Hard News: Weekend Warriors
311 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 6 7 8 9 10 … 13 Newer→ Last
-
or proximity to Siberia.
are you serious?
-
are you serious?
No, it is an example of the minutae to which the debate quickly descends.
I don't think it's a matter of great import to most Obama voters. Its more about vision forward versus grasping at the past.
That "vision forward" was insufficient to capture more than 50% of the vote in the mere Democratic primaries. And to be brutally honest if their votes are bankably for Obama they are not the people who need to be talked to.
And I'd argue has more credibility than McCain.
Who has been a senator since 1986, has a track record of accomodating enemies (restored diplomacy with Vietnam), did campaign for the surge for 2 years prior to its successful adoption, who spent most of 2000 publically divorcing GWB on policy, has a track record of bi-partisan politics.
Some tories think he is more credible than Obama.
The economy is tanking, unemployment is rising, housing market is in crash mode and the dollar is at near record lows against the euro. Insert Clinton quote here.
Every tory wants this election to be a debate about credibility, foreign policy and visions going forward.
-
Every tory wants this election to be a debate about credibility, foreign policy and visions going forward.
Sure. Except there is a not negligible chance that what McCain will get to see going forward is the inside of a coffin. In that regard Palin's choice is as perplexing as it is irresponsible, if Macca did in fact have all those good things at the top of his agenda.
Fact is, on the more than legitimate grounds for debate that you enumerate - credibility, foreign policy, vision for the future - McCain as of two weeks ago was toast, done, finito. He picked Palin hoping to shake things up and make the campaign winnable again. Hardly a principled approach, in light of the dangers.
-
Every tory wants this election to be a debate about credibility, foreign policy and visions going forward.
But it's sexist to ask any questions about what Palin's selection says about McCain's credibility, foreign policy experience and judgement and vision going forward?
Will be see more Palins as your nominations for State and Defence, Seantor McCain? Fair question?
-
did campaign for the surge for 2 years prior to its successful adoption
except that a) he wasn't quite sure when it occurred, as you may recall, and b) the 'success' of the surge is debated. No-one is debating the downturn of violence but the most successful element in that seems to come from the demographics of ethnic cleansing, the purchase of elements of the insurgency with cash, c) the adoption of SOF tactics which exist outside the surge.
I know it's an element of faith in McCain central but every now and then realism has to poke its head into the discussion.
McCain..linked the anthrax to Iraq without evidence, linked 9/11 to Iraq and wanted to go in days afterwards, voted for the war. His history as a moderate before 2000 has been stomped on by his more recent past as a hot headed, rather unthinking before ranting, hard line hawk obsessed with past wars and living in a bygone era.
Obama carries none of that baggage. I know who I'd rather trust.
-
The baggage is assessed here, rather well I think:
But the truth is that it's always about Vietnam for John McCain. He has invoked avoiding the mistakes of Vietnam with a sort of religious fervor in every important debate about dispatching U.S. troops since he first entered Congress in 1983. As he put it in an Aug. 18, 1999, speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, he studies "every prospective conflict for the shadow of Vietnam.
-
Obama quite clearly does and has vastly more credibility there.
And y'know. He's actually been overseas.
-
__Obama quite clearly does and has vastly more credibility there.__
And y'know. He's actually been overseas.
To Islamic nations? To France? Was he carrying a piece at the time? Probably a terrorist!
-
Paul, you're pronouncing it wrong. It's 'terrrrrrist' (cf. Dubya).
-
-
Okay, maybe this will stick ...
From Newsweek:
Court documents show that Judge Suddock was disturbed by the alleged attacks by Palin and her family members on Wooten's behavior and character. "Disparaging will not be tolerated—it is a form of child abuse," the judge told a settlement hearing in October 2005, according to typed notes of the proceedings. The judge added: "Relatives cannot disparage either. If occurs [sic] the parent needs to set boundaries for their relatives."
Like I said on Day One: calling Jerry Springer.
The woman is a vindictive nutcase.
-
Okay, maybe this will stick ...
I don't think so, somehow.
What will stick from today is Obama called her a pig and Obama referred to his Muslim faith.
I think they're getting to him, quite frankly. The latter faux pas is truly a classic.
-
Incidently, from Ed Koch who was a major Bush endorser:
I have concluded that the country is safer in the hands of Barack Obama, leader of the Democratic Party and protector of the philosophy of that party. Protecting and defending the U.S. means more than defending us from foreign attacks. It includes defending the public with respect to their civil rights, civil liberties and other needs, e.g., national health insurance, the right of abortion, the continuation of Social Security, gay rights, other rights of privacy, fair progressive taxation and a host of other needs and rights.
If the vice president were ever called on to lead the country, there is no question in my mind that the experience and demonstrated judgment of Joe Biden is superior to that of Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin is a plucky, exciting candidate, but when her record is examined, she fails miserably with respect to her views on the domestic issues that are so important to the people of the U.S., and to me. Frankly, it would scare me if she were to succeed John McCain in the presidency.
-
The woman is a vindictive nutcase.
She'll fit right in then. You also underestimate the power of good teeth and hair.
-
What will stick from today is Obama called her a pig and Obama referred to his Muslim faith.
I think they're getting to him, quite frankly. The latter faux pas is truly a classic.
Excuse me, Giovanni? In the end, the Obama campaign has to do what they did with Clinton and stop going into a self-defensive crouch every time the McCain campaign or its proxies (like Massachusetts Gov. Jane Swift) bring bullshit allegations of sexism to bear.
If Palin likes being compared to Margaret Thatcher, then it's time to walk the talk. And Obama should take this lesson from Thatcher -- she wasn't shy about mixing it up.
-
Excuse me, Giovanni?
You have to admit that Obama saying "my Muslim faith" is a pretty unlikely slip of the tongue, unless the secret muslim chatter has got to him somehow. The lipstick on a pig is just bs, of course, but he deserves some punishment for resorting to the cliche (still, the man can't win, it seems: he scratches his cheek, he was giving Clinton the finger; he greets his wife, it was a terrorist fist jab; he alludes to the futility of porcine cosmetics... ah, screw it).
Hard to be combative against a woman for Obama, he has been there before, plus attacking the VP nominee is beneath him. I think he needs to change the subject from Palin. If he has a big endorsment up his sleeve (Powell?) now it'd be just the time.
-
And now the story the quickly changing mind of the general from the ANG and his fresh new promotion:
When John McCain announced Sarah Palin as his running mate, the campaign immediately began touting her experience--both foreign and domestic--as "commander-in-chief" of the Alaska National Guard. But the reality of the situation--that Palin actually had little to do with the National Guard quickly became apparent. In fact, the idea was undercut severely by comments made by the actual commander of the Alaska National Guard--its Adjutant General, Major General Craig Campbell. When that happened, it eventually turned into somewhat of a national joke, culminating in the humiliation of McCain/Palin campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds on CNN when he tried to promote Palin's "foreign policy" experience during the Republican National Convention.
It was getting bad for the McCain campaign because they couldn't afford to lose the "experience" argument to the Obama campaign.
But suddenly--and strangely--the commander of the Alaska National Guard, Major General Campbell, changed his story. By the end of the convention, he was praising Palin's experience, talking on TV about how she had taken control of Alaska's National Guard operations and how she was a "great" leader.
Interestingly enough, Palin promoted him with his third star--to the rank of Lieutenant General--only three days later.
-
Hard to be combative against a woman for Obama, he has been there before, plus attacking the VP nominee is beneath him.
I agree with you on the last part, but I seriously think it's a strategic error to let McCain keep using Palin's gender as a shield from questions about his judgement. And do you think it's a coincidence that one thing conspicuously absent from that Palin Truth Squad is... well, men?
Here's how Obama (or Joe Biden) could have "changed the subject" about Lipstick-gate: "Senator McCain, your campaign has told a flat out lie today. I don't compare women to pigs, any more than you do.
If you're serious about 'changing' Washington, how about you stop spreading falsehoods and start talking the real issues facing every woman in America? Joe Biden and I will have that debate with you and Governor Palin -- in public and on the record -- anywhere, any time."
OK, it's a bit clunky but it's putting the focus straight back on McCain.
-
What you said Craig, only better.
-
What you said Craig, only better.
Damn right - and that's another reason why I'd vote for the grown-up if I could. And sadly, it's not John McCain.
And you know the really sad thing.
He was calling on the media to back off Bristol Palin because "It has no relevance to Gov. Palin's performance as a governor or her potential performance as a vice president."
While the usual suspect are making full play of that "my Muslim faith" gaffe, what a shame the McCain-Palin campaign couldn't even acknowledge this:
"So, the fact that Gov. Palin is deeply religious, that’s a good thing," Obama said. "You know, I give her all the credit in the world for that, and for people to start poking around and trying to, you know, paint that as if it’s, as if it’s strange and wrong, I think that’s offensive. I don’t think we should be doing that.
"Now if she’s got positions or John McCain’s got positions or I’ve got positions or Joe Biden has positions, public policy positions, that ... are part of government’s function, then I think it’s legitimate to have a debate about those positions, but don’t give people some sort of religious litmus test," he continued, "because I don’t want somebody to question my faith and I’m certainly not gonna question somebody else’s.
"I feel very strongly about that," Obama said. "This is a nation of believers. This is a nation of believers, and I’m one of them, and we may not agree on every single aspect of our faith, but what we can agree to is that faith is important in our lives and it shapes our values, and we should be respectful of each other’s faiths."
So, theo-con hacks lie about Obama's religion. Obama stands up in front of the party faithful and says that he's not going to attack Palin's.
-
He was calling on the media to back off Bristol Palin because...
...he understands it is really, really, really bad (like -5% swing bad) for his campaign.
-
...he understands it is really, really, really bad (like -5% swing bad) for his campaign
It's called conference bounce, which btw has begun to evaporate now, with most polls either putting Obama back ahead or statistically even. The current feeling amongst many pollsters seems to be that as it plays out, McCain did less well out of the bounce than he was expected to, given the coverage and the Palin factor. So I guess when you step back and look at it, it wasn't really really bad at all for Obama, quite the opposite.
-
"So, the fact that Gov. Palin is deeply religious, that’s a good thing," Obama said.
Twenty years ago politicos as diverse as Margaret Thatcher and David Lange were described as being "deeply religious". This came across as a kind of coded mediaspeak for 'don't ask cos it's nobody's business but theirs'. While it sometimes seemed a handy flag of convenience, Lange, for example, never pimped his kids beyond portraying himself (in his pre-Margaret Pope days) as a down-to-earth bloke who liked nothing better than a family lunch at Georgie Pie. And I don't recall Thatcher ever dropping hints about how she'd like to institute a theocracy.
Obama's right - shove it back, down deep, where it belongs, and leave it there. If an Obama presidency delivers nothing more than putting paid to the Karl Rove-manipulated machination of the relious right then it'd be, in every sense, a good thing. -
...he understands it is really, really, really bad (like -5% swing bad) for his campaign.
Well, I'd like to think that being a lying douchebag would be really, really bad for any campaign. Hasn't stopped McCain though.
-
It's called conference bounce, which btw has begun to evaporate now, with most polls either putting Obama back ahead or statistically even.
Which counts as a negative swing because Obama was leading pre-conventions and is now even.
The current feeling amongst many pollsters seems to be that as it plays out, McCain did less well out of the bounce than he was expected to, given the coverage and the Palin factor.
Press coverage and Palin factor that was generated almost entirely by the hardworking "researching" of the left-o-sphere. Given that, I suppose it could have been worse and McCain might have been expected to do better than destroy Obama's lead. But I just can't see Obama as being real happy about this result.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.