US 08 Presidential Campaign General Discussion Thread #7

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.
SACRAMENTO -- Cindy McCain, wife of Sen. John McCain, is headed to the Republic of Georgia, where tensions between the government and Russia have sparked international concern and have become an issue on the presidential campaign trail.

McCain announced to a group of fundraisers in Sacramento that his wife was headed to the country, but the campaign did not provide any details about the trip.

McCain has been very aggressive in his condemnation of Russia's invasion of Georgia, and his campaign has been critical of Obama's more measured response when Russian tanks first pushed into the country.

McCain spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker confirmed Cindy McCain is enroute to the nation and said she is visiting as part of the World Food Program. She said she will meet with Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili and visit with wounded Georgian soldiers.

If this was Michelle Obama, I can just imagine the reaction and the outrage.

But McCain, a POW, is not presumptuous or arrogant.
 
If this was Michelle Obama, I can just imagine the reaction and the outrage.

From who? The MSM? I don't think so.

But McCain, a POW, is not presumptuous or arrogant.

No, John McCain is not. If you want to get all upset about Cindy, then go ahead. I'm not sure why, but go ahead.

And did you not read : she is visiting as part of the World Food Program
You know that she is incredibly involved in worldwide charities and relief, right?
 
If this was Michelle Obama, I can just imagine the reaction and the outrage.

I am sure McCains will really enjoy an European Vacation home on the Black Sea.

the Georgian economy is in no doubt in shambles
an all cash buyer will be appreciated. (they will probably throw in a kitchen table.)

Would you rather she bought another Ski chalet in Colorado?
 
And did you not read : she is visiting as part of the World Food Program

And to visit the close family friend, the Georgian President.

Are you so obtuse and naive to actually not see this trip as at all political?
 
ABC says 10 How high can it go? Maybe he'd let me live in one, if I vote for him. No thanks...



McCain Jokes About House Gaffe on 'The Tonight Show'

August 25, 2008 9:51 PM

ABC News’ Ron Claiborne and Bret Hovell report: Sen. John McCain’s gaffe last week that he didn’t remember how many houses he owned with his wife Cindy became the source of much of the humor during his appearance on Jay Leno’s "The Tonight Show," Monday evening.

While McCain was still in the green room, Leno got the audience warmed up.

“Tropical Storm Fay has soaked Florida ... ruining thousands of homes, most of them belonging to John McCain,” Leno said during his monologue. “In fact, to make Sen. McCain feel at home tonight, I gave him 7 dressing rooms.”

After their opening segment together on the stage, Leno came back from a commercial break to ask McCain, “For $1 million, how many houses do you have?”

McCain answered by first citing his time as a POW in Vietnam.

“Could I just mention to you, Jay, that, at a moment of seriousness,” McCain began, “I spent five-and-a-half years in a prison cell. I didn't have a house. I didn't have a kitchen table. I didn't have a table. I didn't have a chair. And I didn't spend those five-and-a-half years because, not because I wanted to get a house when I got out.


“We spend our time in a condominium in Washington, in a condominium in Phoenix, sometime over here in the state of California, and we have a place up in northern Arizona,” McCain continued, explaining how his campaign got to the number four in the count. (McCain is being conservative: ABC News’s count is ten homes on eight properties.)

Leno and McCain also joked about the presumptive Republican nominee’s age –- next Friday, McCain will turn 72.

“It was this week in 1814, British troops set fire to the White House. Did you know that?” Leno said during his monologue. “The White House was saved, it was saved thanks to the actions of one brave young soldier, John McCain.”

McCain was in on the joke: “But also, you forgot to mention when I warned the people about the British coming,” McCain said to laughter.
 
And to visit the close family friend, the Georgian President.

Is that what the librul media is telling you? You should stop being so jaded. I mean, it's completely innocent when the Administration visits Bandar Bush Prince Bandar bin Sultan bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud of Saudi Arabia. They just like to have friendly chats about the weather.
 
I hope to God that the simple reason he "lags" with older white voters is not the color of his skin. And those polls are depressing.


What Will The Neighbors Think?

Obama's defeat would say that when handed a perfect opportunity to put the worst part of our history behind us, we chose not to.

Jacob Weisberg
NEWSWEEK
Updated: 5:29 PM ET Aug 23, 2008

What with the Bush legacy of reckless war and economic mismanagement, 2008 is a year that favors the generic Democratic candidate over the generic Republican one. Yet Barack Obama, with every natural and structural advantage, is running only neck and neck with John McCain, a subpar nominee with a list of liabilities longer than a Joe Biden monologue. Obama has built a crack political operation, raised record sums and inspired millions with his eloquence and vision. McCain has struggled with a fractious campaign team, deficits in clarity and discipline, and remains a stranger to charisma. Yet at the moment, the two appear to be tied. What gives?

If it makes you feel better, you can rationalize Obama's missing 10-point lead on the basis of Clintonite sulkiness, his slowness in responding to attacks or the concern that he may be too handsome, brilliant and cool to be elected. But let's be honest: the reason Obama isn't ahead right now is that he trails badly among one group, older white voters. He lags with them for a simple reason: the color of his skin.

Much evidence points to racial prejudice as a factor that could be large enough to cost Obama the election. That warning is written all over last month's CBS/New York Times poll, which is worth studying if you want to understand white America's curious sense of racial grievance. In the poll, 26 percent of whites say they have been victims of discrimination. Twenty-seven percent say too much has been made of the problems facing black people. Twenty-four percent say that the country isn't ready to elect a black president. Five percent acknowledge that they, personally, would not vote for a black candidate.

Five percent surely understates the extent of the problem. In the Pennsylvania primary, one in six white voters told exit pollsters that race was a factor in his or her decision. Seventy-five percent of those people voted for Clinton. You can do the math: 12 percent of the white Pennsylvania primary electorate acknowledged that they didn't vote for Barack Obama in part because he is African-American. And that's what Democrats in a Northeastern(ish) state admit openly.

Such prejudice usually comes coded in distortions about Obama and his background. To the willfully ignorant, he's a secret Muslim married to a black-power radical. Or—thanks, Geraldine Ferraro—he got where he is only because of the special treatment accorded those lucky enough to be born with African blood. Some Jews assume Obama is insufficiently supportive of Israel, the way they assume other black politicians to be. To some white voters (14 percent in the CBS/New York Times poll), Obama is someone who as president would favor blacks over whites. Or he's an "elitist," who cannot understand ordinary (read: white) people because he isn't one of them. We're just not comfortable with, you know, a Hawaiian.

Then there's the overt stuff. In May, Pat Buchanan, who frets about the European-Americans losing control of their country, ranted on MSNBC in defense of white West Virginians voting on the basis of racial solidarity. The No. 1 best seller in America, "Obama Nation," by Jerome R. Corsi, Ph.D., leeringly notes that Obama's white mother always preferred her "mate" be "a man of color." John McCain has yet to get around to denouncing this vile book.

Many have discoursed on what an Obama victory could mean for America. We would finally be able to see our legacy of slavery, segregation and racism in the rearview mirror. Our kids would grow up thinking of prejudice as a nonfactor in their lives. The rest of the world would embrace a less fearful and more open post-post-9/11 America. But does it not follow that an Obama defeat would signify the opposite? If Obama loses, our children will grow up thinking of equal opportunity as a myth. His defeat would say that when handed a perfect opportunity to put the worst part of our history behind us, we chose not to. In this event, the world's judgment will be severe and inescapable: the United States had its day, but in the end couldn't put its own self-interest ahead of its crazy irrationality over race.

Choosing McCain, in particular, would herald the construction of a bridge to the 20th century—and not necessarily the last part of it, either. McCain represents a cold-war style of nationalism that doesn't get the shift from geopolitics to geoeconomics, the centrality of soft power in a multipolar world or the transformative nature of digital technology. This is a matter of attitude as much as age. A lot of 71-year-olds are still learning and evolving. But in 2008, being flummoxed by that newfangled doodad, the personal computer, seems like a deal breaker. At this hinge moment in human history, McCain's approach to our gravest problems is hawkish denial. I like and respect the man, but the maverick has become an ostrich: he wants to deal with the global energy crisis by drilling, our debt crisis by cutting taxes, and he responds to threats from Georgia to Iran with Bush-like belligerence and pique.

You may or may not agree with Obama's policy prescriptions, but they are, by and large, serious attempts to deal with the biggest issues we face: a failing health-care system, oil dependency, income stagnation and climate change. To the rest of the world, a rejection of the promise he represents wouldn't just be an odd choice by the United States. It would be taken for what it would be: sign and symptom of a nation's historical decline.
 
Your logical reasoning is an absolute failure. Seriously how you made that leap is beyond me. I actually think you contorting yourself in this manner is hilarious! At least financeguy understood the context of the primaries.

This is hilarious, but whats funny is some people's militant insistence that there is only one person in the forum who thinks the election is NOT going to be close. When I said there was more than one person, I was thinking about the reply I saw from Aloudgirl or whatever the persons name is. I found the qoute and posted it, after some people strangely insisted that it be done.:wink:
 
:lol:

You miss the point. You quote a drive by, get their name wrong, can't back it up with anything else, and yet you still insist you are right.

You constantly generalize FYM, and you constantly fail. You got caught this time, just face it. :shrug:
 
:lol:

You miss the point. You quote a drive by, get their name wrong, can't back it up with anything else, and yet you still insist you are right.

You constantly generalize FYM, and you constantly fail. You got caught this time, just face it. :shrug:

I was asked to post one person, beyond the one we already knew, and I did, the exact one I was thinking of in fact.

I'm not the one making obsessive generalizations about other people.:wink:
 
I have a standard to live up to now.

And I stand by that label 150%!
 
If McCain truly believes this, which he said in a speech yesterday, then he's absolutely and completely delusional.

While we have our share of critics around the world, when people in the oppressed nations of the world need support, and solidarity, and hope, they look to America. When they talk about our country, it is not with distrust or disdain, but with respect and affection. They do not resent or resist America's democratic influence in the world -- they thank God for it.

Rest of speech.
 
do you think the actions taken recently by Russia will have an effect on the election?



yes, because every cough and sneeze along the massive Russian border is going to be blown up into the greatest challenge our nation has ever faced by the current Republican candidate. it's also important to note that McCain's campaign manager was a lobbyist for Georgia, and it wouldn't surprise me if winks and nods were exchanged in regards to the most recent "incident." Republicans love a sense of crisis. they are at their best when they feel under siege -- be it by Mexicans, gays, phantom WMDs, or Russians. and any actions taken by Russia that can be done as such will be spun into what was the overriding Republican message in 2004 -- "vote for us, or they'll kill you."

it also underscores, to me, just why it will be so important to have someone as calm and cool as Obama in the White House, and not someone itching for a fight and an enemy and a chance for dramatics like McCain. Russia is best dealt with not with threats and stern words. Russian cooperation is going to be absolutely critical in Iran, in the rise of China, in Pakistan, and in the securing of various "loose nukes" across the world. it might feel good to shake a fist and talk about the "Russian empire" but we have to acknowledge that, 1) this is not the Soviet Union, and 2) it's also not 1995 anymore. Russia is a regional power, Russia is an authoritarian petro-state, and Russia is going to have to be dealt with very, very carefully.
 
yes, because every cough and sneeze along the massive Russian border is going to be blown up into the greatest challenge our nation has ever faced by the current Republican candidate. it's also important to note that McCain's campaign manager was a lobbyist for Georgia, and it wouldn't surprise me if winks and nods were exchanged in regards to the most recent "incident." Republicans love a sense of crisis. they are at their best when they feel under siege -- be it by Mexicans, gays, phantom WMDs, or Russians. and any actions taken by Russia that can be done as such will be spun into what was the overriding Republican message in 2004 -- "vote for us, or they'll kill you."

it also underscores, to me, just why it will be so important to have someone as calm and cool as Obama in the White House, and not someone itching for a fight and an enemy and a chance for dramatics like McCain. Russia is best dealt with not with threats and stern words. Russian cooperation is going to be absolutely critical in Iran, in the rise of China, in Pakistan, and in the securing of various "loose nukes" across the world. it might feel good to shake a fist and talk about the "Russian empire" but we have to acknowledge that, 1) this is not the Soviet Union, and 2) it's also not 1995 anymore. Russia is a regional power, Russia is an authoritarian petro-state, and Russia is going to have to be dealt with very, very carefully.

Fascinating. I had no idea about the Georgia connection with McCain's campaign manager. I think your analysis is astute on every count. Russia is not a country to play cowboys and indians with. We need them as an ally, not pushed further away into isolation. Diplomacy is all that is going to work in order to forge cooperation. Military action with even the slightest hint of coercion or threat (which McCain would likely be bursting at the seams to try) could and would have consequences we're not prepared to face.
 
you don't think there's any chance of russia escalating? perhaps another former soviet state?



i think Russia wants to swing it's big dick around. hence, today, their official recognition of South Ossetia. they want to be taken seriously, and they want to arbitrate disputes in their sphere of influence.

i think Russia rolling tanks into Eastern Europe is unlikely.

of course, should it happen, we'll have to deal with it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom