2008 U.S. Presidential Campaign Discussion Thread-Part 11 - Page 35 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-30-2008, 06:15 PM   #681
Blue Crack Supplier
 
kellyahern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 8 years and I still can't think of anything witty to put here
Posts: 34,698
Local Time: 07:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
A local school district official confirmed after the event that of the 6,000 people estimated by the fire marshal to be in attendance this morning, more than 4,000 were bused in from schools in the area. The entire 2,500-student Defiance School District was in attendance, the official said, in addition to at least three other schools from neighboring districts, one of which sent 14 buses.
I was at the Sarasota Obama rally today.



I only wish 4,000 of those people had been bused in - it took me forever to get out of the parking lot

__________________

kellyahern is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 06:40 PM   #682
Refugee
 
Bluer White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 2,155
Local Time: 07:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ImOuttaControl View Post
Because a dictionary says it, it must be so? What does common sense say? Common Sense, that's what I'm about. If a white person in Kentucky votes for McCain simply because he's white, that's racism to me. If a black person in Chicago votes for Obama simply because he's black, that's racism.
I think the primary vote was more telling than the national election will be. Check out the primary polls of African-Americans regarding Obama vs. Clinton. Two candidates, virtually the same platform.

It's a landslide win for Obama, complete landslide. I wouldn't quite call it racism. But it is human nature.
__________________

Bluer White is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 06:55 PM   #683
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Lila64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: ♥Set List Lane♥
Posts: 52,894
Local Time: 04:35 AM
Very cool kelly!

BluerWhite - I'm wondering if my friend is a racist. She would have voted for Hillary, but between Obama/McCain, she doesn't know who to vote for. Her husband is voting for McCain, since all political stuff he sends me is bullshit (refuted by snopes & other sites) and he calls what I send him bullshit. I asked her (the wife) a few simple questions the other day after refuting her email, asking who she would vote for (she responded HRC before Obama was chosen) and hasn't answered anything else political since
Lila64 is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 07:09 PM   #684
Refugee
 
Bluer White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 2,155
Local Time: 07:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lila64 View Post
Very cool kelly!

BluerWhite - I'm wondering if my friend is a racist. She would have voted for Hillary, but between Obama/McCain, she doesn't know who to vote for. Her husband is voting for McCain, since all political stuff he sends me is bullshit (refuted by snopes & other sites) and he calls what I send him bullshit. I asked her (the wife) a few simple questions the other day after refuting her email, asking who she would vote for (she responded HRC before Obama was chosen) and hasn't answered anything else political since
Well, if your friend felt very strongly about Hillary's platform, and is now torn between McCain and Obama.......well, maybe yes! Race could be a factor for her. There may be a few other issues in play, but race could clearly be a factor.
Bluer White is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 07:44 PM   #685
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 06:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diemen View Post
out Of How Many?
285
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 07:45 PM   #686
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 12:35 PM
Precisely because Obama's and Hillary's platforms were so similar, I can easily understand people who prefer Democratic policies on taxes, health care and so on finding the historic appeal of an African-American (male?) candidate, or a (white?) woman candidate, to have been a deciding factor in their primary vote. What I don't get is people who were Hillary all the way during the primaries suddenly being McCain all the way when it was clear she wouldn't be the Democratic nominee. I feel the same way about a couple Republicans I know who were Romney fans during the primaries, then switched to Obama when they saw Romney wasn't going to win. It seems to me these people couldn't possibly have ever been considering policies very carefully. It's harder to generalize about true independents, because some of them are folks who lean one party's way on some issues but the other party's way on others, whereas other independents seem to be basically 'go with my gut' voters who can't articulate much about why their preferred candidate's policies seem better to them.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 10:22 PM   #687
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,422
Local Time: 11:35 AM
I can't wait for this to be over.

It's been too long and unbearable.

JOFO is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 10:41 PM   #688
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,663
Local Time: 06:35 AM
Interesting little chart related to all this "socialism" banter.



Well that's a bit odd...
Diemen is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 10:58 PM   #689
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 07:35 AM
Wow, look at Alaska there, in bronze medal position! Nice job!
anitram is offline  
Old 10-30-2008, 11:14 PM   #690
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,609
Local Time: 12:35 PM
Facts and statistics are elitist. Please refer to Shepherd Fairey's communism inspired artwork for better evidence of where socialism is really at in your country.
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 10-31-2008, 12:17 AM   #691
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,663
Local Time: 06:35 AM
The Economist endorses Obama

Just another liberal rag...
Diemen is offline  
Old 10-31-2008, 12:22 AM   #692
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 09:35 PM
Pretty much.
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-31-2008, 02:01 AM   #693
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,609
Local Time: 12:35 PM
Hey diamond!

From ex Sec. of State Eagleburger, who has previously endorsed McCain:

Quote:
Give her some time in the office and I think the answer would be, she will be [pause] adequate. I can't say that she would be a genius in the job. But I think she would be enough to get us through a four year... well I hope not... get us through whatever period of time was necessary. And I devoutly hope that it would never be tested.
What does he mean?
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 10-31-2008, 02:35 AM   #694
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 12:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post
Interesting little chart related to all this "socialism" banter.
I wonder to what extent those rankings fluctuate with which party is in control of Congress? Unsurprisingly, it looks like there's considerable overlap with rankings of states by per capita and median income, with certain major exceptions (Alaska, Hawai'i, Maryland...).
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 10-31-2008, 03:37 AM   #695
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 09:35 PM
War Criminal or Marxist Terrorist?

Tough call.
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-31-2008, 06:57 AM   #696
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 04:35 AM
One Democrat who is honest:

Would the Last Honest Reporter Please Turn On the Lights?
By Orson Scott Card

Editor's note: Orson Scott Card is a Democrat and a newspaper columnist, and in this opinion piece he takes on both while lamenting the current state of journalism.



An open letter to the local daily paper — almost every local daily paper in America:

I remember reading All the President's Men and thinking: That's journalism. You do what it takes to get the truth and you lay it before the public, because the public has a right to know.

This housing crisis didn't come out of nowhere. It was not a vague emanation of the evil Bush administration.

It was a direct result of the political decision, back in the late 1990s, to loosen the rules of lending so that home loans would be more accessible to poor people. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were authorized to approve risky loans.

What is a risky loan? It's a loan that the recipient is likely not to be able to repay.

The goal of this rule change was to help the poor — which especially would help members of minority groups. But how does it help these people to give them a loan that they can't repay? They get into a house, yes, but when they can't make the payments, they lose the house — along with their credit rating.

They end up worse off than before.

This was completely foreseeable and in fact many people did foresee it. One political party, in Congress and in the executive branch, tried repeatedly to tighten up the rules. The other party blocked every such attempt and tried to loosen them.

Furthermore, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were making political contributions to the very members of Congress who were allowing them to make irresponsible loans. (Though why quasi-federal agencies were allowed to do so baffles me. It's as if the Pentagon were allowed to contribute to the political campaigns of Congressmen who support increasing their budget.)

Isn't there a story here? Doesn't journalism require that you who produce our daily paper tell the truth about who brought us to a position where the only way to keep confidence in our economy was a $700 billion bailout? Aren't you supposed to follow the money and see which politicians were benefiting personally from the deregulation of mortgage lending?

I have no doubt that if these facts had pointed to the Republican Party or to John McCain as the guilty parties, you would be treating it as a vast scandal. "Housing-gate," no doubt. Or "Fannie-gate."

Instead, it was Senator Christopher Dodd and Congressman Barney Frank, both Democrats, who denied that there were any problems, who refused Bush administration requests to set up a regulatory agency to watch over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and who were still pushing for these agencies to go even further in promoting sub-prime mortgage loans almost up to the minute they failed.

As Thomas Sowell points out in a TownHall.com essay entitled "Do Facts Matter?" ( ]Snipurl / Snurl / Snipr - Snippetty snip snip with your looong URLs! ): "Alan Greenspan warned them four years ago. So did the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to the President. So did Bush's Secretary of the Treasury."
These are facts. This financial crisis was completely preventable. The party that blocked any attempt to prevent it was ... the Democratic Party. The party that tried to prevent it was ... the Republican Party.

Yet when Nancy Pelosi accused the Bush administration and Republican deregulation of causing the crisis, you in the press did not hold her to account for her lie. Instead, you criticized Republicans who took offense at this lie and refused to vote for the bailout!

What? It's not the liar, but the victims of the lie who are to blame?

Now let's follow the money ... right to the presidential candidate who is the number-two recipient of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae.

And after Franklin Raines, the CEO of Fannie Mae who made $90 million while running it into the ground, was fired for his incompetence, one presidential candidate's campaign actually consulted him for advice on housing. If that presidential candidate had been John McCain, you would have called it a major scandal and we would be getting stories in your paper every day about how incompetent and corrupt he was.

But instead, that candidate was Barack Obama, and so you have buried this story, and when the McCain campaign dared to call Raines an "adviser" to the Obama campaign — because that campaign had sought his advice — you actually let Obama's people get away with accusing McCain of lying, merely because Raines wasn't listed as an official adviser to the Obama campaign.

You would never tolerate such weasely nit-picking from a Republican.

If you who produce our local daily paper actually had any principles, you would be pounding this story, because the prosperity of all Americans was put at risk by the foolish, short-sighted, politically selfish, and possibly corrupt actions of leading Democrats, including Obama.

If you who produce our local daily paper had any personal honor, you would find it unbearable to let the American people believe that somehow Republicans were to blame for this crisis.

There are precedents. Even though President Bush and his administration never said that Iraq sponsored or was linked to 9/11, you could not stand the fact that Americans had that misapprehension — so you pounded us with the fact that there was no such link. (Along the way, you created the false impression that Bush had lied to them and said that there was a connection.)

If you had any principles, then surely right now, when the American people are set to blame President Bush and John McCain for a crisis they tried to prevent, and are actually shifting to approve of Barack Obama because of a crisis he helped cause, you would be laboring at least as hard to correct that false impression.

Your job, as journalists, is to tell the truth. That's what you claim you do, when you accept people's money to buy or subscribe to your paper.

But right now, you are consenting to or actively promoting a big fat lie — that the housing crisis should somehow be blamed on Bush, McCain, and the Republicans. You have trained the American people to blame everything bad — even bad weather — on Bush, and they are responding as you have taught them to.

If you had any personal honor, each reporter and editor would be insisting on telling the truth — even if it hurts the election chances of your favorite candidate.

Because that's what honorable people do. Honest people tell the truth even when they don't like the probable consequences. That's what honesty means . That's how trust is earned.

Barack Obama is just another politician, and not a very wise one. He has revealed his ignorance and naivete time after time — and you have swept it under the rug, treated it as nothing.

Meanwhile, you have participated in the borking of Sarah Palin, reporting savage attacks on her for the pregnancy of her unmarried daughter — while you ignored the story of John Edwards's own adultery for many months.

So I ask you now: Do you have any standards at all? Do you even know what honesty means?

Is getting people to vote for Barack Obama so important that you will throw away everything that journalism is supposed to stand for?

You might want to remember the way the National Organization of Women threw away their integrity by supporting Bill Clinton despite his well-known pattern of sexual exploitation of powerless women. Who listens to NOW anymore? We know they stand for nothing; they have no principles.

That's where you are right now.

It's not too late. You know that if the situation were reversed, and the truth would damage McCain and help Obama, you would be moving heaven and earth to get the true story out there.

If you want to redeem your honor, you will swallow hard and make a list of all the stories you would print if it were McCain who had been getting money from Fannie Mae, McCain whose campaign had consulted with its discredited former CEO, McCain who had voted against tightening its lending practices.

Then you will print them, even though every one of those true stories will point the finger of blame at the reckless Democratic Party, which put our nation's prosperity at risk so they could feel good about helping the poor, and lay a fair share of the blame at Obama's door.

You will also tell the truth about John McCain: that he tried, as a Senator, to do what it took to prevent this crisis. You will tell the truth about President Bush: that his administration tried more than once to get Congress to regulate lending in a responsible way.

This was a Congress-caused crisis, beginning during the Clinton administration, with Democrats leading the way into the crisis and blocking every effort to get out of it in a timely fashion.


If you at our local daily newspaper continue to let Americans believe — and vote as if — President Bush and the Republicans caused the crisis, then you are joining in that lie.

If you do not tell the truth about the Democrats — including Barack Obama — and do so with the same energy you would use if the miscreants were Republicans — then you are not journalists by any standard.

You're just the public relations machine of the Democratic Party, and it's time you were all fired and real journalists brought in, so that we can actually have a news paper in our city.

This article first appeared in The Rhinoceros Times of Greensboro, North Carolina, and is used here by permission.

R
diamond is offline  
Old 10-31-2008, 07:01 AM   #697
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 06:35 AM
Hasn't this already been posted?
BVS is offline  
Old 10-31-2008, 07:11 AM   #698
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 09:35 PM
Orson Scott Card pops up on Right Wing blogs quite a bit, he wrote some good SF novels but I think he holds some idiotic beliefs, appeals to any authority; such as quoting a mormon author for justification, really demonstrates an unwillingness to defend ideas, it is relatively lazy (which is not neccessarily a bad thing), but one should at least be able to remember enough of their arguments to plagirise them properly.

Obama's positions appear more considered and consistent than those of McCain, he doesn't present himself as a guy you could have a beer with and he is a perfectly moderate liberal; he is probably the least bad option (and the VP picks tip it towards him).
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-31-2008, 08:42 AM   #699
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,613
Local Time: 04:35 AM
"But we acknowledge it is a gamble. Given Mr Obama’s inexperience, the lack of clarity about some of his beliefs and the prospect of a stridently Democratic Congress, voting for him is a risk. "

Sounds like an economist. "It can go this way or it can go that way so tentatively we should support these ideas, of course it's a risk so we will change our minds later if the wind blows that way."

I've lost belief in intellectuals. They don't seem intelligent at all. There's always an "except for" to cover their asses.
purpleoscar is offline  
Old 10-31-2008, 08:44 AM   #700
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,613
Local Time: 04:35 AM
"He has earned it
So Mr Obama in that respect is a gamble. But the same goes for Mr McCain on at least as many counts, not least the possibility of President Palin. And this cannot be another election where the choice is based merely on fear. In terms of painting a brighter future for America and the world, Mr Obama has produced the more compelling and detailed portrait. He has campaigned with more style, intelligence and discipline than his opponent. Whether he can fulfil his immense potential remains to be seen. But Mr Obama deserves the presidency."

What????
__________________

purpleoscar is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×