The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
American Presidency: How low can you go?
Elki
get busyModerator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
get busyModerator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
I linked it earlier, but why not post it a second time?
They can't be serious
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zAbeu3v3Wc
They can't be serious
The Economist.com wrote:John McCain says he's about change too, and so I guess his whole angle is, "Watch out George Bush—except for economic policy, health care policy, tax policy, education policy, foreign policy and Karl Rove-style politics—we're really going to shake things up in Washington"... That's not change. That's just calling something the same thing something different. You know you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig. You know you can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change, it's still going to stink after eight years. We've had enough of the same old thing.
Those words from Barack Obama yesterday prompted an outcry (and web attack ad) from the McCain campaign, which called for an apology. "I can only deem to be disgraceful comments comparing our vice presidential nominee, Governor Palin, to a pig," said the rather daft Jane Swift, the former governor of Massachusetts, in a conference call organised by the campaign. She can't be serious, right? Are common idioms now considered sexist (even if you make no reference to the victimised female)? Is the phrase still considered sexist when used to describe George Bush's Iraq policy? Does John McCain owe Hillary Clinton an apology? So many questions.
Ah, but there is low and then there is looooow. Not content with Ms Swift's false attack, the McCain campaign released an ad yesterday that I can only describe as one of the sleaziest political spots I have ever seen. (The first time I saw it I actually thought it was a "Daily Show" spoof.)
The ad says Mr Obama supported state legislation to teach "comprehensive sex education to kindergartners." But what the referenced bill actually would've done (it never came up for a full vote) is to allow schools to teach "age-appropriate" sex education and tell young children how to guard against sexual predation and inappropriate touching. (McClatchy has a factcheck here—it's something even the Cub Scouts do.) This, of course, makes Mr Obama a pervert in Mr McCain's world.
It's all too easy to blame such dirty tactics on Steve Schmidt, Mr McCain's Rovian chief strategist, or some other campaign hack, but in the end this is John McCain's show and he's turned it into low-brow burlesque theatre. It's a parody of the dirty campaigns that preceded it, with many of the same cast and crew. Mr McCain's campaign was supposed to be different, wasn't it? Win or lose, it's somewhat tragic to see a once-honourable man sink this low.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zAbeu3v3Wc
Elki on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
Barr has the potential to be the right's Nader by himself, at least as far as some southern states are concerned.
However, having a ticket composed of two former/current nationally-elected figures who were both elected as Republicans running under a third party ticket might actually become a strong draw in and of itself.
After all, it's only early september.
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
We don't still hear from Gravel.
NNID: Hakkekage
I don't want to find out.
But I probably will.
His new rock commercial has been filming continuously for the past six months
Paul definitely had some cross-party appeal. Some.
As an Obama fan, he's relevant because he could potentially cut into McCain's voter base.
I guess it would be sexist if he meant to call Palin fat.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
Pig = fat. So calling a woman fat is sexist is best I could think of.
I want to believe that McCain is executing a winning the battles but losing the war strategy. And if the media turns on him it could become a reality.
pleasepaypreacher.net
It's just he is not controlling the media narrative, so the republicans are getting all the attention - even if it is not all positive for them.
My brother knows some Ron Paul folks, including one who was a delegate to the RNC. From what he's heard, the Republicans have gone out of their way to shit on Ron Paul supporters in the party process. He was talking about how the guards were watching them like hawks and harassing them a bit at the convention, and confiscated some really mundane things.
I'm not really surprised Ron Paul is giving the finger to the party.
I think it was more the lipstick thing. Because, you know, insinuating that a woman wears lipstick is evil.
This is the part where it could bite them in the ass. You cry wolf too often at nonesense and you lose the ability. With palins real scandals flaring up they run the risk of having complained early and get screwed when something nasty comes up.
pleasepaypreacher.net
And you know what they say: changing running mates means you lose. So I think we can write off Bob Barr as a serious contender.
(smirk)
e.g. "...and that's my specific plan for economy, which I've been spending time refining and improving while my opponent spends his time throwing trivial, insignificant distractions at the media."
So has the Economist officially turned against McCain? I remember they were basically conservative Republican earlier. But this is like the third anti-McCain screed I've seen from them.
Maybe because she's got this creepy Giada Delaurentis open-mouth smile that looks like her jaw will unhinge like a snake's and swallow you whole?
The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
pleasepaypreacher.net
yeah but how is calling McCain on outright lies a cheap shot?
The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
That man's starting to worry me a little bit.
He's in his car and he's offering me a lollipop but I was told he's a bad man.
As in, he thinks McCain is dumb for bringing it up or that both are dumb because Obama can't be right?
|Xbox Live Tag: Omeks
|PSN Tag: Omeks_R7
|Rock Band: Profile|DLC Collection
If he was going to do this, the best way would be to take the ridiclous sex ed ad, explain the real legislation in 10 words, turn to McCain and ask "why would you run that ad, john?"
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
He thinks that Obama is not calling Palin a pig, and McCain will lose votes if his campaign doesn't drop it.
Ron Paul is like Rudolph, and the Republicans won't let him play their reindeer games.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
They are spewing too much easily-disproved shit for people, let alone the media, to ignore.
And there's such a long way to go.
Therefore, vote McCain?
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
Yeah, it's sad when you can actually say "The swiftboating and Rovian tactics of 2004 were done way better and were more organized than this year's clusterfuck."
yes, both went down by one point in the tracker
to do that, though, McCain polled 50% last night and Obama at 42%.
This represents a single-night increase of 3% for McCain from monday night and a single-night decraese of 3% for Obama from monday.
fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck