Jump to content

McCain v. Obama in 2008? Who saw this 2 months Ago?


jasper383

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

All this talk about inexperience frustrates me. So the naysayers all feel that we need to keep politicians in office to ensure our spiral downward?

 

 

But then again, who says you're on a downward spiral? Many people are convinced things are the best they've ever been thanks to 7 years of Bush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

So what.

 

 

well, it may indicate that he is a scab who doesnt respect unions. Or maybe it just means he's a media whore. On the other hand, who gives a flying {censored}, since he doesnt have a chance in hell to get the gop nod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

All this talk about inexperience frustrates me. So the naysayers all feel that we need to keep politicians in office to ensure our spiral downward?

 

 

Ya, that's the rub. You gotta be good at politics, whether you're in public office, Corporate America or you just want to be a big fish in a small pond. Granted, there are many different ways to be successful but still, you need to track record of success and getting people to do what you want them to do. Unfortunately, there aren't a whole lot of other places to gain it if you want to be the head honcho of the U.S. Kinda sucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
But then again, who says you're on a downward spiral? Many people are convinced things are the best they've ever been thanks to 7 years of Bush.



Well, good news don't sell copy. Economy has been on a tear for 5 years despite the housing problems. Whomever is president doesn't really effect it much, some politicians are just better at claiming to have something to do with it. :D
unitrootdocumentation_01.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

...And not because Obama is African American, either. He's too far left, and too inexperienced.


What do you think?

 

 

Here's what

Investors Business Daily thinks...

 

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, January 07, 2008 4:20 PM PT

On Oct. 2, 2002, while still an undistinguished Illinois state senator, Oprah Winfrey's choice for president explained that while he did not oppose all wars, he opposed Iraq.

 

"What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

well, it may indicate that he is a scab who doesnt respect unions. Or maybe it just means he's a media whore. On the other hand, who gives a flying {censored}, since he doesnt have a chance in hell to get the gop nod.

Is Leno not supposed to have guests and sit there with a monologue all night long? No politicians are supposed to appear, so that 10,500 writers can hold 280 million Americans hostage from hearing, watching and learning about candidates on late night?

 

This letter written by the Guild president is weak. Oh we aren't striking against the hosts. They really support us, but please guests, don't go on their show. So the Guild acknowledges that Leno, O'Brien and Kimmel have all been supportive, but they aren't interested in returning the favor.;)

 

Full letter to union members.

 

cropped for relevancy here - -

 

. . . . . . . Leno, O

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Hil's advisors: "People think you're too cold. Soften up by 10%. But don't give 'em too much to chew on, or they won't just think you're human, you'll go too far and people will think you are weak. Get close to crying, but no real tears. Sensi-strong, etc."


All a game, all a game.

 

 

Agreed 100%...

 

 

 

- georgestrings

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

well, it may indicate that he is a scab who doesnt respect unions. Or maybe it just means he's a media whore. On the other hand, who gives a flying {censored}, since he doesnt have a chance in hell to get the gop nod.

 

 

Waitaminute there, what's wrong with crossing a picket line? Union members have a right to strike. I'm in absolute agreement about that. They have a right to organize, and a right to strike in an effort to get their demands met. What I don't agree with is the fact that you have to "respect" (which is really a misappropriation of the term) their picket line by not crossing it.

 

Let's take the current writer's strike for instance. What about all the other people they put out of work? What about the caterers, the technicians, the makeup people, etc? I don't know if those people are union too, and they very well might be, but let's just say for the sake of argument that they aren't. Due to the strike, a lot of them are out of work. They probably have bills to pay and families to feed, so an impromptu unpaid vacation isn't necessarily what they want. If a show goes back on the air without the writers, what the heck gives the the strikers the right to demand others "respect" their picket line? It is the ultimate act of arrogance to expect others not to work and get a paycheck just because you and/or your union choose to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

To add to Dax's post - Obama is also a product of the Daly political machine - no telling what skeletons *might* jump out of that closet... Looks to me like the Dems once again have given no decent choices - Hillary isn't it, and neither is the ambulance chasing Edwards... Edwards talks about healthcare - hell, he's had quite a hand in bankrupting that system DIRECTLY...

In related news, I see where one of Hillary's largest fundraisers went to prison recently - if that happened to a member of the GOP, it'd be front page news - let alone one of the front runners...



- georgestrings

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Barack Obama shows why foreigners consider us naive.

A good opinion piece by Bret Stephens from the WSJ (the rest of the piece is excellent as well)

Tuesday, January 8, 2008 12:01 a.m. EST

Barack Obama, still fresh from his victory in Iowa last week and confident of another in New Hampshire tonight, has as his signature campaign theme the promise to "end the division" in America. Notice the irony: The scale of his Iowa victory, in a state that's 94% white, is perhaps the clearest indication so far that the division Mr. Obama promises to end has largely been put to rest.

Meanwhile, in Kenya last week a mob surrounded a church in which, according to an Associated Press report, "hundreds of terrified people had taken refuge." The church was put to flame, while the mob used machetes, Hutu-style, to hack to death whoever tried to escape. The killers in this case were of the Luo tribe, their victims were of the Kikuyu, and the issue over which they are bleeding is their own presidential election.

When foreigners assail Americans for being naive, it is often on account of contrasts like these. A nation in which the poor are defined by an income level that in most countries would make them prosperous is a nation that has all but forgotten the true meaning of poverty. A nation in which obesity is largely a problem of the poor (and anorexia of the upper-middle class) does not understand the word "hunger." A nation in which the most celebrated recent cases of racism, at Duke University or in Jena, La., are wholly or mostly contrived is not a racist nation....

There is great virtue in the American way, which expects CEOs to perform on a quarterly basis, presidents and Congresses to reinvent politics in 100 days, generals to wipe out opponents in 100 hours without taking significant casualties, doctors to save life and limb every time, search engines to yield a million results in less than a second, and so on.

There is also great virtue in the belief that what is bad can be made good, and that what is good can be made great, and that what is fractionally less than great is downright awful.

But these virtues can spawn vices. One is impatience. Another is a culture of chronic complaint. A third is the belief that every problem has a solution, that trial is possible without error, that risks must always be zero, that every inconvenience is an outrage, every setback a disaster and every mishap a plausible basis for a lawsuit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I thought that was Letterman.

 

 

Letterman made a deal. There's some controversy with Leno because he wrote a monologue before coming to a deal with anyone, and the writers aren't sure if that's kosher (Leno argues that he wrote it so it's not subject). Conan is just working without writers (more interviews, reality stuff). And he has a beard.

 

[YOUTUBE]ngPLDHJmr6M[/YOUTUBE]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...