C *A *P *C *H

Home of the Click Chicks and Joe
 
HomeHome  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  

Share | 
 

 So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
AuthorMessage
joechgo11



Number of posts : 640
Registration date : 2008-08-31

PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Sun Oct 05, 2008 6:43 pm

CinC wrote:

With experience comes knowledge. Being the leader of our country requires that kind of knowledge. It's really as simple as that. We are facing serious times for our country and as much as I support Barack Obama, I can admit that John McCain would not be the nominee if he had not devoted his life to public service. Barack has also done the same with much of that being in the private sector where he has also gained experience and knowledge. That knowledge is apparent during the debates and during his speeches. He can answer questions asked. Sarah Palin cannot. There are plenty of nice and likeable people out there, but they (like Sarah Palin) do not have the intelligence, knowledge and yes, experience, to lead the USA.

If she were to be vice president, she would be a spokesperson for our country. And given the current state of affairs with our current administration and public opinion here and abroad, another target for jokes because of their ineptness and inability to grasp the real issues of our country would only add to that.

I agree, with experience comes knowledge, but that experience doesn't necessarily mean improved leadership. Leadership is about more than a resume. Leadership is about what a person sparks in those who follow. And although you might not see it, Sarah has sparked something amazing in a lot of people.

I stand by what I said.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
joechgo11



Number of posts : 640
Registration date : 2008-08-31

PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Sun Oct 05, 2008 6:45 pm

katydid wrote:
The economy falls and unemployment swells. The war continues as other threats continue and new ones emerge.
Who do you want to be there to lead us forward and pull us out of this horrible quagmire?

I don't want my next door neighbor or town official. I want the most educated, intelligent, experienced person there is, who knows where we've been and where we need to go. I don't need someone pulling for me, I need someone pulling for us all.

I have respect for McCain and his service to this country, but I lost a lot of respect for him when he chose her out of all the people he could have picked. I doesn't do much good for him to win, if in the end we would all lose.

With all due respect, we're not going to win one damn thing if the quagmire in Washington continues. We can't break up the quagmire with the same old players. I have more confidence in McCain/Palin to change things for the better than Obama/Biden.

I will again state that my opinions might be different if the ticket were Biden/Obama. Sadly, it is not.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Morgan Rowan
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 16603
Registration date : 2007-01-20

PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Sun Oct 05, 2008 6:47 pm

Can we have a viable THIRD choice please ????



Rolling Eyes
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://clickchicks.niceboard.com
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Sun Oct 05, 2008 6:52 pm

Renee wrote:
CinC wrote:

With experience comes knowledge. Being the leader of our country requires that kind of knowledge. It's really as simple as that. We are facing serious times for our country and as much as I support Barack Obama, I can admit that John McCain would not be the nominee if he had not devoted his life to public service. Barack has also done the same with much of that being in the private sector where he has also gained experience and knowledge. That knowledge is apparent during the debates and during his speeches. He can answer questions asked. Sarah Palin cannot. There are plenty of nice and likeable people out there, but they (like Sarah Palin) do not have the intelligence, knowledge and yes, experience, to lead the USA.

If she were to be vice president, she would be a spokesperson for our country. And given the current state of affairs with our current administration and public opinion here and abroad, another target for jokes because of their ineptness and inability to grasp the real issues of our country would only add to that.

I agree, with experience comes knowledge, but that experience doesn't necessarily mean improved leadership. Leadership is about more than a resume. Leadership is about what a person sparks in those who follow. And although you might not see it, Sarah has sparked something amazing in a lot of people.

I stand by what I said.

Then you have obviously made your choice, Renee! Inspiration IS a wonderful thing. I do see where Palin has brought enthusiasm to those who are looking for leadership without experience or knowledge as there prime criteria. I would venture to say Obama has sparked something amazing in a lot of people as well!

This is a very hard fought election. I have read that McCain said on Tuesday he is "taking the gloves off" and is going to attack Obama on things like his association with his church and people he has associated with? Do the McCain supporters here think that is a wise idea or a last ditch effort to lessen Obama's lead? And, if Obama, in turn brings up the Keating 5 and McCain's association with George Bush, will he also sound as though he is avoiding the issues? Also, was conceding Michigan a good move politically, in your opinion?

Again, I have respect for John McCain for his service to the U.S. I don't agree with his politics on the issues, but he is intelligent and seems to have a sense of humor. And to be completely shallow, when he was young, he was kinda hawt!!!
Back to top Go down
joechgo11



Number of posts : 640
Registration date : 2008-08-31

PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:11 pm

CinC wrote:
This is a very hard fought election. I have read that McCain said on Tuesday he is "taking the gloves off" and is going to attack Obama on things like his association with his church and people he has associated with? Do the McCain supporters here think that is a wise idea or a last ditch effort to lessen Obama's lead? And, if Obama, in turn brings up the Keating 5 and McCain's association with George Bush, will he also sound as though he is avoiding the issues? Also, was conceding Michigan a good move politically, in your opinion?

Again, I have respect for John McCain for his service to the U.S. I don't agree with his politics on the issues, but he is intelligent and seems to have a sense of humor. And to be completely shallow, when he was young, he was kinda hawt!!!

Okay, this may not be a popular opinion, but I am THRILLED that McCain's FINALLY taking the gloves off. I honestly believe that in fear of being called a racist, many issues were sidestepped. Obama's church affiliation DOES matter; his association with Ayers DOES matter. No more kid gloves, and it's about damn time the media take off their freakin' rose colored glasses where this man is concerned, grow a pair and print the truth!

As to IF Obama starts making the Bush connection...Cincy, we made a drinking game out of it at the last debate. Every time Obama mentioned Bush or the former administration, or McCain Bush, or the last eight years...take a drink. You'll be drunk by the third question. This has been his fallback play since the beginning!

I think the best way to deal with Michigan is this: McCain pulls out, Palin objects, Palin goes in to show we really care about Michigan! Extra coverage, lots of See what I was willing to do for you moments. Very political, sort of cynical on my part, but that's how I see that playing out. Will it work? I can only hope so.

Yeah, young McCain was hot, lol!

This is how I would quickly classify the candidates....

McCain - most experience, most independent, highest integrity; will be most cautious about war because of his own experience

Palin - rising star, plain speaker, the only genuine Washington outsider. Not out to make friends. Calls a spade a spade, tough because she's had to be. Will make smart moves because her political future depends on it. I see her as the Republican nominee 2012

Obama - a smooth talker who is more form than substance. Period. I believe he sincerely wants to lead but I question why. Unfortunately, the more I know of Obama the less I trust him. I went into this with a lot more respect for the man than I have now.

Biden - my first impression I ever had of Biden was the Clarence Thomas hearings. Not anyone's best moment, but you can see why he started deep in the negatives to me. Biggest change of opinion in the campaign. I've seen his immediate honesty, though I cringe when you see him reined back in. I've seen a man who knows how to be a brutal debater choose to be a smart debater, and choose a smaller debate victory to avoid a huge PR loss, which was what would have happened if he'd steam rolled Palin, which was in his ability. I can now say I'd give Biden a thumbs up, and wouldn't mind him as a President at all.

So there you go...Renee's political readings as of October 5, 2008.

Thank you, thank you, thank you.... bliss
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:21 pm

Thank you, renee for that concise evaluation.... bliss

You touched all bases except the Keating 5 and I'd like to get your thoughts on that.

BTW Obama has denounced Ayers’ radical views and activities. Ayers hosted a small gathering for Obama in 1995, early in his political career. Obama and Ayers live in the same Chicago neighborhood and served on a charity board together, but there is no evidence they have "palled around" as Palin has said.

I read this today:

Rep. Rahm Emanuel, a Chicago Democrat and Obama supporter, warned against McCain’s strategy.

‘‘If we are going to go down this road, you know, Barack Obama was eight years old, somehow responsible for Bill Ayers,’’ he said. ‘‘At 58, John McCain was associating with Charles Keating.’’



Just months into his Senate career, in the late 1980s, McCain made what he has called ‘‘the worst mistake of my life.’’ He participated in two meetings with banking regulators on behalf of Keating, a friend, campaign contributor and S&L financier who was later convicted of securities fraud.

The Senate ethics committee investigated five senators’ relationships with Keating. It cited McCain for a lesser role than the others, but faulted his ‘‘poor judgment.’’


What are your thoughts on the Keating 5 association? Is it relevant to the election and is it reflective of McCain's ability to fairly deal with the economic difficulties we are now facing and will continue to face?
Back to top Go down
joechgo11



Number of posts : 640
Registration date : 2008-08-31

PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Sun Oct 05, 2008 8:40 pm

CinC wrote:
Thank you, renee for that concise evaluation.... bliss

You touched all bases except the Keating 5 and I'd like to get your thoughts on that.

BTW Obama has denounced Ayers’ radical views and activities. Ayers hosted a small gathering for Obama in 1995, early in his political career. Obama and Ayers live in the same Chicago neighborhood and served on a charity board together, but there is no evidence they have "palled around" as Palin has said.

I read this today:

Rep. Rahm Emanuel, a Chicago Democrat and Obama supporter, warned against McCain’s strategy.

‘‘If we are going to go down this road, you know, Barack Obama was eight years old, somehow responsible for Bill Ayers,’’ he said. ‘‘At 58, John McCain was associating with Charles Keating.’’



Just months into his Senate career, in the late 1980s, McCain made what he has called ‘‘the worst mistake of my life.’’ He participated in two meetings with banking regulators on behalf of Keating, a friend, campaign contributor and S&L financier who was later convicted of securities fraud.

The Senate ethics committee investigated five senators’ relationships with Keating. It cited McCain for a lesser role than the others, but faulted his ‘‘poor judgment.’’


What are your thoughts on the Keating 5 association? Is it relevant to the election and is it reflective of McCain's ability to fairly deal with the economic difficulties we are now facing and will continue to face?

The Keating 5....sigh. There's no getting around it. Huge mistake. Fair game? Absolutely. I will say, that McCain hasn't side stepped the issue. Head on he'll admit to the biggest mistake of his life. I honestly believe he learned from it, and I can judge him on his actions from that point on.

I understand that Obama may have condemned the Ayers, but he still hasn't personally renounced his own association, with them or with that hate filled church. Those things deeply truly worry me.

Emanuel's words are just idiocy. Obama was NOT 8 in 1995, nor was he accused of being responsible for the Ayers. The bigger the reaction the more I wonder what they're trying to hide.

I personally have quit organizations that meant a lot to me because of persons involved that I could not respect. I would have one hell of a lot more respect for Obama for QUITTING those particular charities than for serving with Ayers.

It's a smelly deal. Are you really comfortable with it? No snark, genuine interest in your answer. I'm off to Mass right now, so I'll check in later. Thanks for the great conversation, cinc!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Sun Oct 05, 2008 10:36 pm

Renee wrote:
CinC wrote:
Thank you, renee for that concise evaluation.... bliss

You touched all bases except the Keating 5 and I'd like to get your thoughts on that.

BTW Obama has denounced Ayers’ radical views and activities. Ayers hosted a small gathering for Obama in 1995, early in his political career. Obama and Ayers live in the same Chicago neighborhood and served on a charity board together, but there is no evidence they have "palled around" as Palin has said.

I read this today:

Rep. Rahm Emanuel, a Chicago Democrat and Obama supporter, warned against McCain’s strategy.

‘‘If we are going to go down this road, you know, Barack Obama was eight years old, somehow responsible for Bill Ayers,’’ he said. ‘‘At 58, John McCain was associating with Charles Keating.’’



Just months into his Senate career, in the late 1980s, McCain made what he has called ‘‘the worst mistake of my life.’’ He participated in two meetings with banking regulators on behalf of Keating, a friend, campaign contributor and S&L financier who was later convicted of securities fraud.

The Senate ethics committee investigated five senators’ relationships with Keating. It cited McCain for a lesser role than the others, but faulted his ‘‘poor judgment.’’


What are your thoughts on the Keating 5 association? Is it relevant to the election and is it reflective of McCain's ability to fairly deal with the economic difficulties we are now facing and will continue to face?

The Keating 5....sigh. There's no getting around it. Huge mistake. Fair game? Absolutely. I will say, that McCain hasn't side stepped the issue. Head on he'll admit to the biggest mistake of his life. I honestly believe he learned from it, and I can judge him on his actions from that point on.

I understand that Obama may have condemned the Ayers, but he still hasn't personally renounced his own association, with them or with that hate filled church. Those things deeply truly worry me.

Emanuel's words are just idiocy. Obama was NOT 8 in 1995, nor was he accused of being responsible for the Ayers. The bigger the reaction the more I wonder what they're trying to hide.

I personally have quit organizations that meant a lot to me because of persons involved that I could not respect. I would have one hell of a lot more respect for Obama for QUITTING those particular charities than for serving with Ayers.

It's a smelly deal. Are you really comfortable with it? No snark, genuine interest in your answer. I'm off to Mass right now, so I'll check in later. Thanks for the great conversation, cinc!

I am comfortable with it, Renee, because I have sought out the details which indicate that Ayers is now a professor at a university in Illinois. While neither I (or Obama) condone any kind of violence, the political activists of the Viet Nam era have to be viewed in context with those times. I am sure that I have come in contact with some people who did things in the name of "peace" that they are not 100% sure now was the right thing to do. And Dave was at the University of Kentucky during that time when a building was set on fire and was acquainted with the members of the students who set the fire. If he were running for office, I don't think it would be fair to bring it up. Also, that fundraiser in 1995 resulted in a $200 contribution to Obama's campaign....a far cry from the hundreds of thousands of dollars McCain received from Charles Keating, not to mention the trips he took with Keating picking up the ticket. The Keating 5 scandal involved an attempt to sway regulations of banking procedures. Here in Cincinnati (the Keating stronghold and base of its AFC operations), thousands of people lost their life savings because of the scandal. Yes, it WAS a long time ago, but with the bailout being so high on everyone's radar right now, I think it would hurt McCain to bring it up.

I do notice that so far Sarah Palin has been the one to mention the Ayers' connection in her speeches to criticize Obama. But I really think if people research the issue, they will find that this 40-plus year old "scandal" is far reaching. I have heard comments online such as if this is the worst they can find about Obama, he most definitely should be President.

The thing that I would be concerned with if I were a McCain supporter is that Ohio is a state he NEEDS to win....it is key to his chances at having a chance of winning. Hamilton County (the Ohio county in which Cincinnati is located) and the surrounding area consitutes a large portion of the Ohio votes. With the still hurtful memories of the Keating scandal where so many families were affected so prevalent here (people tend to be pretty non-nomadic around here), the mere connection with McCain could cost him lots of votes. That would be a shame because I don't think his involvement was significant...he was only reprimanded for exercising poor judgment; no criminal charges. But honestly, I wish the campaign would not go down this road by either side.

As for Obama's connection with that "hate-filled church", here's an analogy..... I see a lot of hateful comments being made on many Clay boards right now. Some comments ar downright prejudicial and hate driven. If a person is a member there and doesn't share those feelings but has no desire to leave their membership, they will likely stay. Even the board leaders may engage in hateful comments (before being accused of it, I am NOT talking about CAPCH) Doesn't mean they share the views or condone them, but it is hard to walk away from something that involves years of a person's life. I know that analogy is not dead-on.....no member of a fan club is comparable to someone running for President, but it is a simplistic analogy of a very complex issue that Barack has answered to the satisfaction of his supporters and which still gives his non-supporters ammunition to discredit him.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:57 am

It was actually a woman at a rally for McCain that asked McCain "When are you going to take the gloves off"
Personally I think he should have done it a very long time ago. His associations with very questionable people are a real concern.
He has set out to accomplish certain positions as a means to an end, that being the White House.

He used his so called "Community Activist" position to get to the next point. His political career began in the living room of William Ayres (the terrorist). He never lasted long in any of these positions, he always had his eye on the next rung of the ladder the moment he got to that level he just reached. He gets into the US Senate, his last on his list to move for the Highest office.

He began his campaign for the White House just months after being in the Senate. He didn't want to be a US Senator, but he needed it to run for President. It was all a means to an end. The more I learn of him the more he scares me to death. He can't even use his time in the Senate as experience, he accomplished nothing.

I wonder if those people that voted for him because of what he promised them got what he promised. What about Rev.Wright? Are we really supposed to believe that Obama went to his services for over 20 years and never once used the hate he vomits until Obama was running for President. That all of a sudden this Pastor became a bigot and hate filled man after Obama stopped attending on a regular basis?
I don't believe that for a moment.

Obama's has either very poor judgment, or he too agrees with these men
(and others I haven't mentioned) but has chosen to keep it to himself until after the election.
Why did Oprah leave that Church? She had said it was because it wasn't for her......
Someone here said in a post that Sarah Palin couldn't put a sentence together.
I would like you all to pay attention Tuesday during the debate, count how many times Obama does the following, during one sentence, and during an answer, Pauses, eheheh, hmmmm, stammers, stutters, (and not in the way a person with a stammer does) more in the way a person does trying to find or think of an answer.
His connection with ACORN is a concern too......He was their attorney.

I urge everyone, do a search on your computers on ALL the candidates.
Check out Obama's early days, and how he destroyed a woman that actually was kind to him and helped him in the beginning. But when the time came and she as in his way, he ran right over her.Check out his connections in Chicago.
Check on all of them. Obama, Biden, McCain, and Palin. We all have computers, the information is at our finger tips. If there is something you are looking for I will be happy to help you search, on any of them.....
Back to top Go down
amainachen

avatar

Number of posts : 2074
Registration date : 2007-01-24

PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Mon Oct 06, 2008 9:17 am

Renee wrote:
katydid wrote:
The economy falls and unemployment swells. The war continues as other threats continue and new ones emerge.
Who do you want to be there to lead us forward and pull us out of this horrible quagmire?

I don't want my next door neighbor or town official. I want the most educated, intelligent, experienced person there is, who knows where we've been and where we need to go. I don't need someone pulling for me, I need someone pulling for us all.

I have respect for McCain and his service to this country, but I lost a lot of respect for him when he chose her out of all the people he could have picked. I doesn't do much good for him to win, if in the end we would all lose.

With all due respect, we're not going to win one damn thing if the quagmire in Washington continues. We can't break up the quagmire with the same old players. I have more confidence in McCain/Palin to change things for the better than Obama/Biden.

I will again state that my opinions might be different if the ticket were Biden/Obama. Sadly, it is not.


Exactly Renee if we let the insiders in Washington continue on nothing is going to change. We need something fresh and I see so much promise in Palin. Unfortunately i don't agree with the Biden/Obama ticket. My politics just don't match theirs.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Mon Oct 06, 2008 9:53 am

Unfortunately for John McCain, when the “gloves come off” , they reveal quite unclean hands. Thus far, he has tried to attack Obama on the issues by misrepresenting them in his tv ads but he has at least tried to keep the personal issues out of things. I think opening the gates to “guilt by association” will backfire on him and hope both candidates stick to less dirty politics. There are important issues for them to present Tuesday and I’d hate to see the debate mired down in the muck. The sad thing is that people who don’t take the time to examine the candidate’s position on the issues and their record, DO base their voting decision on this type of thing. Their vote, their decision, but not the road I will take.

If Michael Moore could not convince the nation as a whole of the association between the Bush and bin Laden families, I think McCain will have difficulties convincing the nation that Barack Obama has terrorist ties....it’s simply not true or believeable and it makes it seem as though he is desperate and grasping at straws. With all the publicity and hoopla Sarah Palin has brought to the Ayers issue this week, McCain’s best bet would be some sort of self-serving comment early in the debate that he is not going to go there. People know that elephant is now in the room, so he’d best address it, look like the good guy and at the same time, save himself from scrutiny regarding his own admitted mistakes. Because he DID make mistakes and errors in his own judgment....while Obama, at worst, is accused of knowing people who made them. Doing that will make Sarah a bit of the fall guy....but I think that has been her position all along.
Back to top Go down
amainachen

avatar

Number of posts : 2074
Registration date : 2007-01-24

PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Mon Oct 06, 2008 10:08 am

If you really want to to be fair cincy both men have "unclelan hands" misrepresenting the facts in their ads. its actually quite disgusting how both twist facts using a bit of truth here and a bit of truth there. They are both Washintonians unfortunately. But a choice has to be made. I've made my choice and i feel good about it. The Ayers connection, his pastor's comments are there on record. Can't deny the record or the words spoken by his pastor who he sat under for 20 plus years. As for a bush bin laden connection i've not seen any proof but what has that to do with this election. Bush isn't running. The connection between ayers is there and Obama is running for election and its fair game. If he chooses to discuss it as he did with O'Reilly and poorly i might ad to clear the air it might help. Right now he is winning so not addressing anymore about these people is probably to his benefit.

I do check voting records, I've read Obama's intended policies on the economy etc. I could not support those policies. Probably won't matter in the end. I do think he will win and instead of name calling the president which has been done so frequently here and other places I will give the President the respect he/she deserves. I can't support his policies but we shall see what happens.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
amainachen

avatar

Number of posts : 2074
Registration date : 2007-01-24

PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Mon Oct 06, 2008 10:14 am

As to IF Obama starts making the Bush connection...Cincy, we made a drinking game out of it at the last debate. Every time Obama mentioned Bush or the former administration, or McCain Bush, or the last eight years...take a drink. You'll be drunk by the third question. This has been his fallback play since the beginning!



lol Renee. I would put money on that too.

I think the gloves should have come off a long time too. He has been holding back. Mccain has made mistakes own up to them just like Palin told Biden to do in the debate which he didn't. When o'reilly questioned obama on ayers he didn't denounce him, said he was a friend but that he didn't always agree on his stances. Not exact words.

Mccain in loosing in the polls. He has nothing to loose imo, let loose at least he gave it his all. Acknowledge errors and attack on Obama's errors and missteps, of which he has many too.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Mon Oct 06, 2008 10:42 am

The Weathermen were formed out of the SDS in the late 60s and 70s in protest of U.S. involvement in Viet Nam, Laos and in protest of the political climate of those times. While I don’t support their violent methods, I proudly supported and still support in general the political position they expressed. I am certainly not a terrorist by any stretch of the imagination. Nor is Bob Dylan from whose song (Subterranean Homesick Blues) the Weatherman organization got their name.....or maybe the McCain camp will find a Dylan cd in Obama’s possession and make that “tie” too. I will always believe that when government is not acting in the interests of the people, protest is an effective vehicle for change. Peaceful protest. Not the violent measures of the Weathermen. But the same protested issues, approached in a less violent way. So, likewise, Obama can support the principles upon which the protests were made while not condoning the violent acts of the Weatherman organizaiton.

As for tying Bush’s failed policies to McCain, that is a much more recent “association” than actions of someone during a time of protest in the 1970s. Of course, McCain is not Bush but he does have the same political objectives and is not quite the “maverick” he tries to portray himself to be. Biden pointed out that very real, very recent “connection/association” in the VP debate when he listed the areas in which McCain has not been the maverick (education, foreign policy, etc.) but rather as Hillary Clinton pointed out just a “mimic of George Bush.” That is the association that McCain has tried desperately and without success to rid himself of.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Mon Oct 06, 2008 10:53 am

One thing that doesn't add up for me. Obama said he will cut taxes for 95% of the population but proposes all kinds of new programs, such as healthcare, higher education for all, new roads and bridges etc etc. Just where is all the money going to come from for all this big government??
Back to top Go down
coocooitstrue

avatar

Number of posts : 2211
Registration date : 2007-01-23

PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Mon Oct 06, 2008 10:59 am

CinC, what say you about Obama's ties to Acorn early in his rise to power while in Chicago? what say you about his continued ties to this organization, and are you in favor of what it represents?

i'm tired of the Bush bashing. he's on his way out the door, much to the delight of many. i supported him for a long time, but will go on record of saying i am very disappointed in his very lackluster 2d term. McCain may belong to the same party as W, but to me, McC will show he does not follow W's identical path.

i also feel too much emphasis is being placed on Palin being president in the near future, should McCain win. does anyone really think McCain would be in this election if he knew he couldn't see his term thru? Sarah may be new to the Washington scene, but i think we need someone like her to go to Washington and put some of those puffed up big boys in their place. it's a start for real change. i think most will agree Washington run by the leaders in place is very screwed up, much to the confusion and frustration of The People.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
amainachen

avatar

Number of posts : 2074
Registration date : 2007-01-24

PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Mon Oct 06, 2008 10:59 am

paminhlwd wrote:
One thing that doesn't add up for me. Obama said he will cut taxes for 95% of the population but proposes all kinds of new programs, such as healthcare, higher education for all, new roads and bridges etc etc. Just where is all the money going to come from for all this big government??


There isn't anyway it can be done. Spin it anyway you want but it can't be done. I hate the deceit on both parts because first we know that taxes will increase, they have too. I don't think we have a politician running or in office that has the guts to cut programs that need to be cut. Its politiical suicide so i think it will all continue on. Obama can say 95 will have tax cuts but so far he hasn't from what i've read come up with a realistic plan on how to pay for all the things he wants to pay for. If we want to talk about negativity Obama already had a keating 5 ad 13 minutes actually not just a little 2 minute add to debut today. It comes on a noon today. They have been working on this for a long time according to beckel. So it would seem that McCain isn't the only one slinging mud. Its actually very sad to see the office of the President brought to this level on both parts.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
coocooitstrue

avatar

Number of posts : 2211
Registration date : 2007-01-23

PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Mon Oct 06, 2008 11:00 am

this just in:

DOW DOWN 500+ POINTS, DROPS BELOW 10,000 MARK FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE 2004


..so much for built up confidence and correction with the bailout sniff
Back to top Go down
View user profile
amainachen

avatar

Number of posts : 2074
Registration date : 2007-01-24

PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Mon Oct 06, 2008 11:05 am

coocooitstrue wrote:
CinC, what say you about Obama's ties to Acorn early in his rise to power while in Chicago? what say you about his continued ties to this organization, and are you in favor of what it represents?

i'm tired of the Bush bashing. he's on his way out the door, much to the delight of many. i supported him for a long time, but will go on record of saying i am very disappointed in his very lackluster 2d term. McCain may belong to the same party as W, but to me, McC will show he does not follow W's identical path.

i also feel too much emphasis is being placed on Palin being president in the near future, should McCain win. does anyone really think McCain would be in this election if he knew he couldn't see his term thru? Sarah may be new to the Washington scene, but i think we need someone like her to go to Washington and put some of those puffed up big boys in their place. it's a start for real change. i think most will agree Washington run by the leaders in place is very screwed up, much to the confusion and frustration of The People.


What i'd like to know is if we can equate McCain to bush's policies can we do the same to Obama to the very impressive Presidency of Jimmy Carter. I would also say Clinton because I really never saw alot of what Clinton did for this country. Our military was reduced thanks to him, the Deficit was lower, ( that is good) he let bin laden go when he had the shot and look where that gotus. I too am tired of the bush bashing. Supposedly with the polls showing Obama leading in many states it not doing much for the markets either. I think it shows that no matter who is in its going to be a rough road. But then i'm getting tired of the Palin bashing too. The cheap shots being slung at this woman are disgusting. I pray McCain wins and that Palin show exactly what the woman is made of. I know she can do the job
Back to top Go down
View user profile
coocooitstrue

avatar

Number of posts : 2211
Registration date : 2007-01-23

PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Mon Oct 06, 2008 11:06 am

Deb, i don't look at certain 'revelations', mud slinging as you call it, as a bad thing, because if there is concrete proof in any of the allegations directed to either presidential candidate, let the chips fall where they may. the last thing i want is someone taking over the presidency who has significant skeletons in their closet..no matter who it is. information circulating seems to point to questionable decisions and choices by both candidates. so how do we decide this election once all the facts? are made clear? by who is less tainted in some way?

....i long for the days of Eisenhower. even Nixon. the wiretapping charges seem trite in comparison to what goes on behind close doors in politics today Suspect
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Mon Oct 06, 2008 11:09 am

coocooitstrue wrote:
CinC, what say you about Obama's ties to Acorn early in his rise to power while in Chicago? what say you about his continued ties to this organization, and are you in favor of what it represents?

i'm tired of the Bush bashing. he's on his way out the door, much to the delight of many. i supported him for a long time, but will go on record of saying i am very disappointed in his very lackluster 2d term. McCain may belong to the same party as W, but to me, McC will show he does not follow W's identical path.

i also feel too much emphasis is being placed on Palin being president in the near future, should McCain win. does anyone really think McCain would be in this election if he knew he couldn't see his term thru? Sarah may be new to the Washington scene, but i think we need someone like her to go to Washington and put some of those puffed up big boys in their place. it's a start for real change. i think most will agree Washington run by the leaders in place is very screwed up, much to the confusion and frustration of The People.


Hate to hit and run, but gotta get to work. did want to address the ACORN issue though...unfortunately, will have to do that at least for now with a cut/paste:


Discredited Republican voter-suppression guru Ken Blackwell is attacking Barack Obama with naked lies about his supposed connection to ACORN.

• Fact: Barack was never an ACORN community organizer.
• Fact: Barack was never an ACORN trainer and never worked for ACORN in any other capacity.
• Fact: ACORN was not part of Project Vote, the successful voter registration drive Barack ran in 1992.

In his capacity as an attorney, Barack represented ACORN in a successful lawsuit alongside the U.S. Department of Justice against the state of Illinois to force state compliance with a federal voting access law. For his work helping enforce the law, called “Motor Voter,” Barack received the IVI-IPO Legal Eagle Award in 1995. (For more about Barack’s career, check out our Obama bio.)

Ken Blackwell is best known today for disenfranchising Democratic voters in his dual role as Ohio Secretary of State and chair of George Bush’s Ohio campaign in 2004. To see him shed crocodile tears for the integrity of the vote while making accusations about Barack and ACORN with absolutely no basis in fact is disturbing.

Blackwell’s attacks against ACORN and community organizers continue a vile Republican pattern of mockery and viciousness against this noble profession. Community organizers are the very individuals Republicans should be celebrating for helping people to help themselves rather than depending on the government.
Back to top Go down
coocooitstrue

avatar

Number of posts : 2211
Registration date : 2007-01-23

PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Mon Oct 06, 2008 11:23 am

i appreciate the Democratic counter to the Acorn allegations. i suppose we all can just sit back to see how all spins pan out on both sides once the final round of mud slinging starts.

i may not agree with your fundamental ideology of your Party, Cincy ....but i can understand and respect an opposing side's zeal and support for what they believe in.

thanks for posting what you believe as truth when you're obviously pressed for time.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
joechgo11



Number of posts : 640
Registration date : 2008-08-31

PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:16 pm

Quoting Cal Thomas, Fox News Contributor (I know many don't like Fox, but that doesn't make everything they say wrong snk danc )


Quote :
Let’s Get Real: Judge Obama by the Company He Keeps
I wish the tone of this campaign were different and it might have been if Obama had accepted McCain’s offer months ago to do 10 town hall meetings around the country. But Obama chose otherwise. His problem is that he is trying to portray himself as something he is not (moderate and mainstream) while portraying McCain as something he is not (out of touch and uncaring).

One can be known in part by the company one keeps. William Ayers is not somebody who just did evil things when Obama was eight years old.


They have an adult relationship and Ayers has been a booster of Obama’s and they have worked together on “education issues” in Chicago.

Let’s have some perspective here. What do you suppose the mainstream media reaction would be had McCain been associated with an abortion clinic bomber? You know what it would have been. The big media would be editorializing that McCain was not fit to be president. But Obama can associate with a man who belonged to Weatherman, a Communist-driven splinter faction of Students for a Democratic Society. Characterizing Weatherman as “an American Red Army,” Ayers summed up the organization’s ideology as follows: “Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, Kill your parents.” He has never apologized for those remarks or said he has a different world view today.

As recently as 2001, Ayers said America makes him “want to puke.” Nice.

Ayers boasts that he “participated in the bombings of New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, of the Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972.” Of the day he bombed the Pentagon, Ayers says, “Everything was absolutely ideal. … The sky was blue. The birds were singing. And the bastards were finally going to get what was coming to them.”

The Obama campaign says if the McCain campaign continues to dredge-up Ayers, they will start mentioning Charles Keating and McCain’s association with the savings and loan scandal of the 1980s and early 90s.

After a lengthy investigation, the Senate Ethics Committee determined in 1991 that Alan Cranston, Dennis DeConcini, and Donald Riegle (all Democrats) had substantially and improperly interfered with the FHLBB in its investigation of Lincoln Savings, with Cranston receiving a formal reprimand. Senators John Glenn (a Democrat) and John McCain (the lone Republican) were cleared of having acted improperly but were criticized for having exercised “poor judgment”.

McCain long ago apologized for his poor judgment. We await a similar confession from William Ayers and his candidate for president, Barack Obama.


The more I learn...the less I trust that man!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:29 pm

FROM TODAY'S MSN HOMEPAGE:


In the game of guilt by association and mutual assured destruction that the two leading candidates for president appear poised to play, both campaigns are reaching back into the past to find someone who might stick to their rivals today.

But in the case of the McCain campaign's attack, running mate Sarah Palin has reached so far into the past of an associate of Democrat Barack Obama that it has no apparent relevance to the candidate himself, while the Obama campaign today plows an episode of influence-peddling in Washington in which Republican John McCain has admitted his own "poor judgment.''

Palin accuses Obama of "palling around with terrorists'' - one, actually, who isn't really a terrorist anymore, but happens to be a professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago and an author of educational reform books, William Ayers, who - four decades ago - took part in the radical anti-Vietnam war protests of the Weather Underground which he helped form, a group claiming credit for protest-bombings at the Pentagon and the Capitol.Obama, who was eight years old at the time of those bombings, has denounced the past activities of the radical-turned-professor, and has served on civic boards in Chicago with him.

The Obama campaign's retaliatory attack today hits much closer to home for McCain, who in fact was embroiled in a scandal with four other members of Congress in the late 1980s - they became known as "The Keating Five.'' When Charles Keating, an Arizona homebuilder and banker who helped bankroll McCain's early campaigns, came calling for help with federal regulators cracking down on his savings and loan, McCain and others met with the regulators. McCain took part in just the first two meetings, and then stepped away as the severity of Keating's trouble grew clear, yet after the case of the senators' interference with regulators came to closure before the Senate Ethics Committee, McCain conceded: "I was judged eventually, after three years, of using, quote, poor judgment, and I agree with that assessment.''

Palin, the Republican Party's vice presidential nominee, insisted over the weekend that her campaign trail attacks against Obama for his association with Ayers are relevant because Ayers once hosted a small, meet-the-candidate event for Obama in 1995, early in his political career and donated $200 to Obama's state legislative camapign. Palin said in California on Sunday: "I think it's fair to talk about where Barack Obama kicked off his political career, in the guy's living room."

By that measure, then, it's certainly fair for the Obama campaign to talk about McCain's association with Keating, because Keating and associates raised $11,000 for McCain's first congressional campaign in 1982 and ultimately raised more than $100,000 for McCain's early political campaigns. McCain and his wife, Cindy, also had often been guests of the high-flying Arizona homebuilder, flying aboard his private jet to his vacation home in the Bahamas - trips for which the senator repaid Keating only after his problems with federal regulators surfaced.

"Charlie was a real go-getter,'' McCain has written in his 2002 memoir, Worth the Fighting For.

"On several occasions, he invited Cindy and me to his beautiful vacation retreat at Cat Cay in the Bahamas, flying us there, with out infant daughter, Meghan, and her nanny, on his private jet,'' McCain wrote with co-author Mark Salter, his chief of staff and speechwriter. "The place always seemed to have a huge, boisterous crowd in attendance... We would all crowd on his yacht, off for a day of swimming and snorkeling, and then return for another extravagant party with the best wine, food and entertainment available. They were memorable experiences, and even though our trips there would almost lead to my ruin, I would be lying were I to deny just how much I enjoyed them and how eagerly I awaited invitations to Charlie Keating's Shangri-La.''

From: McCain: The Essential Guide to the Republican Nominee, published by the Chicago Tribune and Triumph Books in September:



Charles H. Keating Jr., a high-flying homebuilder in Arizona who had befriended and entertained McCain and other politicians, wanted to head off federal regulators who were moving in early 1987 to take over the failing Lincoln Savings and Loan, a subsidiary of his American Continental Corp. Keating had contributed thousands of dollars to the campaigns of Arizona's senior senator, Democrat Dennis DeConcini. In March of that year, Keating asked DeConcini to convene a meeting with the thrift regulators and urge them to leave Lincoln alone. DeConcini arranged a meeting with not only the regulators, but also four other senators, including McCain.

McCain had met Keating, a fellow Navy flyer, a few years back. Keating had sponsored a fund-raiser for McCain's first congressional campaign in 1982, raising more than $11,000 from employees of American Continental. In 1983, as McCain prepared for reelection without any prospect of a serious challenge, Keating sponsored at $1,000-per-plate dinner for his campaign. And in 1986, Keating raised $50,000 for McCain's Senate race. By 1987, according to the Arizona Republic's count, McCain had collected about $112,000 in contributions from Keating and associates. The newspaper also found that a partnership involving McCain's wife and father-in-law had invested $359,000 in a shopping center that Keating developed in 1986, and that the McCains had made at least nine trips aboard the American Continental jet, including three for vacations at Keating's retreat in the Bahamas. McCain did not pay Keating for some of the trips - at a cost of about $13,000 - until years afterward, after learning that Keating was in trouble.

Keating had a list of demands for federal regulators, but McCain told Keating that all he intended to do was attend the meeting to see if Keating was being treated fairly. The first session, on April 2, 1987, in DeConcini's office, included McCain and Democratic Sens. John Glenn of Ohio and Alan Cranston of California. The four senators met with the chairman of the Federal Home Loan Bank Board, Ed Gray. He told the senators that, as chairman of the board, he had no personal knowledge of Lincoln's situation but would defer to regulators based in San Francisco.

In the next meeting, on April 9, a fifth senator joined in, Democrat Donald Riegle of Michigan. Among them, the five had collected $300,000 in campaign contributions from Keating. The five met with James Cirona, president of the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco, and two other federal regulators. William Black, deputy director of the Federal Savings and Loans Insurance Corp., attended the meeting - which he later called a show of force by Keating -- and told the Republic that Keating hoped senators could pressure the regulators to drop their case against Lincoln. "The Senate is a really small club, like the cliché goes,'' Black told the newspaper. "And you really did have one-twentieth of the Senate in one room, called by one guy, who was the biggest crook in the S&L debacle.''

Black also kept notes of the meeting, and quoted McCain as saying in that second session: "One of our jobs as elected officials is to help constituents in a proper fashion. (American Continental) is a big employer and important to the local economy. I wouldn't want any special favors for them... I don't want any part of our conversation to be improper.'' Still, Black maintained that the regulators were nervous about the senators' intentions. "They were all different in their own way,'' he told the newspaper. "McCain was always Hamlet... wringing his hands about what to do.''

The other senators were more direct: Glenn telling the regulators to charge Lincoln or leave it alone, DeConcini calling it unusual for regulators to be putting a company out of business. But the regulators advised the senators that Lincoln's abuses were so serious that they were sending a criminal referral to the Justice Department. "This is an extraordinarily serious matter,'' one said.

McCain was finished with the matter after this meeting. He maintained later that he had been "troubled by the appearance of the meeting'' and "only wanted them to be fairly treated.''

The government's case against Lincoln moved forward, though it was taken out of the San Francisco-based regulators' hands and moved to Washington. In April 1989, the government seized the bankrupt Lincoln. Its federal bailout, $2 billion, was the costliest of the nationwide S&L scandal. In 1990, Keating was charged with 42 counts of fraud. In 1993, a federal jury convicted him of 73 counts of wire and bankruptcy fraud and sentenced him to 12 years in prison. He served four years before the conviction was overturned, and in 1999, at the age of 75, he pled guilty to four counts of fraud and was credited for time served.

The senators had become known as "The Keating Five.'' In August 1991, the Senate Ethics Committee passed judgment on its own: Cranston, DeConcini, and Riegle had substantially interfered with federal regulators. The committee, deeming Cranston the worst offender in the matter, reprimanded him for "improper conduct'' in November and recommended censure. Cranston retired from the Senate the following year. The committee found that Glenn and McCain were only minimally involved, and accused McCain of "poor judgment.'' The committee's counsel had wanted to drop McCain from the case, but leaders kept him in it to maintain an appearance of bipartisan scandal. McCain later concluded: "I was judged eventually, after three years, of using, quote, poor judgment, and I agree with that assessment.''


As I have said, in fairness, I don't think what McCain did was anything more than his admitted "poor judgment". And I wish none of this was being brought up. The Ayers matter is, however, such a stretch. If I were McCain's people, I'd be careful of not ending up with egg on their face.


Last edited by CinC on Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:34 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:33 pm

[quote="amainachen

But then i'm getting tired of the Palin bashing too. The cheap shots being slung at this woman are disgusting. I pray McCain wins and that Palin show exactly what the woman is made of. I know she can do the job[/quote]


What specifically about Palin (other than her being fresh to the Washington scene....which could be said about anyone without experience there) leads you to believe she can do the job? Specifically, what makes her qualified for the job in your opinion?
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion   

Back to top Go down
 
So, who watched the political debates? A FRIENDLY discussion
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 3 of 9Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 Similar topics
-
» How many times have you watched Mai HiME?
» Azumanga Daioh Discussion
» Burst Angel Discussion
» Tokyo Mew Mew Discussion
» Entry #48 Discussion

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
C *A *P *C *H :: KITCHEN / politics, hot subjects-
Jump to: