- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 13, 2008 at 10:05 pm #618622
AnonymousInactiveAnd in response to the “100 year war”,
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/04/mccains_100year_war.html
May 13, 2008 at 10:32 pm #618623
AnonymousInactiveA lot of issues.
First I want to say that I don’t believe McCain attended Hagee’s church for 20 years, or held Hagee as a close, personal confidant for 20 years.
There is a difference between accepting the endorsement of (for some)a powerful, wealthy person, and actually having a lengthy, very close relationship with someone and actually seeking advice from that person.
I don’t believe McCain confers with Hagee privately regarding his home life, his campaign and, ultimately, his possible future as President.
I apologize if any links that I share here are not up to par. I do notice that a lot of links posted by Dem’s are also “opinion pieces”. Sometimes, there is no link, only a false quote here and there that someone heard and then, somewhere along the way, it became true.
Obama will have issues to face in the upcoming run. He has shady associations, possible illegal real estate transactions, etc..
I think, as his supporter, it is easy to disregard some of the issues, because he is promising to do things that people want. However, these are issues that tell a lot about a person’s character and should not be overlooked.
On the other side of that (because, as charla will say), I am not a die-hard conservative and I do realize that a lot of my statements here could apply to *both* candidates.
It is politics and every single skeleton will fall out of the closet. I think Obama is more at risk of this being an issue, only because he is younger with less experience. We will see what happens.
May 13, 2008 at 11:59 pm #618624
AnonymousInactiveI did respond to you guys, but you aren’t seeing it.
I don’t want you to think that I wimped out of the debate and crawled into a corner!
Really, I responded! Hello…. hello…. can’t anyone hear me!?!
May 14, 2008 at 4:53 am #618625
JoBParticipantNew Resident…
i hear you.
I have come to believe that the reason that Obama supporters are always telling you what Obama meant instead of what he said.. and always attributing higher motives to him is that he has made himself such a blank slate that any supporter can see anything they want… He is all things to all people..
well.. almost all people:)
so if you say anything.. you are attacking their hopes and dreams.. not just Obama.
I am not saying that to be mean or dismissive of them.. It is a great way to inspire people and can be a good thing… but it is very hard to combat.
However.. having led you down the garden path of agreeing with you… I have to disagree.
Hagee and Wright are very similar circumstances..
Had Hagee’s church been close enough for Senator McCain to attend and held such political power where he needed it in his earlier career.. you can bet he would have attended his church… and sat week after week and smiled and nodded while the man spewed bigotry from the pulpit.
but not to worry.. Hagee apologized to the Catholics and the apology was accepted.. so there is reconciliation.. just ask McCain who takes credit for it… or at least for the appearance of reconciliation…
And Wright took his comments past the acceptable limit so Obama could repudiate him ..
all is well in the world. at least it looks that way…
May 14, 2008 at 5:19 am #618626
JoBParticipantNewResident…
McCain’s team…
folks you can be proud of…
“Two of John McCain’s senior campaign staff were forced to resign this week after revelations that their lobbying firm was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to represent Burma’s brutal military dictatorship.1
And it gets worse—turns out this goes all the way to the top. Charlie Black, McCain’s campaign chairman, ran a lobbying firm that represented brutal dictators like Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines and Mobutu Sese Seko in Zaire—along with terrorist rebel Jonas Savimbi in Angola. Together, these men have been responsible for massive human suffering.2
And for good measure, Charlie Black has represented war profiteer Blackwater Worldwide and Iraqi fraudster Ahmed Chalabi.3″
May 14, 2008 at 7:11 pm #618627
AnonymousInactiveJoB – You have been doing some digging, I see. So I have done some of my own.
Because I do not have the patience right now to go through and edit and only post the prudent facts of this article, I will just post the link.
Before you say anything, I already realize this article is biased, but the facts are not.
http://www.newsmax.com/newfront/connor_clinton_obama/2008/05/11/95144.html
May 14, 2008 at 8:03 pm #618628
Tonya42MemberThe problem, in my view with Obama is that he has more red flags than accomplishments.
If the FBI were running a background check to verify Barack Obama’s application to be an agent …his “friends” as well as his overall background would disqualify him from holding the sensitive position and I am supposed to think he’s capable and qualified to be the next president? I don’t understand that.
May 14, 2008 at 8:31 pm #618629
AnonymousInactiveTonya42 – Great point.
And, JoB, just an interesting side note in regards to your earlier post.
If you put into Google the search term “McCain terrorist ties”, you get about 279,000 hits.
Clinton: 376,000
Obama: 434,000
Of course this is no scientific study, but I do find it interesting and a little discrediting to your attempt at portraying McCain as in bed with any terrorist group.
May 14, 2008 at 8:34 pm #618630
AnonymousInactiveTonya42 – Haven’t figured out what camp you align yourself with, but in response to your assertion that because Obama would not qualify to be in the FBI, how can he qualify to be the next President, let’s remember that a Democratic President can be disbarred for ethical reasons and that is still considered ok by Democrats.
May 14, 2008 at 9:02 pm #618631
walfredoMemberNewRes- if you think that the bar that was set by supporters of the Clinton administration was low. It might interest you that a whopping 40% of republicans still support the current administration!
If I had a job opening at a video store, I would not entrust our current commander in chief to understand the complexities of removing those little tabs on the bottom of the dvd’s before the customers leave the store…
May 14, 2008 at 9:43 pm #618632
walfredoMemberAs for the Hagee versus Rev. Wright comparison, I think its a very interesting discussion.
First you have the relationship between the two men- clearly Rev. Wright was more closely involved in Barack Obama’s life. No question.
You have the outrageous statements- we’ve all heard them, god punished New Orleans w/ Katrina because of gay people, Catholics = evil, US government spread AIDS, American foreign policy is immoral and partly responsibly for attacks on us… Lots of em. Both pretty batshi* nuts imho…
So then, to me the most interesting part is how the relationships have since been handled. Obama has denounced the statements, then denounced Rev. Wright and has never sought his support or endorsemnet. McCain campaigned for the support of Mr. Hagee, has included him in campaign events, and as of this date still says he is proud of his endorsement… Clearly they have handled this differently, as has the media.
So really, if you agree both of them are batshi* nuts, and say crazy things… You are left with the debate of what is of more impact- a close proximity and long relationship, but a denouncement of the controversial ideas, and of the actions to date of the man himself. Or a long-distance relationship, but a support of the ideas of “spiritual mentor” with no qualifiers, and an active involvement in a current campaign…
I think both are potentially damaging, my gut says that the guy who has not distanced himself and actually sought the support of the pastor is more likely to then bestow influence and respect onto someone who is batshi* nuts, more so then the person who has adamantly chastised the words of his pastor, and then publicly distanced himself…
May 14, 2008 at 11:51 pm #618633
AnonymousInactiveI’m not surprised by the 40% approval rate of the current administration by Republicans. One question, on that note: Has there been one terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11?
One *fact* that Democrats love to dismiss is that (and I should have included this in the wording in my previous post) President Clinton broke the law.
He didn’t just cheat on his wife and try to hide it (which is already bad enough), but then broke the law in his attempt to cover it up.
I know that you will argue that “….lives were not lost when Clinton broke the law…”, but he still DID break the law.
To many Democrats, it’s not a big deal. It has even been suggested on this forum that Clinton breaking the law was okay. I think the quote was something like: “He did what any man would do”.
Of course, that is old news, but it does set a precedence of what, or I should say, how much corruption, Democrats are willing to elect into office.
The Hagee/Wright argument is an interesting debate, I agree. Your thoughts on that are interesting to me as well.
Of course, I have to disagree with your final assessment. I think that having such a long standing, close relationship is more detrimental than how it was later dealt with.
Let’s not forget, also, that Obama did not initially rebuke Reverend Wright, but waited until it really blew up and he saw that he had no choice. Basically, his hand was forced.
May 15, 2008 at 12:02 am #618634
AnonymousInactiveI don’t know a single person who thinks either the sex or the lying was defendable. We just don’t think it justified spending millions upon millions of dollars and law makers time to prove it was a bad thing.
May 15, 2008 at 12:06 am #618635
AnonymousInactiveWhy, then, today do Democrats believe that Clinton was a great President?
May 15, 2008 at 12:08 am #618636
beachdrivegirlParticipantI think that its about how the economy was when Clinton was in office. Everything was going great.
May 15, 2008 at 12:10 am #618637
AnonymousInactive*Of course, that is old news, but it does set a precedence of what, or I should say, how much corruption, Democrats are willing to elect into office.*
By the way, Clinton wasn’t elected after his impeachment. It occurred during his second term.
May 15, 2008 at 12:14 am #618638
beachdrivegirlParticipantLets also note that McCain not only has Hagee to be worried about but his Phoenix Pastor Dan Yeary who is very much against Abortion and homoesexuality. i dont see on the fence Democrats voting for McCain when he has not one but two religous affiliates like that.
May 15, 2008 at 12:16 am #618639
walfredoMemberNewRes-
I definitely don’t forget that Obama didn’t initially rebuke Wright. He in fact, went out of his way to include him. Of course he excluded the ideas, and any rational person would probably agree that he doesn’t share those views. But it is very fair to say, that Obama tried to defend Wright when the clips came out, and stated directly that he could not disown him. Comparing him to an uncle, and his grandmother. Someone he can vehemently disagree with, and is a part of a generation past, that sees the world as static, but someone who he loves…
There is a real relationship between the two men, even now a damaged one. I guess to me, its not an argument as to which two are closer because that is pretty clear. But which relationship is more likely to advance ideas I find as extreme into the mainstream, and into policy… My gut still says that is Hagee… There is a different level of acceptance and credibility that comes with being a confirmed, solicited, an official surrogate of a candidate.
As far as 40% of republicans supporting Bush, I just think its a funny stack. If 6/10 of the people who hired you regret it and think you did a bad job, and 10/10 of the people who didn’t recommend you, still think you are terrible, well then you would be the least popular president ever, at any point in recorded history! What Clinton did, absolutely pales in comparison to the lies, corruption, incompetence, arrogance, and flat-out illegal activity of this administration the last 8 years, and now the only folks left are the true, true believers. Watch for the Repub brand name to continue to be dragged into the gutter, and the congress to continue to become more democratic. Along with the embarrassment, shame, death, and utter failure from the Bush administration, the destruction of the republican brand will be the ultimate legacy of the Bush/Cheney/Rove debacle.
May 15, 2008 at 12:18 am #618640
AnonymousInactiveYou only get 2 terms.
But, let’s remember, the economy is *possibly* getting worse now, when Bush has 6 more months in office, as compared with the 90 months he has been in office. And let’s also remember that our current President has not broken the law.
Hypothetically, if Obama gets voted into office, how long will it be before he makes this country the beautiful, fairy tale country so many think he’s capable of providing?
May 15, 2008 at 12:23 am #618641
AnonymousInactiveI don’t know. How long do you think it will take to clean up Bush’s mess before he can even begin to work on his own ideas?
May 15, 2008 at 12:27 am #618642
walfredoMemberI’m sorry NewRes, but that just isn’t accurate. The current president has broken many laws… The grab at power from the executive branch the last 7+ years, completely ignoring all laws has been staggering. Cheney reinventing the Vice Presidency as its own cabinet that answers to no one… It’s been interesting to watch. Not to mention the illegal war we are waging based on the lies we were told… The no-bid contracts for Blackwater, and Halliburton… The detainees at Guatanimo. The trashing of the Geneva Convention, the implementation of torture. Abu Graib… The illegal wire tapping, and the pardons that were demanded afterwards (apparently its not illegal, if you demand the change the law after you commit the crime)…
I could go on. There is no comparison, and there is a reason why Bill Clinton left as a popular president, and GW will leave more disgraced and less popular then Richard Nixon…
May 15, 2008 at 12:28 am #618643
AnonymousInactiveWow, walfredo. Do you not like Republicans?
“He, in fact, went out of his way to include him. Of course, he excluded the ideas, and any rational person would probably agree that he doesn’t share those views.”
Well… If I so, so badly wanted to believe in Obama and everything that he is telling me, I would probably think the same thing.
However, call me irrational (I guess you already did), but I do not KNOW that Obama doesn’t share those views. Are you trying to say that a mentor and close personal confidante for over 20 years would have no influence, whatsoever, on a persons character, views and opinions? That is quite an assumption.
One thing I have come to realize throughout the last couple of months is that Obama supporters seem very quick to jump to assumptions. If it is in accordance with Obama somehow being right, it must be true.
May 15, 2008 at 12:33 am #618644
walfredoMemberNewRes- I honestly believe at my core, that the very first day of the Obama adminstration will be a great day in American history. Quite frankly, just standing up and saying NO with a loud voice to what has been done the last 7+ years will send a powerful message to the world. It will start the healing of our nations soul, and immediately improve our standing abroad…
It will be that quick. As far as substantive policies being put in place, that will happen but take time. I believe him when he says we will be out of Iraq before the end of his first term. I believe him when he says that “we” are the only people that can bring change to Washington… and we will still need to rally and push the agenda for what we want.
But realistically, with the projected house and senate gains, he will be able to get a lot done… And for the first time in my adult life, I will be proud of the governemnt that represents me…
May 15, 2008 at 12:50 am #618645
AnonymousInactiveAnd I, too, am sorry, walfredo because your post wasn’t that accurate either.
Bush brought the idea of war to congress, it was voted on. Of course, this was back when everyone was actually upset that we were attacked. Does any one remember that?
I’m glad for you that you would finally be proud of your government if Obama wins. I would like to know, because I don’t think anyone has asked you point blank, why are you Democrat?
Ok, we know that you don’t agree with the war, but why else?
May 15, 2008 at 1:35 am #618646
walfredoMemberI actually don’t hate republicans, I do very much hate George W. Bush and his administration (as do 80% of Americans right now). I don’t have time to go through point by point what I referred to above, but it is absolutely correct that this administration has acted above the law, and broken it on numreous occassions… Congress gave President Bush the authority to use military force as a last resort, and he falsified intelligence, and falsified experts, and disregarded all evidence to the contrary, and fired all generals that disagreed to present a blatant lie to the world about our reasons to invade Iraq.
Which by the way, he has changed what those reasons were at least 2 dozen times now (wmd’s, imminent threat, mushroom cloud, spread democracy to the region, remove Saddam, keep women out burkas, train an independant Iraq) where now the goal is to keep the shi* to shoe level, and hope less stuff explodes, while we occupy a foreign country, deplete our military, bankrupt our treasury, and his buddies get rich…
Why am I a democrat? I tend to lean democrat, but I am not a partisan. I would love a system that had more parties. I think there is an illusion of choice in this country. I have 65 different kinds of cereal I can choose at the grocery store, but clearly everyone is represented as there are only 2 types of people in America (R or D)…
I can absolutely tell you why I didn’t support GW Bush in 2000, 2004, and why anything short of a damning repudiation of the terrible mistake that American’s made in 2004 (the only time he actually was elected) would be a disaster for this country going forward.
We have been lied to, stolen from, our futures have been badly damaged, our families are less safe, our economy is in shambles, and we have generations of new enemies and deep hatred to deal with. It is imperative that America turn the page on this pathetic sack of shi* that has been in the white house the last 7+ years, and speak out loudly in opposition of all that he has stood for.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.