US 2008 Presidential Campaign/Debate Discussion Thread - Part Catorce!

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
U2isthebest said:


You know, I would actually tend to agree with you there. It is a generality. Then I look back at the past 8 years. I have no personal dislike for Bush as a person, believe it or not. However, anyone who could look back at the policies and plans carried out by the Bush administration and come to a conclusion that he's done a good job would have to be a bit off, at the least. Unless deceptively being pushed into a bloody, unnecessary war, having a welfare and aid response system in shambles (as revealed by the Bush administration's disastrous response to Katrina), having an economy in the toilet, an education plan that has widened the gap between wealthy schools and those truly left behind in the inner cities, and unconstitutional acts that take away civil rights, are good things in one's eyes, then, yes, it doesn't make Martha's argument sound stupid at all. Imagine that, our fearless leader has actually managed to screw things up so badly, that we shouldn't even need a debate about whether or not good has come from his administration. Well done W.

Well I don't want to get into a big policy debate about President Bush, but some of the stuff you mentioned are opinions, not facts, and you conveniently left out all the good things that have happened in the past 7 years.
 
2861U2 said:


Well I don't want to get into a big policy debate about President Bush, but some of the stuff you mentioned are opinions, not facts, and you conveniently left out all the good things that have happened in the past 7 years.

Quite frankly, I can't think of any "good things".
 
U2isthebest said:


Quite frankly, I can't think of any "good things".

Well I can, so according to martha I could use the responsible, adult approach and just call you stupid. :|
 
The only "good thing" I will give him credit for is going against the right wing xenophobes in his party on the immigration bill.

Everything else was dismal. Bush is a national embarrassment. Mercifully I no longer have to see his ugly smirking mug on my TV on a daily basis and that's the way I like it.
 
anitram said:
The only "good thing" I will give him credit for is going against the right wing xenophobes in his party on the immigration bill.

Everything else was dismal. Bush is a national embarrassment. Mercifully I no longer have to see his ugly smirking mug on my TV on a daily basis and that's the way I like it.

That's one thing that at least proves he's not a complete bigoted fool, but as you said there is nothing, absolutely nothing, good that came from his administration.
 
I feel sick to my stomach every time I see Joe Lieberman standing behind McCain.

What a fucking traitor. Sure, now he calls himself an 'Independent Democrat'(whatever that is), but how MANY years did he spend sitting in Congress calling himself a Democrat while supporting the Iraq War, while taking every conceivable opportunity to side with Republicans over his own supposed party.

And now he's actively campaigning for McCain.

Does he make anyone else feel sick?
 
namkcuR said:
I feel sick to my stomach every time I see Joe Lieberman standing behind McCain.

What a fucking traitor. Sure, now he calls himself an 'Independent Democrat'(whatever that is), but how MANY years did he spend sitting in Congress calling himself a Democrat while supporting the Iraq War, while taking every conceivable opportunity to side with Republicans over his own supposed party.

And now he's actively campaigning for McCain.

Does he make anyone else feel sick?

I'm disappointed, but I know he's been a pretty conservative Democrat. He's always been chummy with the Republicans which is more refreshing to see than the ignorance of some on the far right who've said, in recent days, that the reason they don't support McCain is because of his willingness to work with Democrats. Apparently, some people don't have a basic knowledge of how the U.S. government is supposed to function. So, to answer your question, I'm not a fan of Lieberman supporting John McCain because I feel McCain is the wrong choice for a president. It has nothing to do with Lieberman's political affiliation itself.
 
Irvine511 said:
Bush has done a good job increasing aid to Africa.

True. Although, that certainly doesn't take away from all the other horrors he's created across the world and at home. Not that you were implying that, but Bush supporters might actually try and make that argument.
 
Irvine511 said:
Bush has done a good job increasing aid to Africa.

Has he though in actuality? I know the first couple of times he pushed for increased aid, it was turned down in the majority Rep Senate, in fact I remember one of the earlier votes didn't have one single Rep vote. Maybe he has since then and I didn't see...
 
Here are my plans for the weekend:

Tomorrow (Saturday) evening I'll be going to the Democratic Party of Virginia's Jefferson Jackson dinner where both Clinton and Obama will speak. Should be an absolute zoo, but it should be fun.

Sunday I'm going to a rally where Obama will speak at Virginia Beach, hopefully I'll get there early enough to get in. Again, should be a zoo, but should be fun.

I'll report back later with photos and stories :up:
 
I can't wait to hear everything you experience this weekend, Laura!:hyper: None of the Democratic candidates have even been in Michigan for any major events yet because of our stupidity in breaking party rules about the timing of our primary. Go us.:|
 
It should be quite an eventful weekend :yes:

Oh and I'm also voting absentee tomorrow :D

I saw Obama speak last year, as well as 3 years ago when I actually had the honor of meeting him. I don't expect to meet him again as the crowds are much larger than they were when I saw him previously, which is hard to imagine.

Still, just being in a room filled with Obama supporters and the man himself is going to be very invigorating, something you simply can't capture from the outside.

My nephew was born yesterday, and this will sound cheesy but I hope he gets a chance to grow up in a historic era of an Obama presidency, and that I will be able to tell him that I was a part of it.
 
That must've been an awesome experience! And it doesn't sound cheesy at all. Obama has the ability to be a great president. I think our country would be blessed beyond measure to have him leading it.
 
Last edited:
I guess Shuster got suspended

SEATTLE (AP) - A distasteful comment about Chelsea Clinton by an MSNBC anchor Thursday could imperil Hillary Rodham Clinton's participation in future presidential debates on the network, a Clinton spokesman said.

In a conference call with reporters, Clinton communications director Howard Wolfson Friday excoriated MSNBC's David Shuster for suggesting the Clinton campaign had "pimped out" 27-year old Chelsea by having her place phone calls to Democratic Party superdelegates on her mother's behalf. Wolfson called the comment "beneath contempt" and disgusting.

"I, at this point, can't envision a scenario where we would continue to engage in debates on that network," he added.

Clinton and Barack Obama are scheduled to participate in an MSNBC debate Feb. 26 from Ohio, which holds its primary March 4. The Clinton campaign has pushed hard for as many debates as possible with Obama, but Wolfson said the Feb. 26 debate could be jeopardized.

Wolfson pointed to what he called a pattern of tasteless comments by MSNBC anchors about the Clinton campaign. Weeks ago, "Hardball" host Chris Matthews apologized to the former first lady after suggesting her political career had been made possible her husband's philandering.

MSNBC has apologized on-air for Shuster's remark, but Wolfson said neither Chelsea nor Sen. Clinton had received a phone call offering a personal apology.

An MSNBC spokeswoman did not immediately return a phone call requesting comment.
 
(AP) Ann Coulter wasn't officially invited to speak at this year's Conservative Political Action Conference -- many on the right were still upset at the bad publicity she brought last year after calling John Edwards a "faggot." But to no one's surprise, she showed up anyway, commandeering the spotlight.

Speaking before the Young America's Foundation, who invited her over CPAC's objections, the conservative author spent most of her time viciously attacking her party's new presumptive presidential nominee, Sen. John McCain.

No topic was out of bounds, including the five years McCain spent as a prisoner of war in Vietnam.

"I know that [he was a POW]," Coulter declared, "because he mentions it more often than Kerry mentions he was in Vietnam. There were hundreds of POWs and we are not going to make all of them president. Can't we find a POW who doesn't want to shut down Guantanamo."

That was mild. Take Coulter's rationale for supporting Sen. Hillary Clinton's candidacy over McCain's:

"A serious case could be made to support Hillary Clinton," she declared, offering the analogy of Winston Churchill backing Stalin in the fight against Hitler in WWII. "I'm not equating Hillary Clinton to Stalin, and if I did I apologize to Stalin's decedents... I'm not comparing McCain to Hitler. Hitler had a coherent tax policy." Later, she added, "The only way I can promise that I won't vote for Hillary Clinton is if John McCain appoints her as his vice president."

Remarkably, Coulter's comments reflected what conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh predicted would be the reception McCain would receive from the antagonistic mainstream media.

"Once [McCain]'s got this sewn up you're going to see the Drive-By Media start doing stories on his age, and they're not going to be mean, they are not going to be vicious, they're going to be almost sorrowful," said Limbaugh. "I am telling you, if that doesn't work, they're going to go after this age business, and they'll do it almost regretfully."

And indeed, Coulter speech contained repeated subtle and not so subtle digs at McCain's age.

"He has been in the Senate for about 100 years," she said (he's actually 71), long enough "to vote on the Spanish-American War." She even declared, playing off the mutual admiration between McCain and the media, that "[he] is working for the New York Times obituary."

Coulter ripped him over policy issues as well, taking on his signature legislation McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform, as well as his vote against President Bush's tax cuts, and his stance on climate change. In the process, she contrasted the Arizona Republican with the GOP candidates that he bested for the presidential nomination.

"McCain and [Mitt] Romney are mirror opposites of one another," said Coulter. "Romney is a conservative who had to win votes from liberals in Massachusetts. McCain is a liberal who had to win votes from conservatives in Arizona."

As for former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani: He "enthusiastically supported torturing terrorists," she said to great applause. "McCain hysterically opposes dripping water down the terrorist's noses."

And what if the unthinkable happens, and President McCain is inaugurated? I've led an impeachment movement before, Coulter said, and "I can lead another one."
 
:( I really like David Shuster. I happened to be watching when he said that, and I didn't bat an eye :shrug: A poor choice of words sure, but I don't think he meant anything malicious by it.

Ann Coulter on the other hand...:uhoh:
 
U2democrat said:
:( I really like David Shuster. I happened to be watching when he said that, and I didn't bat an eye :shrug: A poor choice of words sure, but I don't think he meant anything malicious by it.


Yes, it was a fluid, back and forth conversation,
with these guys talking about how both Hillary and Obama were using members of their families in their campaigns.

Names mentioned were Bill Clinton, Chelsea Clinton and Michelle Obama.

you see nothing wrong? Ok.

I will buy your statement as being objective and not bias.

If you will tell me that you would not "bat an eye " if he said Obama was pimping out Michelle?
 
I said it was a poor choice of words. He should have and could have phrased it differently.

I've got nothing against Chelsea Clinton, in fact I've felt quite sorry for her for the treatment she's received over the years.

That being said, I think things are being blown out of proportion.
 
Why does McCain get a free pass on:

"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno."

Not only did he say it when Chelsea was only 17, but he also managed a classy dig at Reno's sexual orientation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom