Don't like the snow? You can make a bookmark with the following text instead of a url: javascript:snowStorm.toggleSnow(). Clicking it will toggle the snow on and off.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

The American Presidency: This Thread Is 'Inartful'.

13468963

Posts

  • tuxkamentuxkamen Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Anyone suggesting it was deliberate, on either side, is ridiculous.

    Here's an interesting clip from Verdict with Clark expounding on his comments.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybBb2tUQtvI

    The best exchange:

    Abrams: Are you sorry you said it?

    Clark: It's a great line. I didn't make it up--it was given to me by the interviewer.


    Games: Ad Astra Per Phalla | Choose Your Own Phalla
    Spoiler:
    3DS: 2406-5451-5770
  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2008
    tuxkamen wrote: »
    SCHIEFFER: I have to say, Barack Obama has not had any of those experiences either, nor has he
    ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down. I mean...

    Gen. CLARK: Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification
    to be president.

    SCHIEFFER: Really?
    Really? Yes really. Good lord man. I'd like to say that if I had been in the chair across from Schieffer I'd have responded: "Really. What about that makes one qualified to be President? I'll wait."

    I would have been dickish about it and offered him a ride over North Korea so he could run for president.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    tuxkamen wrote: »
    Asking it in that way is blunt and...uh, inartful olol. The question you ask has to be how he feels about Clark's opinion that the most important experience that military service can give you (as it pertains to the Presidency) is command experience, executive experience. Full stop. Don't mention POWing, because that's a personal experience that--to be quite frank--anyone can get.

    I don't think that's necessarily the question to ask. McCain was saying that Clark said something terrible and that Obama needed to repudiate him and get him off the campaign trail. The question that needed to be asked is, "Why? Why is what Clark said so horrible?"

    I don't think McCain got angry because the reporter was broaching an intensely personal subject. I think McCain got angry because there's no way for him to answer that question without revealing his smear-tactic accusations as being complete bullshit. McCain was painted into a corner, and McCain does not like being painted into a corner.

    This is my annoyance with the situation.

    His campaign is calling it a smear on his military record, but at no point cites anything that's a smear on his military record. He can disagree with Clark all he wants, I'm fine with that. But he's beyond misrepresenting Clark and well into making shit up, while having surrogates ACTUALLY disparage Clark's military record (directly saying he wasn't that stellar at his last post).

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    kildy wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    tuxkamen wrote: »
    Asking it in that way is blunt and...uh, inartful olol. The question you ask has to be how he feels about Clark's opinion that the most important experience that military service can give you (as it pertains to the Presidency) is command experience, executive experience. Full stop. Don't mention POWing, because that's a personal experience that--to be quite frank--anyone can get.

    I don't think that's necessarily the question to ask. McCain was saying that Clark said something terrible and that Obama needed to repudiate him and get him off the campaign trail. The question that needed to be asked is, "Why? Why is what Clark said so horrible?"

    I don't think McCain got angry because the reporter was broaching an intensely personal subject. I think McCain got angry because there's no way for him to answer that question without revealing his smear-tactic accusations as being complete bullshit. McCain was painted into a corner, and McCain does not like being painted into a corner.

    This is my annoyance with the situation.

    His campaign is calling it a smear on his military record, but at no point cites anything that's a smear on his military record. He can disagree with Clark all he wants, I'm fine with that. But he's beyond misrepresenting Clark and well into making shit up, while having surrogates ACTUALLY disparage Clark's military record (directly saying he wasn't that stellar at his last post).

    This right here is what angers me the most about what happened. Clark didn't attack McCains service record, but in fighting this made up smear they are attacking Clarks service record.

  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited July 2008
    kildy wrote: »
    His campaign is calling it a smear on his military record, but at no point cites anything that's a smear on his military record. He can disagree with Clark all he wants, I'm fine with that. But he's beyond misrepresenting Clark and well into making shit up, while having surrogates ACTUALLY disparage Clark's military record (directly saying he wasn't that stellar at his last post).

    I've seen in more than one location assertions that everybody hated Clark because he was an arrogant asshole who never listened to anyone whose achievements were entirely a cynical ploy to garner the credentials to run for office.

    Yup, smearing military folks is an abomination, except when you disagree with them.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • GoslingGosling Looking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, Probably Watertown, WIRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Jragghen wrote: »
    I think, whether he realized it himself or someone told him, that this is potentially a fatal blow if it gets past 'how can he SAY that' and into 'wait, he fucking outranks McCain, maybe he CAN say that'. And he has to keep it in the former category at all costs.

    I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    His campaign is calling it a smear on his military record, but at no point cites anything that's a smear on his military record. He can disagree with Clark all he wants, I'm fine with that. But he's beyond misrepresenting Clark and well into making shit up, while having surrogates ACTUALLY disparage Clark's military record (directly saying he wasn't that stellar at his last post).

    I've seen in more than one location assertions that everybody hated Clark because he was an arrogant asshole who never listened to anyone whose achievements were entirely a cynical ploy to garner the credentials to run for office.

    Yup, smearing military folks is an abomination, except when you disagree with them.

    I think I've said a few times over the last couple days that the only time it's okay to disparage a (former) military person's record is if they're a Democrat. See: Max Cleland and John Kerry.

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Jragghen wrote: »
    "The thought of his being president sends a cold chill down my spine," Cochran told the Globe. "He is erratic. He is hotheaded. He loses his temper and he worries me."
    Thats Senator Thad Cochran - (very) R - MS.

    Thats a campaign ad all by itself, especially if you could get audio.

    11793-1.png
    Spoiler:
  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    CNN Poll: 35% believe a terrorist attack is likely in the next few weeks.

    I suppose it's inevitable when an even higher number feel about the same about the Rapture.

    PSN: allenquid
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Quid wrote: »
    CNN Poll: 35% believe a terrorist attack is likely in the next few weeks.

    I suppose it's inevitable when an even higher number feel about the same about the Rapture.

    Do bombings against civilians in Iraq count?

    11793-1.png
    Spoiler:
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited July 2008
    wwtMask wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    His campaign is calling it a smear on his military record, but at no point cites anything that's a smear on his military record. He can disagree with Clark all he wants, I'm fine with that. But he's beyond misrepresenting Clark and well into making shit up, while having surrogates ACTUALLY disparage Clark's military record (directly saying he wasn't that stellar at his last post).

    I've seen in more than one location assertions that everybody hated Clark because he was an arrogant asshole who never listened to anyone whose achievements were entirely a cynical ploy to garner the credentials to run for office.

    Yup, smearing military folks is an abomination, except when you disagree with them.

    I think I've said a few times over the last couple days that the only time it's okay to disparage a (former) military person's record is if they're a Democrat. See: Max Cleland and John Kerry.

    I think a large part of this is because it's principally Republicans who get a bad case of the undie-bundies when you disparage military experience. When Pubs talk about how a Dem's service doesn't make him a minor deity, the Dems don't care nearly as much as the Pubs do given the inverse.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • CommunistCowCommunistCow Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    tuxkamen wrote: »
    I just find the timing of the remark... remarkable. Being on/around the same day as the patriotism speech, maybe there's some causality I'm missing?

    You really need to look at the transcript, as was suggested in the previous thread:
    ...full transcript snip...

    Wow. So what was this about Clark not speaking well? It seems like he perfectly explained his position the first time through. Le sigh.

    No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
  • Gnome-InterruptusGnome-Interruptus Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    wwtMask wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    His campaign is calling it a smear on his military record, but at no point cites anything that's a smear on his military record. He can disagree with Clark all he wants, I'm fine with that. But he's beyond misrepresenting Clark and well into making shit up, while having surrogates ACTUALLY disparage Clark's military record (directly saying he wasn't that stellar at his last post).

    I've seen in more than one location assertions that everybody hated Clark because he was an arrogant asshole who never listened to anyone whose achievements were entirely a cynical ploy to garner the credentials to run for office.

    Yup, smearing military folks is an abomination, except when you disagree with them.

    I think I've said a few times over the last couple days that the only time it's okay to disparage a (former) military person's record is if they're a Democrat. See: Max Cleland and John Kerry.

    I think a large part of this is because it's principally Republicans who get a bad case of the undie-bundies when you disparage military experience. When Pubs talk about how a Dem's service doesn't make him a minor deity, the Dems don't care nearly as much as the Pubs do given the inverse.

    Just like implying an 'ism against a Dem is seen as more of a slight than implying that same 'ism against a Repub.

    Call Bush / McCain a homophobe... now try the same with Clinton or Obama etc.

    steam_sig.png
    MWO: Adamski
    Brave Frontier: Adamski (481 077 56)
    Puzzles & Dragons: Adamski@pa (313 842 296)
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic I've Done Worse Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Wow. So what was this about Clark not speaking well? It seems like he perfectly explained his position the first time through. Le sigh.
    When translated into simpleton the nuance is lost.

    Trogg wrote: »
    Not as positive as AIDS and cancer, but positive nonetheless.

    PSN: QuipFilter
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/mccain_campaign_obamas_trip_to_1.php

    McCain campaign a month ago: "hey, betch you haven't even BEEN to Iraq!"

    McCain campaign today: "visiting Iraq is just a cheap political stunt!"

    Sane World: .... While true, doesn't that kind of point out your infamous Market trip?

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    kildy wrote: »
    http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/mccain_campaign_obamas_trip_to_1.php

    McCain campaign a month ago: "hey, betch you haven't even BEEN to Iraq!"

    McCain campaign today: "visiting Iraq is just a cheap political stunt!"

    Sane World: .... While true, doesn't that kind of point out your infamous Market trip?

    Isn't McCain the person who talked about how safe and normal it was while he had a ton of bodyguards protecting him?

  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited July 2008
    tuxkamen wrote: »
    I just find the timing of the remark... remarkable. Being on/around the same day as the patriotism speech, maybe there's some causality I'm missing?

    You really need to look at the transcript, as was suggested in the previous thread:
    ...full transcript snip...

    Wow. So what was this about Clark not speaking well? It seems like he perfectly explained his position the first time through. Le sigh.

    He speaks fine. He doesn't speak politics-ese well. Recall the genius of many of Obama's best speeches is that they provide nuanced and complex arguments in ways that are impossible to break into soundbites. You take a random sentence out of those speeches, and it's literally meaningless - you need at least a 30-40 second clip to even begin making sense of it. This keeps the media from fucking up the context by selecting damning 5-second portions that sound really bad when removed from the larger work.

    Clark's treatment shows why the status quo has lately been to speak only in digestible blurbs and rah-rah truisms that sound good and say nothing. If your entire speech is a string of platitudes, the media can't sabotage you. You're not saying anything, sure, but at least you're not being kneecapped. Clark didn't follow the rules - he provided an actual nuanced argument over the course of his interview. But due to the interview format and his lacking Obama's rhetorical brilliance, he wasn't able to tailor his argument to be safe from the media's Soundbite-o-Tron 9000. So they grabbed an incriminating blurb and tar-n-feathered the fuck out of him.

    tl;dr: Clark's a smart guy and a good thinker, but a poor politician.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Titmouse wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/mccain_campaign_obamas_trip_to_1.php

    McCain campaign a month ago: "hey, betch you haven't even BEEN to Iraq!"

    McCain campaign today: "visiting Iraq is just a cheap political stunt!"

    Sane World: .... While true, doesn't that kind of point out your infamous Market trip?

    Isn't McCain the person who talked about how safe and normal it was while he had a ton of bodyguards protecting him?

    Ton of bodyguards, a few attack helicopters and snipers nicely cropped out of the photos where he talked about how safe and great the market was.

  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    That's an interesting strategy. Set a benchmark to meet and challenge your opponent to meet it. Opponent takes up your challenge. Proceed to accuse your opponent of using your challenge as a cheap political stunt. Shit like this is convincing me that McCain's campaign really doesn't have much to go on with regards to Obama.

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Clark's treatment shows why the status quo has lately been to speak only in digestible blurbs and rah-rah truisms that sound good and say nothing.
    <snip>
    tl;dr: Clark's a smart guy and a good thinker, but a poor politician.

    Not too over-geekify this but:
    the mentor wrote:
    we've been spoon-fed baby food at school when we hungered for steak... the bits of meat that you did let slip through were pre-chewed and tasteless. We've been dominated by sadists, or ignored by the apathetic.

    The world has rewarded the media/powerful into treating us as stupid for too long and now a backlash is building.

    That last sentence actually is a pretty good description (combined with his military cred) for a good (office holding) VP, and thats from someone who doesn't have Clark high on his list for Obama VPs.

    11793-1.png
    Spoiler:
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic I've Done Worse Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    tl;dr: Clark's a smart guy and a good thinker, but a poor politician.

    I'm not certain I agree with that usage of politician. Restricting the virtues of a good politician to strictly those that help you get elected is a little silly. I understand your point that Clark fucked up on handling the media but I don't think that's the end all of politician-hood.

    I will note that McCain is a poor politician by this standard if you take away the kid gloves the media has been using to keep this a competitive race.

    Trogg wrote: »
    Not as positive as AIDS and cancer, but positive nonetheless.

    PSN: QuipFilter
  • JragghenJragghen Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    If I ever get rich, I'm going to found a 24 hours news station which isn't completely retarded.

    camo_sig2.png
  • Ghandi 2Ghandi 2 Registered User
    edited July 2008
    Quid wrote: »
    CNN Poll: 35% believe a terrorist attack is likely in the next few weeks.

    I suppose it's inevitable when an even higher number feel about the same about the Rapture.
    Why is it so unbelievable? It's not like Bush has done anything to actually stop a terrorist attack other than bomb everyone. My mom worked as an airport screener and my dad works in the upper levels of TSA as a consultant, and both of them say it's a fucking mess.

    Though I don't think they'd strike now, unless they're very fond of McCain (and let's face it, people would go to him because MILITARY MAEKS ME FEEL SAFE <3 <3 <3. That advisor in Forbes was correct, just stupid for saying it out loud and in that manner). They'll probably strike shortly after the Inauguration, if they have the resources to do so. Any attack now would be "wasted" in its effects on paralyzing the government because it would be blamed on Bush.

    By the way, what do you think would happen if Obama is elected and then there is a 9/11 scale attack in his first year?

  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic I've Done Worse Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Ghandi 2 wrote: »
    By the way, what do you think would happen if Obama is elected and then there is a 9/11 scale attack in his first year?

    In the first year? Pakistan might quickly reconsider it's overlooking the camps within their borders. It still might not keep our troops out of there.

    If it's much later than that Obama might have some issues and have to treat people like adults and talk about how there really isn't much the government can do to prevent terrorist attacks completely.

    Trogg wrote: »
    Not as positive as AIDS and cancer, but positive nonetheless.

    PSN: QuipFilter
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Ghandi 2 wrote: »
    By the way, what do you think would happen if Obama is elected and then there is a 9/11 scale attack in his first year?

    We'd flatten the people responsible.

  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Ghandi 2 wrote: »
    By the way, what do you think would happen if Obama is elected and then there is a 9/11 scale attack in his first year?

    Obama would use the good will generated to forge an international alliance and go into countries involved (most likely Afghanistan and western Pakistan), secure those countries, then stay there and help pacify, stabilize and rebuild the region so that terrorist groups cannot regain a foothold there. Basically, what any intelligent, rational person would do, and exactly the opposite of what Bush did.

    On the national scene, two-thirds of Americans will blame Bush for doing nothing about terrorism for eight years and support Obama, and a third will wrongly credit Bush with preventing terrorist attacks during his term as president and claim this proves Obama is not as good a president. Fox News will report that Obama helped orchestrate the attack because he is a secret gay muslim terrorist.

    RichyFlag.gifsig.gif
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited July 2008
    kildy wrote: »
    http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/mccain_campaign_obamas_trip_to_1.php

    McCain campaign a month ago: "hey, betch you haven't even BEEN to Iraq!"

    McCain campaign today: "visiting Iraq is just a cheap political stunt!"

    Sane World: .... While true, doesn't that kind of point out your infamous Market trip?

    The whole thing was a trap set up by McCain. Didn't much matter what Obama did, but this is probably the politically safer move.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    We started right, but at some point we went from "totally beating the shit out of the people who attacked us while the world pats our backs" to "everyone hates us because we went and stabbed some random dude and publicly admitted we didn't actually care about catching the guys who attacked us anyways"

    If we'd kept on with the first bit, it would have been a fine reaction to 9/11.

  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited July 2008
    Religious polemicists don't like Obama's faith-based initiative because it's not Jesus-y enough. Money quote:
    “The whole purpose behind funding faith-based programs is that they are, in fact, superior to secular programs. And the reason they are has everything to do with the inculcation of religious values disseminated by people of faith. No matter, Obama wants to gut the religious values and bar religious agencies from hiring people who share their religion. Hence, his initiative is a fraud.”

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic I've Done Worse Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    kildy wrote: »
    We started right, but at some point we went from "totally beating the shit out of the people who attacked us while the world pats our backs" to "everyone hates us because we went and stabbed some dude who done made our pappa look bad and publicly admitted we didn't actually care about catching the guys who attacked us anyways"

    If we'd kept on with the first bit, it would have been a fine reaction to 9/11.

    Fixed.

    Trogg wrote: »
    Not as positive as AIDS and cancer, but positive nonetheless.

    PSN: QuipFilter
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/mccain_campaign_obamas_trip_to_1.php

    McCain campaign a month ago: "hey, betch you haven't even BEEN to Iraq!"

    McCain campaign today: "visiting Iraq is just a cheap political stunt!"

    Sane World: .... While true, doesn't that kind of point out your infamous Market trip?

    The whole thing was a trap set up by McCain. Didn't much matter what Obama did, but this is probably the politically safer move.

    If you recall the nonsense surrounding McCain's Iraq trip nearly sank his campaign

  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited July 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/mccain_campaign_obamas_trip_to_1.php

    McCain campaign a month ago: "hey, betch you haven't even BEEN to Iraq!"

    McCain campaign today: "visiting Iraq is just a cheap political stunt!"

    Sane World: .... While true, doesn't that kind of point out your infamous Market trip?

    The whole thing was a trap set up by McCain. Didn't much matter what Obama did, but this is probably the politically safer move.

    If you recall the nonsense surrounding McCain's Iraq trip nearly sank his campaign

    Which nonsense?

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • Captain UltraCaptain Ultra Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Yeah, I thought what almost sank his campaign was that he didn't have any fucking money, because all the Republican donors thought he was too liberal, especially compared to sexy, sexy Rudy Giulani and Fred Thompson.

    “I’m the next president,” Greene said. “I’ll be 35 … just before November, so I was born to be president. I’m the man. I’m the man. I’m the man. Greene’s the man. I’m the man. I’m the greatest person ever. I was born to be president. I’m the man, I’m the greatest individual ever.”
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/mccain_campaign_obamas_trip_to_1.php

    McCain campaign a month ago: "hey, betch you haven't even BEEN to Iraq!"

    McCain campaign today: "visiting Iraq is just a cheap political stunt!"

    Sane World: .... While true, doesn't that kind of point out your infamous Market trip?

    The whole thing was a trap set up by McCain. Didn't much matter what Obama did, but this is probably the politically safer move.

    If you recall the nonsense surrounding McCain's Iraq trip nearly sank his campaign

    Which nonsense?

    McCain: Touring this Baghdad market, I can see that things are totally safe!
    The Reality Based Community: Um, didn't you have like 100 soldiers as guards and 2 Blackhawks overhead while touring that market?
    McCain: Shut up.

    Though I don't think that was what nearly sank his campaign, it was more his lack of conservativeyness.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • OctoparrotOctoparrot Registered User
    edited July 2008
    ...sexy, sexy Rudy Giulani and Fred Thompson.

    Thank you for permanently ruining anything sexy.

    the GOP shouldn't give a rats ass about them since they won't vote for them. If someone won't vote for you they might as well not exist.
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/mccain_campaign_obamas_trip_to_1.php

    McCain campaign a month ago: "hey, betch you haven't even BEEN to Iraq!"

    McCain campaign today: "visiting Iraq is just a cheap political stunt!"

    Sane World: .... While true, doesn't that kind of point out your infamous Market trip?

    The whole thing was a trap set up by McCain. Didn't much matter what Obama did, but this is probably the politically safer move.

    It was a trap, I'm just curious if anyone will effectively call McCain on it.

  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Religious polemicists don't like Obama's faith-based initiative because it's not Jesus-y enough. Money quote:
    “The whole purpose behind funding faith-based programs is that they are, in fact, superior to secular programs. And the reason they are has everything to do with the inculcation of religious values disseminated by people of faith. No matter, Obama wants to gut the religious values and bar religious agencies from hiring people who share their religion. Hence, his initiative is a fraud.”

    Damn that separation of church and state!

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
13468963
This discussion has been closed.