US 2008 Presidential Campaign Discussion Thread - Part 9

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.
Forgive me if this picture of Sarah Palin has already been posted...

n1134840002_30058960_2571.jpg
 
A shame that kids don't even have the right to free speech any more. (one way to look at this)


But the truth?

this kid is being brought up in a very unhealthy environment.

I hope he makes it to adulthood and gains the ability to think for himself.

School systems have the right to ask students to change clothing that may impead the main function of the school which is to educate. The fact is, we have no idea what the population of the school body is, and who may or may not be in the classroom with the student that may have found it offensive. The court system supports this position. The burden is on the school to demonstrate why the shirt was causing a disruption to the educational process.

In three years, I have had one girl cover the saying on a shirt. I cannot remember what it was on the shirt other than it was pretty sexual in nature for an elementary school student to be wearing, and I had complaints from multiple sources in the school.
 
oooh let the goutrage continue :laugh::

The Associated Press: Freddie Mac paid 15K a month to McCain aide's firm

WASHINGTON (AP) — The lobbying firm of John McCain's campaign manager was paid $15,000 a month for several years until last month by one of two housing companies taken over by the federal government, a person familiar with the financial arrangement said Tuesday night.

That money from Freddie Mac to the firm of Rick Davis was on top of more than $30,000 a month that went directly to Davis for five years starting in 2000.

The $30,000 a month came from both Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, the other housing entity now under government control because of the crisis in the financial markets...
 
That's a really interesting situation. My initial reaction to Deep's posting was that the boy was dressing according to his (or more likely his family's) definition of 'patriotic,' and should be left alone, no matter how inaccurate I feel the statement is. But then Dread brought up a very good point. It's a tough call, and i guess it's ultimately up to schools to determine if there's a line being crossed.

I wonder what the political leanings of that particular school district are, and if that had any impact on the decision.
 
I don't know why people assume that students in a school have the same rights of expression or privacy that they would in their own homes. They do not and never have.
 
I don't know why people assume that students in a school have the same rights of expression or privacy that they would in their own homes. They do not and never have.

Oh, I totally get that, but in the case of political statements, where is the line drawn? I'm sure a pro-Obama shirt would have been fine. Or a pro-McCain. Would a shirt dissing McCain have had the same reaction? Was it because of the connection with terrorism? Or was it because it was an ugly-ass homemade shirt? :wink:
 
The whole "Bush Doctrine" and "Bridge to Nowhere" nonsense are distractions. I'm betting not a heck of alot of average undecideds give two shits about either of these "issues" so I wish the media would just shut the hell up and explore other issues.:angry:

I think at this point the "undecideds" fit somewhere in two categories those that don't care, which you are probably right these issues will not help them make up their minds, or those that truly don't have party leanings and vote purely on issues, and those voters want to know what kind of background this newcomer has.

I think the "_____ to nowhere" is only an issue because she keeps using it as a slogan to make her seem strong and maverick, which really isn't the case when you flipped on the issue at first. Find another slogan Sarah and the bridge will become a non-issue.

And the "Bush Doctrine" issue isn't so much that she didn't know what was meant by the "Bush Doctrine", although in the current political context it's pretty easy to figure out, it was how she went about responding... She came off like the girl who announces very loudly to the room "I don't get it" right after the whole room bursted out with laughter after a joke was told.
 
But the truth?

this kid is being brought up in a very unhealthy environment.

I hope he makes it to adulthood and gains the ability to think for himself.

I have to agree. The dad and the son were on Hannity and Colmes last night, and they did seem a tad bit :coocoo:
 
I have to agree. The dad and the son were on Hannity and Colmes last night, and they did seem a tad bit :coocoo:


They had this tool on their show last night? Wow, I used to think Hannity was a little brighter than the others just uninformed, but the more I find out the more I realize he's not...
 
Turmoil in the financial industry and growing pessimism about the economy have altered the shape of the presidential race, giving Democratic nominee Barack Obama the first clear lead of the general-election campaign over Republican John McCain, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News national poll.

Just 9 percent of those surveyed rated the economy as good or excellent, the first time that number has been in single digits since the days just before the 1992 election. Just 14 percent said the country is heading in the right direction, equaling the record low on that question in polls dating back to 1973.

More voters trust Obama to deal with the economy, and he currently has a big edge as the candidate who is more in tune with the economic problems Americans now face. He also has a double-digit advantage on handling the current problems on Wall Street, and as a result, there has been a rise in his overall support. The poll found that, among likely voters, Obama now leads McCain by 52 percent to 43 percent. Two weeks ago, in the days immediately following the Republican National Convention, the race was essentially even, with McCain at 49 percent and Obama at 47 percent.

The poll also dampens concerns that Obama can't win over white women:

Two weeks ago, McCain held a substantial advantage among white voters, including newfound strength with white women. In the face of bad economic news, the two candidates now run about evenly among white women, and Obama has narrowed the overall gap among white voters to five percentage points.
 
Speaking of the economy.... I saw a report similar to this on the news the other day (can't remember where). Found this article.

CENSUS_HOMEOWNERS.sff.embedded.prod_affiliate.81.jpg

Millions spend half of income on housingBy ADRIAN SAINZ and ALAN ZIBEL
AP Business Writers

Siobhan Dooley
Al Ray is so strapped for cash, the only time he eats out is on Wednesday or Sunday, when the local McDonald's sells hamburgers for 49 cents.

Ray lost his engineering job last November, and has been working as high school tutor, scratching out about $1,000 a month - if he's lucky. He struggled to make his $1,400 monthly mortgage payment and $330 monthly homeowners' association fee until May, when he stopped paying.

Ray, 44, is looking for work and renting out a room in his two-bedroom condo in Davie, Fla., for $500, but his monthly income doesn't match his expenses and he's facing foreclosure.

"I barely have money to survive," he said.

Ray is one of more than 7.5 million people - almost 15 percent of American homeowners with a mortgage - who are spending half of their income or more on housing costs, according to 2007 data released Tuesday by the U.S. Census Bureau. That is up from nearly 7.1 million the year before.

Traditionally, the government and most lenders consider a homeowner spending 30 percent or more of their income on housing costs to be financially burdened. But that definition now covers almost 38 percent of American homeowners with a mortgage - 19 million of them.

Though home prices have fallen this year, in the most expensive markets where home prices tripled during the boom, many working families still cannot afford to buy a home.

"We had a bubble," said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. "This is a case where we absolutely want the market to adjust."

The data underscore the serious affordability problems in this country and highlight how the slightest financial problem - from a lost job to higher gas prices or insurance premiums - can put a family behind on their mortgages and into the realm of foreclosure.

When home prices fell in the early 1990s, borrowers had more equity in their homes, and were able to escape foreclosure. But now, an estimated 10 million homeowners owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth, according to Moody's economy.com.

More than 4 million homeowners were at least one month behind on their loans at the end of June, and almost 500,000 had started the foreclosure process, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association.

Cascading foreclosures over the past two years created a domino effect in the lending industry, undermining investor confidence and forcing the Bush administration last weekend to announce the greatest rescue package and market intervention since the Great Depression.

And yet, the deal will not help Dolly Hanna, 51, and her husband, who bought five homes in the San Francisco area over the past 20 years, and were enjoying life during the housing boom by renting them out.

But her husband's overtime at his mechanic's job was cut, and the Hannas now find themselves overextended at a loss of $15,000 per month and trying two sell two of the homes.

With four children, Hanna had been a stay-at-home mom, but Monday she started a job in real estate. They are seeking a renter for two upstairs bedrooms in their primary residence for $1,200.

Getting a loan during the boom was easy, Hanna knows. Too easy.

"All you had to was massage the information enough to fit it into their round hole, and they gave us a mortgage," Hanna said.

In San Francisco, more than one out of five homeowners with a mortgage spends half or more of their income on housing.

That's also true in 13 more of the largest 100 metro areas analyzed by the Associated Press. Other places include California metro areas of Stockton, Los Angeles, Riverside, Oxnard-Thousand Oaks, San Francisco, and San Diego. Also in the top 10 are the Fort Myers, Sarasota and Orlando metro areas in Florida, and New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island.

full article here: www.kansascity.com | 09/23/2008 | Millions spend half of income on housing

And yes, my family is one of the struggling ones and in one of the areas mentioned in the article. The economy has taken a toll on our business and we really don't know what the future holds for us. :sigh:

Glad to see gas prices down for now. How ironic is it that we're happy when gas is at only $3.61 a gallon? :|
 
Used to be that the max housing debt lenders would give borrowers was 26-29% based on gross income. Maybe you could go a little higher with excellent compensating factors but not a whole lot higher. Then a little more than 10 years ago, (I don't remember the exact year. Time flew by)lenders grew dependent on automated underwriting systems that were driven by credit scores (a relatively new development and sometimes unreliable if you look at the borrower's whole credit history) that would allow housing debt at 50% and total debt income up to 65%. This is gross income, pretax income, not the actual income you have to work with. (We are talking Fannie Mae here, prime secondary market) In addition, if you received nontaxable income (social security, child support), you could gross it up another 25% for qualifying even though that extra 25% wasn't actually available to you. Lenders loosened their qualifications accordingly, private mortgage companies did. The automated underwriting system gave its OK and you were good to go. (This isn't even taking into account fraud. This is assuming the lender properly documented all the information fed into the uw system. Fraud's a whole other issue). We were watching all this transpire with bewilderment. Who could afford that kind of debt? But it allowed lenders to do prime loans they never could do before.
Awfully late, but credit has tightened, standards have tightened (not back to the old standards) and the lenders can't do loans they could do easily six months ago. The private mortgage companies have been taking a bath.
 
My issue is that our income has declined, and our expenses have gone up, especially medical expenses. Pretty soon, the health insurance for myself, husband, and teenage daughter will be more than my mortgage. And with a $2500 deductible to boot, which looks like I might meet annually due to an illness, and a $500 pharmaceutical deductible which, due to my medications, I meet in 2 months worth of medicine (2 prescriptions). Then it's $30/10 for the rest of the year (name/generic). I just got a new pill that is supposed one pill a month for about $44. Don't know why it's not the same as the above two, but on the print-out my savings said $113. So no matter who is elected, I don't know if anything will change or improve on this issue. However, with hubby taking on a new part-time job, secondary health insurance may kick in and pick up some of the expenses that are supposed to be our out of pocket.

\rambling
 
They had this tool on their show last night? Wow, I used to think Hannity was a little brighter than the others just uninformed, but the more I find out the more I realize he's not...

I know Hannity has a thing for the Ayers and Obama association.

And many if not most people would consider Ayers a terrorist, at least at one time in his life.


I think having this father and son on FOX will do more to undermined their behavior than support it.


As for the free speech concept that some of you have mentioned, that is just crap.

There are all kinds of rights in the constitution that are stopped or restricted at the school yard fence.

And as for the shirt being patriotic, that is just stupid.

A shirt that read "McCain supports burning babies in Baghdad"

should not be allowed either.
 
Sorry to burst your bubble:

sarah%20palin%20bikini%20photo%201.jpg

Are you sure

that image is a more true representation of Sarah Palin than much of the things I have seen printed in here
that many seem to believe are the "gospel truth".


and for that matter much of the stuff I or any of us believe that is "truth"
(much of it printed on candidates official websites) as their "stances and beliefs" may be less authentic than that image
 
From the L A Weekly

September 22, 2008 2:02 PM

BY MARC COOPER

I was around a lot of gloomy Democrats today who are more or less convinced that McCain's got this thing in the bag.

They came to me looking to get cheered up because I've been writing columns to the contrary. In the end, of course, I don't know. I can only guess.

But one of my arguments or, better said, talking points is this: Yes, you can say that something is awry because Obama ought to be up 20 points in the polls. Or you can take the opposite tack, one I've been pointing out, and say: "Here we have John McCain. A long-time senator. A bona fide war hero in a time of war. Someone who has indeed showed moments of great independence from his party. And yet, he's running a couple of points behind a 47-year-old, black freshman senator whose middle name is Hussein. So, exactly who is in trouble here?"
 
from CNN

John McCain suspends campaigning to work on economy, requests postponing Friday debate; asks Obama do the same.

And Bush will be making a speech about the economy tonight at 6:00pm
 
from CNN

John McCain suspends campaigning to work on economy, requests postponing Friday debate; asks Obama do the same.

And Bush will be making a speech about the economy tonight at 6:00pm

What crap...McCain is setting up so that when Obama says no to postponing the debate, McCain can tell everyone, 'I suspended my campaign to work on the economy, Obama didn't, who do you trust?'

This isn't the first time he's tried to pull shit like this. It's no different than the 'If Obama would've agreed to town hall meetings the tone of the campaign would be different' thing.
 
I know Hannity has a thing for the Ayers and Obama association.

And many if not most people would consider Ayers a terrorist, at least at one time in his life.


I think having this father and son on FOX will do more to undermined their behavior than support it.


As for the free speech concept that some of you have mentioned, that is just crap.

There are all kinds of rights in the constitution that are stopped or restricted at the school yard fence.

And as for the shirt being patriotic, that is just stupid.

A shirt that read "McCain supports burning babies in Baghdad"

should not be allowed either.

For once I agree with deep.

That shirt was idiotic. Allowing the kid to wear it would be to encourage the idiocy and possibly allow it to spread. That's how the politics of shallowness and deceit win. It doesn't speak well for the father either that he's encouraging his kid to wear a ridiculous shirt like that.
 
Even George Will - one of the more intelligent conservatives in the media - has had it with McCain:

Under the pressure of the financial crisis, one presidential candidate is behaving like a flustered rookie playing in a league too high. It is not Barack Obama.

Channeling his inner Queen of Hearts, John McCain furiously, and apparently without even looking around at facts, said Chris Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, should be decapitated. This childish reflex provoked the Wall Street Journal to editorialize that "McCain untethered" -- disconnected from knowledge and principle -- had made a "false and deeply unfair" attack on Cox that was "unpresidential" and demonstrated that McCain "doesn't understand what's happening on Wall Street any better than Barack Obama does."

To read the Journal's details about the depths of McCain's shallowness on the subject of Cox's chairmanship, see "McCain's Scapegoat" (Sept. 19). Then consider McCain's characteristic accusation that Cox "has betrayed the public's trust."

Perhaps an old antagonism is involved in McCain's fact-free slander. His most conspicuous economic adviser is Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who previously headed the Congressional Budget Office. There he was an impediment to conservatives, including then-Rep. Cox, who, as chairman of the Republican Policy Committee, persistently tried and generally failed to enlist CBO support for "dynamic scoring" that would estimate the economic growth effects of proposed tax cuts.

In any case, McCain's smear -- that Cox "betrayed the public's trust" -- is a harbinger of a McCain presidency. For McCain, politics is always operatic, pitting people who agree with him against those who are "corrupt" or "betray the public's trust," two categories that seem to be exhaustive -- there are no other people. McCain's Manichaean worldview drove him to his signature legislative achievement, the McCain-Feingold law's restrictions on campaigning. Today, his campaign is creatively finding interstices in laws intended to restrict campaign giving and spending. (For details, see The Post of Sept. 17; and the New York Times of Sept. 19.)

By a Gresham's Law of political discourse, McCain's Queen of Hearts intervention in the opaque financial crisis overshadowed a solid conservative complaint from the Republican Study Committee, chaired by Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas. In a letter to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, the RSC decried the improvised torrent of bailouts as a "dangerous and unmistakable precedent for the federal government both to be looked to and indeed relied upon to save private sector companies from the consequences of their poor economic decisions." This letter, listing just $650 billion of the perhaps more than $1 trillion in new federal exposures to risk, was sent while McCain's campaign, characteristically substituting vehemence for coherence, was airing an ad warning that Obama favors "massive government, billions in spending increases."

The political left always aims to expand the permeation of economic life by politics. Today, the efficient means to that end is government control of capital. So, is not McCain's party now conducting the most leftist administration in American history? The New Deal never acted so precipitously on such a scale. Treasury Secretary Paulson, asked about conservative complaints that his rescue program amounts to socialism, said, essentially: This is not socialism, this is necessary. That non sequitur might be politically necessary, but remember that government control of capital is government control of capitalism. Does McCain have qualms about this, or only quarrels?

On "60 Minutes" Sunday evening, McCain, saying "this may sound a little unusual," said that he would like to replace Cox with Andrew Cuomo, the Democratic attorney general of New York who is the son of former governor Mario Cuomo. McCain explained that Cuomo has "respect" and "prestige" and could "lend some bipartisanship." Conservatives have been warned.

Conservatives who insist that electing McCain is crucial usually start, and increasingly end, by saying he would make excellent judicial selections. But the more one sees of his impulsive, intensely personal reactions to people and events, the less confidence one has that he would select judges by calm reflection and clear principles, having neither patience nor aptitude for either.

It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed?
 
from CNN

John McCain suspends campaigning to work on economy, requests postponing Friday debate; asks Obama do the same.

And Bush will be making a speech about the economy tonight at 6:00pm

They just interrupted a discussion on NPR with this breaking news, interestingly enough it was a discussion about presidential debates.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, I'm sure McCain will try and twist this but I can't see it playing in his favor...

It makes him look desperate, really desperate.
 
Because a President can't multitask?

This is a really lame move. What you need is a good economic plan implemented by economists who know what they are doing and then a debate in Congress. Neither of these things are hinging on the presence of John McCain (or Obama) in Washington.

I actually initially thought this might look proactive but I see he's getting slammed by commentators for it thus far.
 
I'll be pissed off if the Friday debate is canceled. We were planning on getting a big group together for a drinking game.

Take a shot of vodka if...

McCain gives an insincere smirk or laugh
McCain says "my friend" or "my friends"
McCain says the economy is sound
McCain moves like a robot
Obama writes something down
Obama says the word "change"
The candidates look at eachother
Either of the candidates begin a response by saying "First of all..."
Either of the candidates tell an outright lie
 
As Ben Smith said - nothing has changed in the last 48 hours except the polling.

Remember when Bob Dole resigned from the Senate in 96? Yeah.
 
from CNN

John McCain suspends campaigning to work on economy, requests postponing Friday debate; asks Obama do the same.

And Bush will be making a speech about the economy tonight at 6:00pm



Good lord, what theatrics!
 
McCain is gonna do what in Washington, exactly?

Nobody has missed more votes in the Senate than him.

And now he wants to spend all of his time working on the legislation? And being the legal scholar that he is, he's going to be personally penning it? LOL. Give me a break.
 
why can't he multitask like the rest of us!

I'll be pissed off if the Friday debate is canceled. We were planning on getting a big group together for a drinking game.

Take a shot of vodka if...

McCain gives an insincere smirk or laugh
McCain says "my friend" or "my friends"
McCain says the economy is sound
McCain moves like a robot
Obama writes something down
Obama says the word "change"
The candidates look at eachother
Either of the candidates begin a response by saying "First of all..."
Either of the candidates tell an outright lie

:lol:

McCain is gonna do what in Washington, exactly?

Nobody has missed more votes in the Senate than him.

And now he wants to spend all of his time working on the legislation? And being the legal scholar that he is, he's going to be personally penning it? LOL. Give me a break.

:love:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom