I responded to.

but that wasn't what i was talking about. i was comparing the rather breezy Dem convention to the difficulty Mccain will have next week. bush has low approval ratings, horrifically low. the bulk of voters don't want more of the same. but those supporters are the republican base that Mccain will need to keep happy. So I was commenting on Mccain's problems. He will need to both distinguish himself from Bush while not really putting down bush's term. that's a very fine line. and while Obama was able to talk about the problems and offer solutions, Mccain will essentially have to sell people on things not being that bad.
It's very tricky. that's not an opinionated argument about him or his policies (though i do think someone who votes with bush 90% of the time is not someone i want), it's my analysis of the situation.


how many times have you brought up "god damn america" or called him a secret muslim?
are we only allowed to beat the dead horse with the obama attacks?


i made an argument about his record and similarities to bush yesterday, today i'm saying that perception and bush's unpopularity will require finesse from Mccain. He has to make everyone happy, Obama just has to make people unhappy with bush happy.
and how many times have we talked about ayers, wright, muslimism? seriously. if i have to respond to your repeated arguments, you have no right to complain.



i think i need to find a new arch-rival, this just isn't working out. there's no algonquin roundtable here, just an old man who comes to vent his closeted rage at a bunch of comic book readers. i think my new arch-rival will be bsams. at least his insults are clever and he will be challenging to debate. you're just grumpy and kind of dishonest about it all. it's a message board, there's nothing at stake here. yet you seem to play dirty and cheat and avoid the conversation as if it was life or death.
people call me a liberal and attack me frequently here, but i try to be honest and respond with frankness because it's the internet and i have nothing to lose by just being straightforward.

And, ray, I'm trying to be honest with you. I think the McCain=Bush argument, and the variations you've posted thereon, are something of a canard, for the reasons I've posted already.

While there will certainly be more attempts to argue McCain=Bush as a result of the convention, the fact of the matter is that Bush will be there opening night and then, as is typical for an outgoing incumbent, fade from view.

McCain will speak the last night.

In between you will have Sarah Palin (and others) speaking and people will be paying attention to her.

I seriously don't see it as that big of an issue, any more than the idea that Ted Kennedy speaking at the DNC somehow implied Obama was going to drown an intern in his car during a drunken driving incident.

you're not reading what i am typing. i'm not arguing whether bush is mccain, i'm talking about the perception that mccain will have to deal with. i'm talking about the fine line he'll have to walk to please the base who still support bush, the unhappy republicans, and the undecideds. i'm not arguing whether he is the same as bush or not. i'm talking about how delicate it'll be for him.
learn to fucking read, old man. seriously.


anyone else i would just roll my eyes and be done with it. but you made such a stink when tony snow got sick and died about how mean people were to a sick man. kennedy is an old man who just had brain surgery and is so committed to his beliefs and his job that he gave a big speech in his frail state.
then you bitched today about me talking about something 2 days in a row.
you bring up an accident from 30 something years ago that you have repeatedly mentioned here.
i know you want to be like reagan, but the emulation should've stopped before you hit the alzheimers.

Um, ray, read what I wrote again. I was saying it would be ridiculous to make that comparison. And, back when Kennedy was diagnosed with cancer I made it a point of saying that I didn't wish that on him just because of mistakes he might have made in the past.

According to NBC news, Obama and Biden both called to congratulate Palin. That's fairly classy as well.

and Mary Jo Kopechne wasn't an intern. she was a 29 year old woman who helped set up campaign headquarters. And Kennedy has said he wasn't drunk that night (though his Irishness makes that suspect). The real controversy is that she survived in an air pocket and he failed to get help in time. However looking at the events of the night you could argue his near death experience and having to swim across a dangerous chanel to get to his hotel coupled with the fact he mistakenly thought she had died exonerate him of true wrongdoing. He himself says his failure to call for help or report the accident for several hours were inexcusable, but to me it looks like post traumatic shock.

Well, then, she deserved to die.

plus if Obama was eight when it happened it's a victimless crime, I saw a commercial today that said so.

I'm pretty Obama was about when the Manson murders occurred. I guess we should let ol' Charlie out of the hole 'bout now.

he only drove the car g-man.

Ray should be along any second now to tell us that the Tate-Libianca incident was just a college prank.

It was like Animal House, with a little SAW.....

he might still be looking for a youtube clip to back that up.

try finishing the sentences, g-man. i was pointing out that she was way above an intern. just correcting your error.

you're seriously comparing a car accident to a multiple murder?
that's just sick. i put forth a valid argument that someone who's car went off the road and into the water, who escaped the car and believed the passenger was killed, then went through pitch black terrain and swam across a channel (and nearly drowned) might have had post traumatic shock.
the mistake was in not calling for help, something he himself later admitted. but it does sound like trauma. he had a near death experience and got confused. it happens, people who suffer trauma sometimes blank it out and go about a normal routine until their brain processes it and they react.
If you actually look at the story, it does seem like that. He got back to his hotel after nearly dying twice and went to his room. The key in my mind to calling it trauma is that he came downstairs a few times and seemed almost blank like he was trying to figure out the situation.
Was he drinking? I don't know. I've heard that he has denied being drunk, but that seems suspect. However people do have car accidents, and he's hardly the first guy to drive home after a party not realizing how drunk he is.
A DUI is serious, enough that I think that kind of judgment should rightfully disqualify him for president (of course you voted for bush so you disagree), but at worst he was negligent, and at best he was suffering the trauma of nearly drowning twice.
To compare that to multiple murder, including that of a pregnant woman is sick. I'm getting so sick of this place, it's one thing to joke, but there's a nasty undercurrent to the partisanness. Even PJP who normally is a good guy becomes an ass here. And I've really tried to have serious conversations lately but I'm seeing that's impossible. If I dare to open my mouth (or fingers) and type out any defense of a democrat you attack. you attack whomod for the crime of being liberal, you mock the insurgents for the crime of being liberal. And then you smear any liberal's name all over the board, trying to turn us into punchlines instead of actually making a good counter-argument.
I may mock people here, but generally with reason. I mock g-man because he's an asshole, I mock wondy because he's a racist, I mock pariah because he's a little uptight, and I mock rex because he's rex and mocking him is part of the user agreement. But I don't go viciously after PJP and bsams, who have attacked my side non-stop.
It's a real shame that you guys are so intent on turning this place into a rightwing circle jerk. You make it very unpleasant to post here, and your constant hit jobs on liberals only put us on the defensive if we post here at all.

maybe you should quit posting here then.

I'm not trying to give you a hard time Ray. I think you are a great guy! I just think you are allowing all the years that have passed to give a free pass to a spoiled Kennedy that cared more about his political future than a drowning girl.

Ray is a good guy!

I'm sure to you he is, peejus.

It's going to be a long 64 days if we are at each others throats already.

Ray, you'd probably get less shit if you weren't being so pedantic.

The fact of the matter is that the woman died as a direct result of, at best, Kennedy's negligent behavior.

Who cares, other than you, what her official job title was?

You also get shit because you draw some pretty stupid parallels.

Yeah, maybe both Bush and Kennedy drove drunk. But only one of those people drove drunk and let a woman die because of it. That makes, by any fair analysis, Kennedy's behavior worse than Bush's in this particular area.

i'm not giving him a free pass. i'm 26, i wasn't around then. for me this story is about 10 years old, because that's when i first looked into it.
i'm just arguing some of the facts, and now i apparently have to defend it because it's being compared to multiple murder. as i said, it's negligence and rightfully kept him from the presidency.

fair enough.....will leave it at that. I'm not sure what you n G are arguing about but I will stay out of it. besides it is almost the time of night where we need to change his diaper.....leave him be.