The Real McCain - Page 9 - 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 04-12-2008, 09:59 PM   #161
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 02:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2387


I think we who vote take the right to vote seriously enough. We have low turnout, but that is a whole different issue. Like I do not understand people in other countries are dying for it- people died for it here, pal. Women, blacks, etc. America is different, we have always prided ourselves on individual rights/democracy. Bringing other countries in does not change the fact that we protect the right to vote, and is not an excuse for it not being upheld. If Bush has been in the same position as Gore was and votes were not counted, you would not be saying get over it, Kenya and Pakistan have it a lot worse. We expect to vote in this country, and that is not tantamount to crying when things do not go your way. Under your reasoning, a court not sending a murderer to jail for killing someone is ok and we just take the rule of law for granted in this country- after all, people kill with impunity in Haiti, so too bad. The victims family should just stop crying when they did not get their way, right?

Do some on the left resort to the victim card all the time, say in Ohio 2004?? Of course,on the far right fringe. There are nutjobs on both sides. Not too many people listen to either. 2000 was completely different than the claims made by said nutjobs, thats why there was so much controversy/coverage.

2000 was a perfect example of the right crying and having their Supreme Court overturn an election that was not going to go their way. Your reasoning is just crazy

right would have gone absolutely nuts,



Plus, many independents like McCain anyway for many of the reasons they like Obama(not a typical politician, etc) and that is why they will vote for him over Hillary. That will change when his support for Iraq gets more play, though.



You never cease to amaze me- first it was the whole crazy Gone idea

. Then I make factual points about how we spent frivolous money on investigating Clinton's cock arguments.



2000 was Supreme Court upholding the rule of law, which many on the Left still have a hard time understanding due process and the beauty of the electorial college, even after 8 years.

If the Left thinks it such an outdated system why don't they have the traction or support of the common sense of the electorate to change it? Should't be that difficult.

#387, you're very angry and shouldn't be, you shouldn't take disagreements personally, if you do most times posters like you flame out, crash and burn-which I would hate to see as you write so well, your posts are very spirited. Take this is as a little timely advice from a fellow who has taken the punches, has the war wounds and gotten the proverbial tee shirt to prove it. Sometimes the ass kickings we're well deserved, sometimes not and sometimes staged-to either get ppl to think, or mess with their minds-as in the thread Gone that I still think you haven't fully grasped my intention or concept yet. If you actually think I expect Principle Management to even know who I am or would consider my input-well, the jokes on you I'm afraid my friend.


I have news for you, Clinton was impeached, even if you claim he wasn't. As Capone was corrupt and only busted for tax invasion, the same principle holds true for Bill in an allegorical sense. Bill was busted for an exposed Achilles Heel that he could no longer conceal. He was busted for perjury and it was just deserts for all the ppl he took advantage of. Let's try and keep sexual organs out of the discourse, it can be hard (pun unintended) for some I understand.

Umm, I didn't know if you supported Hillary or not, I dont follow your posts that closely, I do realize you lean Left.

Your points on Independents are well taken.

I think Hillary has integrity and credibility issues and because of that not only will not get elected but not even get the nomination. You have to admit that both Obama and Mccain have far more credibility and personal integrity or appearance there of compared to Clinton.

Ok, I think we're done here.

<>
__________________

diamond is offline  
Old 04-12-2008, 11:25 PM   #162
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,327
Local Time: 05:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond





2000 was Supreme Court upholding the rule of law, which many on the Left still have a hard time understanding due process and the beauty of the electorial college, even after 8 years.

If the Left thinks it such an outdated system why don't they have the traction or support of the common sense of the electorate to change it? Should't be that difficult.

#387, you're very angry and shouldn't be, you shouldn't take disagreements personally, if you do most times posters like you flame out, crash and burn-which I would hate to see as you write so well, your posts are very spirited. Take this is as a little timely advice from a fellow who has taken the punches, has the war wounds and gotten the proverbial tee shirt to prove it. Sometimes the ass kickings we're well deserved, sometimes not and sometimes staged-to either get ppl to think, or mess with their minds-as in the thread Gone that I still think you haven't fully grasped my intention or concept yet. If you actually think I expect Principle Management to even know who I am or would consider my input-well, the jokes on you I'm afraid my friend.


I have news for you, Clinton was impeached, even if you claim he wasn't. As Capone was corrupt and only busted for tax invasion, the same principle holds true for Bill in an allegorical sense. Bill was busted for an exposed Achilles Heel that he could no longer conceal. He was busted for perjury and it was just deserts for all the ppl he took advantage of. Let's try and keep sexual organs out of the discourse, it can be hard (pun unintended) for some I understand.

Umm, I didn't know if you supported Hillary or not, I dont follow your posts that closely, I do realize you lean Left.

Your points on Independents are well taken.

I think Hillary has integrity and credibility issues and because of that not only will not get elected but not even get the nomination. You have to admit that both Obama and Mccain have far more credibility and personal integrity or appearance there of compared to Clinton.

Ok, I think we're done here.

<>
Please read all of this, I want to address the advice you gave me, etc:

Honestly, I do not want to come across as angry. I am just stating the facts. I have no problem with the electoral college, what I am trying to say is that the popular vote in Florida, not just nationally as some on the far left like to claim, was taken by Gore and therefore, the electoral votes for Florida should have gone to Gore. I am not a left wing wacko who is giving a knee jerk diatribe against the electoral college giving Bush the election- I understand completely that you have to win the electoral college and I do not think we need to get rid of it. In fact, if we did, I think that would be the end of campaigning in some states that are less populated and would be a net negative for the country. I see you are from Arizona- you guys probably would have been ignored until you became the fastest growing state under such a system.(correct me if I am wrong- 1990s somewhere?) I want you to tell me how any of Bush's claims re:equal protection plus the court ruling hold up given what they both said.

Sure, Clinton was impeached, did not try and claim otherwise, I guess we can just agree to disagree on the merits. They got Capone for tax evasion, fine, Elliot Spitzer, another straight arrow got the Gambinos on running a monopoly, not on blowing people's brains out. Difference between this and Clinton- what they did was illegal, Clinton was just a personal transgression that you correctly point out as his Achilles heal- always has been. I dont admire that part of him.

On a better note, thank you for the compliments on my writing and I am not trying to be angry. I do not want to and will not flame out, as I have liked posting and learning from others here in the short time I have been registered. As much as I can disagree, know this: I do not want to make it personal, we both have in some ways, and I can more than understand from reading your posts that you are someone who is very spirited but also someone who writes well and sincerely holds their views. I guess w/ the principle management stuff, I was not used to your style yet and with some admitted trouble, I am starting to understand it now. I took that wrong. We can agree on Obama and McCain and independents, both come across as principled, not in it for themselves and Hillary is just the opposite. You make a good point about independents not going for Hillary, and I will be glad to stick up for you if you get any of her supporters on here.

I know you know the candidates and the issues as much or more than others on here and for that, you have my respect. I am alot more moderate in my views than some of my posts may suggest- I lean left, you are right, but I am not a bleeding heart. I liked Biden the best and Richardson was my number 2. I dont like single payer or mandated health coverage such as Hillary's plan. I support a balance between business and labor interests, I'm not anti profit or anti business. I think there are way too many abortions in this country, on crime I think people should take personal responsibility in keeping their kids off the streets and in not shooting eachother and not blame the government or discrimination for all their problems. I guess as someone who leans left, I believe in a combination of personal and governmental responsibility. I really do not know who to vote for this year- I do not like McCain's stances, Hillary is out, and suprised as you might be, Obama lost me with his 'typical white person' remark and all the Wright stuff. Neither me nor anyone in my family liked that characterization much. I think he is all the things you said he is that attract independents, a good, principled guy, but those comments and his lack of experience scare the hell out of me given the times we face.

I am rambling again, but I just want you to have my assurances that it is not personal, I have no problem with you, appreciate the debate and also, I am no radical leftist who is blind to realities. One U2 fan to another, neither of us could be that bad, we both have our views and thats what it is about. Look forward to seeing you in other posts, and things will be toned down!

-Greg

p.s. Ever attended U2 outdoors in Arizona? UF tour somewhere, forget the place and of course, Sun Devil Stadium Tempe? I have 12/20/87 at Sun Devil and it sounded like one of their best shows ever. I know someone who goes to ASU and she says the whole area is amazing.
__________________

U2387 is offline  
Old 04-13-2008, 02:03 AM   #163
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 04:16 PM
I am not a republican -
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-13-2008, 08:12 AM   #164
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 02:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by U2387

Please read all of this, I want to address the advice you gave me, etc:

. I see you are from Arizona- you guys probably would have been ignored until you became the fastest growing state under such a system.(correct me if I am wrong- 1990s somewhere?)


Sure, Clinton was impeached, did not try and claim otherwise, I guess we can just agree to disagree on the merits. They got Capone for tax evasion, fine, Elliot Spitzer, another straight arrow got the Gambinos on running a monopoly, not on blowing people's brains out. Difference between this and Clinton- what they did was illegal, Clinton was just a personal transgression that you correctly point out as his Achilles heal- always has been. I dont admire that part of him.

On a better note, thank you for the compliments on my writing and I am not trying to be angry. I do not want to and will not flame out, as I have liked posting and learning from others here in the short time I have been registered.


We can agree on Obama and McCain and independents, both come across as principled, not in it for themselves and Hillary is just the opposite. You make a good point about independents not going for Hillary, and I will be glad to stick up for you if you get any of her supporters on here.

. I liked Biden the best and Richardson was my number 2. I am rambling again, but I just want you to have my assurances that it is not personal, I have no problem with you, appreciate the debate and also, I am no radical leftist who is blind to realities. One U2 fan to another, neither of us could be that bad, we both have our views and thats what it is about. Look forward to seeing you in other posts, and things will be toned down!

-Greg

p.s. Ever attended U2 outdoors in Arizona? UF tour somewhere, forget the place and of course, Sun Devil Stadium Tempe? I have 12/20/87 at Sun Devil and it sounded like one of their best shows ever. I know someone who goes to ASU and she says the whole area is amazing.

Greg-

Here's an interesting article on why Richardson wouldn't support Hillary, he was being pressured by them, told that he owed them etc etc. It's an artcle that shows both Clintons' true colours-power.

Here's the article:

Why Gov. Bill Richardson didn't endorse Clinton
Shari Vialpando / Associated Press
Gov. Bill Richardson, shown here in New Mexico on Tuesday, has drawn criticism from supporters of Bill and Hillary Clinton for endorsing Sen. Barack Obama. "I was loyal," Richardson says. "But I don't think that loyalty is transferable to his wife.... You don't transfer loyalty to a dynasty."
The New Mexico governor says he was dismayed by pressure from the Clinton camp, and impressed by Obama's optimism. Besides, 'you don't transfer loyalty to a dynasty.'
By Mark Z. Barabak, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
April 12, 2008
SANTA FE, N.M. -- Before he endorsed Barack Obama, before he drew the wrath of the Clintons and was likened to Judas, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson nearly endorsed Hillary Rodham Clinton for president.

But Richardson hesitated, and as the Democratic campaign turned ugly, he grew angry.



There was that "3 a.m." TV ad, in which Clinton questioned Obama's personal mettle. "That upset me," Richardson said.

There were some ham-fisted phone calls from Clinton backers, who questioned Richardson's honor and suggested that the governor, who served in President Clinton's Cabinet, owed Hillary Clinton his support. "That really ticked me off," Richardson said.

Still, even as he moved from Clinton toward Obama -- "the pursuit was pretty relentless on both sides" -- Richardson wrestled with the question of loyalty. After 14 years in Congress and a measure of fame as an international troubleshooter, Richardson was named Clinton's U.N. ambassador, then Energy secretary: "two important appointments," Richardson said.

He finally concluded that he had settled his debt to the former president: He had worked for Clinton's election in 1992, helped pass the North American Free Trade Agreement as part of his administration, stood by him during the Monica S. Lewinsky sex scandal, and rounded up votes to fight impeachment.

"I was loyal," Richardson said during an extended conversation over breakfast this week at the governor's mansion in Santa Fe. "But I don't think that loyalty is transferable to his wife. . . . You don't transfer loyalty to a dynasty."

He was impressed by the mostly positive tone of Obama's campaign, and grew to appreciate the substance and depth of their private conversations. The more Richardson heard from the Washington heavyweights backing Clinton, the more convinced he became of the need for a change inside the Beltway.

It has been three weeks since Richardson embraced the Illinois senator, an endorsement that continues to rankle and resonate -- the significance, it would seem, going far beyond the preference of a governor from a poor, rural state.

But this is a family fight, between kin of the Clinton years, so perhaps the raw emotions shouldn't be surprising. "They're very similar in personality," said Art Torres, chairman of the California Democratic Party and a friend of both Bill Clinton and Richardson. "There was a bond established, and I think [the former president] feels a little hurt."

Attention to the endorsement might have quickly passed but for the strenuous protest of Bill Clinton and others. Speaking for the campaign, advisor Mark Penn suggested Richardson's endorsement came too late to be much help to Obama. "Everyone has their endorsers," he said.

But then James Carville, the pundit, strategist and Clinton loyalist, hurled a lightning bolt by comparing Richardson to Judas and his surrender of Jesus for 30 pieces of silver.

Soon after came an odd back-and-forth concerning a private conversation in which, supposedly, either Hillary Clinton or Richardson dismissed Obama as unelectable. (Neither party will discuss particulars, but Richardson said he never made that statement.)

Days later, just when interest in the endorsement seemed to wane, former President Clinton exploded in a rant about Richardson at the California Democratic Party convention. He later apologized, but his tirade in a closed-door session with superdelegates rekindled the story for several more days.

People close to Clinton said he views the governor's action as a personal betrayal. "I think [Richardson] really owes a big chunk of his success and his career to the Clintons," said an associate who has discussed the matter with the former president and requested anonymity to speak candidly.

"Look," Richardson responded, "I was a successful congressman rescuing hostages before I was appointed. I was a governor afterward, elected on my own."

Even more than the endorsement, Clinton's associate said, the former president was angry because he thought Richardson broke his word. The two men watched the Super Bowl together at the governor's mansion -- Clinton made a special trip from California in bad weather -- and the former president walked away convinced that Richardson would endorse his wife or, at least, stay neutral.

Richardson was, in fact, close to backing the New York senator that day, though his advisors -- many of whom backed Obama -- urged him to wait. "I remember talking to the president and saying, 'I'm leaning. But I'm not there yet.' He denied pledging neutrality if he changed his mind. "Sometimes people hear what they want to hear," Richardson said.

Normally the most gregarious of politicians, the governor during the interview this week was subdued as he slowly worked his way through a plate of scrambled eggs, bacon and green chiles. His voice was soft, and he rarely smiled.

His endorsement had been highly coveted, due largely to his stature as one of the country's most prominent Latino leaders. The pursuit began soon after Richardson quit the presidential race on Jan. 10.


-----

Re Biden although a decent and warm speaker, he comes across lofty and a bit Kerry like, plus the plagerism issue back in the 80s.

Richardson I think is more genuine, but I do remember him early in the Lewinsky scandal huddling with Bill and Veron Jordan aiming to besmirch Monica. The blue dress surfaced later and unbeknown to Richardson he coulda been played or used the same way ( or even known perhaps that something was up) Colin Powell was played by the Bush Administrtion in the UN. I think subconsciously it may have bothered Bill Richardson that early on he was lying for Bill, and in the meantime the Clintons still say "hey you owe us". You gotta love Richardson for saying F/O to the Clinton machine.

I don't think Bill's only character flaw was his libdo, I view him more as pathological and always able to tidy up his loose ends- this is the only way that he was finally nailed and it wasn't pretty.

Az is a great place if you're heat tolerent, in which I'm not but I have 2 beautiful teenage girls from a 1st marriage that keep me here along with an outstanding wife. I grew up in So. Cal where the weather is nearly perfect however I'm stuck here for another 5 years it looks like.

I have many bootlegs of U2, and pretty sure I have Tempe 87 Joshua Tree Tour-thanks for your offer.

Stay well #387 and looking forward to your posts.

Dave
diamond is offline  
Old 04-13-2008, 08:17 AM   #165
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 02:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
I am not a republican -
Homelnd Security has already notified me that you will reregister (again) prior to the General Election.



thank u.

<>
diamond is offline  
Old 04-13-2008, 02:31 PM   #166
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,327
Local Time: 05:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond



Greg-

Here's an interesting article on why Richardson wouldn't support Hillary, he was being pressured by them, told that he owed them etc etc. It's an artcle that shows both Clintons' true colours-power.

Here's the article:

Why Gov. Bill Richardson didn't endorse Clinton
Shari Vialpando / Associated Press
Gov. Bill Richardson, shown here in New Mexico on Tuesday, has drawn criticism from supporters of Bill and Hillary Clinton for endorsing Sen. Barack Obama. "I was loyal," Richardson says. "But I don't think that loyalty is transferable to his wife.... You don't transfer loyalty to a dynasty."
The New Mexico governor says he was dismayed by pressure from the Clinton camp, and impressed by Obama's optimism. Besides, 'you don't transfer loyalty to a dynasty.'
By Mark Z. Barabak, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
April 12, 2008
SANTA FE, N.M. -- Before he endorsed Barack Obama, before he drew the wrath of the Clintons and was likened to Judas, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson nearly endorsed Hillary Rodham Clinton for president.

But Richardson hesitated, and as the Democratic campaign turned ugly, he grew angry.



There was that "3 a.m." TV ad, in which Clinton questioned Obama's personal mettle. "That upset me," Richardson said.

There were some ham-fisted phone calls from Clinton backers, who questioned Richardson's honor and suggested that the governor, who served in President Clinton's Cabinet, owed Hillary Clinton his support. "That really ticked me off," Richardson said.

Still, even as he moved from Clinton toward Obama -- "the pursuit was pretty relentless on both sides" -- Richardson wrestled with the question of loyalty. After 14 years in Congress and a measure of fame as an international troubleshooter, Richardson was named Clinton's U.N. ambassador, then Energy secretary: "two important appointments," Richardson said.

He finally concluded that he had settled his debt to the former president: He had worked for Clinton's election in 1992, helped pass the North American Free Trade Agreement as part of his administration, stood by him during the Monica S. Lewinsky sex scandal, and rounded up votes to fight impeachment.

"I was loyal," Richardson said during an extended conversation over breakfast this week at the governor's mansion in Santa Fe. "But I don't think that loyalty is transferable to his wife. . . . You don't transfer loyalty to a dynasty."

He was impressed by the mostly positive tone of Obama's campaign, and grew to appreciate the substance and depth of their private conversations. The more Richardson heard from the Washington heavyweights backing Clinton, the more convinced he became of the need for a change inside the Beltway.

It has been three weeks since Richardson embraced the Illinois senator, an endorsement that continues to rankle and resonate -- the significance, it would seem, going far beyond the preference of a governor from a poor, rural state.

But this is a family fight, between kin of the Clinton years, so perhaps the raw emotions shouldn't be surprising. "They're very similar in personality," said Art Torres, chairman of the California Democratic Party and a friend of both Bill Clinton and Richardson. "There was a bond established, and I think [the former president] feels a little hurt."

Attention to the endorsement might have quickly passed but for the strenuous protest of Bill Clinton and others. Speaking for the campaign, advisor Mark Penn suggested Richardson's endorsement came too late to be much help to Obama. "Everyone has their endorsers," he said.

But then James Carville, the pundit, strategist and Clinton loyalist, hurled a lightning bolt by comparing Richardson to Judas and his surrender of Jesus for 30 pieces of silver.

Soon after came an odd back-and-forth concerning a private conversation in which, supposedly, either Hillary Clinton or Richardson dismissed Obama as unelectable. (Neither party will discuss particulars, but Richardson said he never made that statement.)

Days later, just when interest in the endorsement seemed to wane, former President Clinton exploded in a rant about Richardson at the California Democratic Party convention. He later apologized, but his tirade in a closed-door session with superdelegates rekindled the story for several more days.

People close to Clinton said he views the governor's action as a personal betrayal. "I think [Richardson] really owes a big chunk of his success and his career to the Clintons," said an associate who has discussed the matter with the former president and requested anonymity to speak candidly.

"Look," Richardson responded, "I was a successful congressman rescuing hostages before I was appointed. I was a governor afterward, elected on my own."

Even more than the endorsement, Clinton's associate said, the former president was angry because he thought Richardson broke his word. The two men watched the Super Bowl together at the governor's mansion -- Clinton made a special trip from California in bad weather -- and the former president walked away convinced that Richardson would endorse his wife or, at least, stay neutral.

Richardson was, in fact, close to backing the New York senator that day, though his advisors -- many of whom backed Obama -- urged him to wait. "I remember talking to the president and saying, 'I'm leaning. But I'm not there yet.' He denied pledging neutrality if he changed his mind. "Sometimes people hear what they want to hear," Richardson said.

Normally the most gregarious of politicians, the governor during the interview this week was subdued as he slowly worked his way through a plate of scrambled eggs, bacon and green chiles. His voice was soft, and he rarely smiled.

His endorsement had been highly coveted, due largely to his stature as one of the country's most prominent Latino leaders. The pursuit began soon after Richardson quit the presidential race on Jan. 10.


-----

Re Biden although a decent and warm speaker, he comes across lofty and a bit Kerry like, plus the plagerism issue back in the 80s.

Richardson I think is more genuine, but I do remember him early in the Lewinsky scandal huddling with Bill and Veron Jordan aiming to besmirch Monica. The blue dress surfaced later and unbeknown to Richardson he coulda been played or used the same way ( or even known perhaps that something was up) Colin Powell was played by the Bush Administrtion in the UN. I think subconsciously it may have bothered Bill Richardson that early on he was lying for Bill, and in the meantime the Clintons still say "hey you owe us". You gotta love Richardson for saying F/O to the Clinton machine.

I don't think Bill's only character flaw was his libdo, I view him more as pathological and always able to tidy up his loose ends- this is the only way that he was finally nailed and it wasn't pretty.

Az is a great place if you're heat tolerent, in which I'm not but I have 2 beautiful teenage girls from a 1st marriage that keep me here along with an outstanding wife. I grew up in So. Cal where the weather is nearly perfect however I'm stuck here for another 5 years it looks like.

I have many bootlegs of U2, and pretty sure I have Tempe 87 Joshua Tree Tour-thanks for your offer.

Stay well #387 and looking forward to your posts.

Dave
Hey, thanks, Dave, appreciate it. I too was glad to see Richardson not take shit from the Clintons- everything he said in that article, you have made complete sense- how he had been loyal, had stood on his own before Clinton and has since, etc. Maybe Richardson lost the Clintons as friends, but that is all- he lost none of his ability to be listened to, well known and respected as a public servant. I liked Bill as President, was well aware of his flaws, etc. He has not made me angry until this campaign and the stupider by the day explanations for the indefensible-wanting an election they have no mathematical chance of winning just to go back to the White House. I say they had 8 yrs and as Richardson pointed out, Hillary is not Bill. And to think I have no particular loyalty to Obama as I pointed out. I cant imagine what his hard core supporters think of Hillary and what she thinks that means for her if she gets the nomination. Alot of people crossing to McCain is my guess.

Carville is just a joke, he and Begala(his partner in crime) along with Hillary campaign manager Terry MCauliffe did a great job of getting Bill Clinton elected-which was fine with me. However, as a Democrat, I think they did a great job of DESTROYING the party in the 1990s and early 2000s. Their strategy, evident in the Hillary campaign now, is to get the liberal coasts, some upper midwest, and put your hands together and pray for either Florida or Ohio. Every other possible swing state is ignored-Colorado, Missouri, Arizona, West Virginia, etc. That strategy was what made the last 2 elections a loss for the Democrats by one state. At least now, the Dems are getting smart enough to compete in every state and actually not be arrogant and listen to people in the South and out West and put up candidates who reflect their district's views and not some Washington criteria. I liked Jim Pederson out in your state, Bob Casey of PA, Jim Webb of VA, Jon Tester of MT- not trying to argue about the merits of either of these guys, just pointing out that they dont 100% fit a liberal NYC checklist, which is where the problems came in in the past- fit that check list plus be a donor to the Clintons, your candidacy was promoted strongly, regardless of electability/views. I have no problem admiting that pre 2006, people were justified in viewing Democrats as condescending to most of the country because of this never so veiled strategy. The way I saw it, why should we have been shocked that people did not vote for us when we were not even considerate enough to show up, share our values and listen to them? I certainly have no problem pointing out where my own party elite has done idiotic things that have cost us with whole groups and regions of voters.

They had this strategy, have seen it fail, everyone else has seen it fail. Despite all this, the Clintons keep using it. Richardson being a westerner, sees it is a failure and goes for Obama- someone who in many ways, represents the 2006 Democratic strategy of competing in every state, not discounting people, not dividing red v blue, etc. Obama campaigned for alot of these moderate-conservative Democratic congress people and they have also endorsed him. They know their districts and constituents and know who can get the cross over votes and its not Hillary.

The reason I mentioned Arizona was you just would not believe how many people in New England are moving out there, want to move out there, have had their parents retire and move out there, etc. All come back and rave about it. All would take it over Florida. I guess it is easy for us to say we are heat tolerant when it is cold as hell from november-april, so I wont comment until I actually get out there. Scottsdale @100 degrees always sounds good when it is 10 below here. I hear you on Southern California- LA, Orange County, San Diego area I absolutely loved- sunny and 75-80 is perfect for me! Take care, see you around.
-Greg
U2387 is offline  
Old 05-02-2008, 06:56 AM   #167
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 28,324
Local Time: 05:16 PM
Someone actually asked him about it



Q: This question goes to mental health and mental health care. Previously, I've been married to a woman that was verbally abusive to me. Is it true that you called your wife a (expletive)?


McCain: Now, now. You don't want to... Um, you know that's the great thing about town hall meetings, sir, but we really don't, there's people here who don't respect that kind of language. So I'll move on to the next questioner in the back.



UPDATE: It turns out the man who asked the question is a Baptist minister worried about McCain's temper:

Clive businessman Marty Parrish was escorted from Sen. John McCain's town hall meeting by Des Moines police and members of the Secret Service after asking McCain if he had called his wife Cindy an expletive in 1992.


Parrish, an ordained Baptist minister who holds a master's degree in political science, was questioned by Secret Service agents before being released. He was not charged in the incident. Parrish asked whether McCain called his wife Cindy an expletive related to the female anatomy, as has been alleged in the book "The Real McCain," written by Dem strategist Cliff Schecter.

McCain's response got him a round of applause from the crowd: "There's people here who don't respect that kind of language, so I'll move on to the next questioner in the back."

In an interview with IowaPolitics.com, Parrish said his intentions were simple in posing the question to McCain. The former Joe Biden campaign worker stressed he is very concerned about the Republican presidential nominee's temperament.

"We have a man whose temper can get the best of him," Parrish said. "What I am worried about is his temper. Our country is in a serious crisis. This election is the most significant one since 1860. It appears America is asleep -- so I stood up and asked the question."
__________________

MrsSpringsteen 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 04:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×