8th election thread

[fatheadfred]

Pigs do wear lipstick and Lieberman is a jackass.

McCain is for oil and nuclear; Obama is comprehensive

McCain is ready for more war; Obama is for diplomacy

McCain's VP sucks; Obama's is knowledgeable about a lot of political shit.

McCain represents the 50's; Obama is ready to face the future.

[Guest Jules]

Thanks. I actually did medical studies to pay the bills some in college. I met hundreds of people from all walks of life, and made $100 dollars a day by doing nothing. I can't believe I did that shit.

I think brother Sooie was talking about the hot broads all over that site.

[EL the Famous]

She misspoke. Do people really think she feels that her family understands war and nobody else does? Man, the things people jump on. There's nothing quite as stupid as a presidential election.

 

exactly. that post combined w/ john smith's perfect 'falling into the trap' statement were part of my ire yesterday. let's continue to engage in debates over gaffes or issues like abortion and religion that have gone in circles forever and will continue to go in circles forever versus focusing on tangible issues w/ real historical data that can be used as a basis for legitimate discourse and, IMO as an obama supporter, a solid case for why we shouldn't elect mccain.

 

i understand that these are imporant issues to folks and i'm not asking anybody to ignore them, just for equal (if not higher priority) w/ things we can actually hang some sort of hat on.

 

as far as my digs at jnick...a discussion on the political platofrms of each candidate that could affect the pro-life/pro-choice landscape is one thing, revisting a tired debate over what are no more than personal definitions on what consitutes a human life seem counterproductive to a discussion on the actual election. that said, carry on...it's a relatively-open forum. you have have as much right to focus on it as i have to focus on how tired i think it is.

 

on another tip, quite frankly, the immediacy of information and lack of accountability for it's accuracy the web provides to this election is making me physically ill. it's affecting both campaigns and completely detracting from legitimate issues as well. 'obama is a muslim and/or a black panther'...'sarah palin's

[sweetheart-mine]

Coffee with a shot of valium figures to be my beverage of choice for the next couple months.

it's not a bad idea, is it (thanks, tom friedman). maybe even leave out the coffee! i don't remember an election with so much at stake in my lifetime -- been voting since 1972 -- so it's pretty charged.

 

right this second i'm listening to my level-headed husband, who is on the board of peace action maine in portland, talking on the phone with its director, and my husband is saying, "some people are getting really panicky about this election -- for example, right here in my household."

[Central Scrutinizer]

i guess i'm just becoming completely disenfranchised w/ the whole damn thing. it's a clusterfuck w/ both parties all the way around...the actual candidates for president are being lost in ths static. which, IMO, is good for mccain...bad for obama.

 

Very well put. If you're an Obama supporter, it's a lot of wasted energy that's counter productive. The more you engage people on the merits, values of your candidate, and steer away from the silly innuendo and rhetoric, the more you sterilize those hollow arguments.

[sweetheart-mine]

a couple of weeks ago a gay friend of mine who owns a shop refused my suggestion to go ahead and make his ranch house into a cottage-type place like his shop is, who cares about the house's era. he said "that would be like putting lipstick on a pig." therefore, obama must be gay. pass it on.

[quarter23cd]

right this second i'm listening to my level-headed husband, who is on the board of peace action maine in portland, talking on the phone with its director, and my husband is saying, "some people are getting really panicky about this election -- for example, right here in my household."

 

My wife has zero patience for politics. She avoids the topic as much as she can (although I give her credit for having an astonishingly good BS-detector without having to spend hours on end obsessing about it, like we've all been doing around here lately). But I guess since I'm usually pretty level-headed, she hates election season because it never fails to push every last button I have.

[John Smith]

Very well put. If you're an Obama supporter, it's a lot of wasted energy that's counter productive. The more you engage people on the merits, values of your candidate, and steer away from the silly innuendo and rhetoric, the more you sterilize those hollow arguments.

 

But the more of these stupid spun statements that go unchalleneged the more legitimate they become. It is the rock and a hard place scenario. I fully belive that the issues speak for themselves, but that the air gets clouded with all the other crap.

If you view it as crap and do nothing, the air is still clouded and voters who are disenclined to do anything other than observe the national enquirer aspects of the election will vote accordingly. Left unchallenged crap like little McCains statment, Or Palin/McCains new spin on the bridge or their spin on her experience, or Obama being a muslim etc... these things will grow and attain legitmacy and eventually overshadow the issues. I guess what I am saying is that not challenging these things gives them legitmacy by the absence of protest and by protesting they gain legitimacy through the attention they recieve. So it's adamned if they do damned if they donn't situation. Either way they cloud the issues.

 

BTW watch how republicans respond to stuff like this. Remeber how quickly they went on the offensive and how loud and boisterous they were when the Dan Rather thing hit the air? When the GWB Drunk driving thing hit the air? They don't let the little stuff slide at all.

 

Also it now appears that we are putting on a military Push to find BinLaden again. Did they do this in 2004 and in 2006 also, then shortly after the elections the intensified search quietly was scaled back?

[myboyblue]

But the more of these stupid spun statements that go unchalleneged the more legitimate they become. It is the rock and a hard place scenario. I fully belive that the issues speak for themselves, but that the air gets clouded with all the other crap.

If you view it as crap and do nothing, the air is still clouded and voters who are disenclined to do anything other than observe the national enquirer aspects of the election will vote accordingly. Left unchallenged crap like little McCains statment, Or Palin/McCains new spin on the bridge or their spin on her experience, or Obama being a muslim etc... these things will grow and attain legitmacy and eventually overshadow the issues. I guess what I am saying is that not challenging these things gives them legitmacy by the absence of protest and by protesting they gain legitimacy through the attention they recieve. So it's adamned if they do damned if they donn't situation. Either way they cloud the issues.

 

BTW watch how republicans respond to stuff like this. Remeber how quickly they went on the offensive and how loud and boisterous they were when the Dan Rather thing hit the air? When the GWB Drunk driving thing hit the air? They don't let the little stuff slide at all.

this is true... Republicans are notoriously good at spinning non-issues into issues (i.e. swiftboat, Clinton BJ, etc.) It is a catch 22 if the Democrats try and take the high road. My feeling is that the dems should avoid any negative campaigning but feel free to go on the offensive if they are attacked. There are a lot of ignorant voters out there and the republicans prey on them.

[Good Old Neon]

exactly. that post combined w/ john smith's perfect 'falling into the trap' statement were part of my ire yesterday. let's continue to engage in debates over gaffes or issues like abortion and religion that have gone in circles forever and will continue to go in circles forever versus focusing on tangible issues w/ real historical data that can be used as a basis for legitimate discourse and, IMO as an obama supporter, a solid case for why we shouldn't elect mccain.

 

i understand that these are imporant issues to folks and i'm not asking anybody to ignore them, just for equal (if not higher priority) w/ things we can actually hang some sort of hat on.

 

as far as my digs at jnick...a discussion on the political platofrms of each candidate that could affect the pro-life/pro-choice landscape is one thing, revisting a tired debate over what are no more than personal definitions on what consitutes a human life seem counterproductive to a discussion on the actual election. that said, carry on...it's a relatively-open forum. you have have as much right to focus on it as i have to focus on how tired i think it is.

 

on another tip, quite frankly, the immediacy of information and lack of accountability for it's accuracy the web provides to this election is making me physically ill. it's affecting both campaigns and completely detracting from legitimate issues as well. 'obama is a muslim and/or a black panther'...'sarah palin's

[quarter23cd]

Well I'll be gal-darned. I by no means have a PhD in economics, but those reckless lefties over at that clearly liberally-biased "news" rag know as Business Week seem to like Obama's tax plan.

[Central Scrutinizer]

But the more of these stupid spun statements that go unchalleneged the more legitimate they become. It is the rock and a hard place scenario. I fully belive that the issues speak for themselves, but that the air gets clouded with all the other crap.

If you view it as crap and do nothing, the air is still clouded and voters who are disenclined to do anything other than observe the national enquirer aspects of the election will vote accordingly. Left unchallenged crap like little McCains statment, Or Palin/McCains new spin on the bridge or their spin on her experience, or Obama being a muslim etc... these things will grow and attain legitmacy and eventually overshadow the issues. I guess what I am saying is that not challenging these things gives them legitmacy by the absence of protest and by protesting they gain legitimacy through the attention they recieve. So it's adamned if they do damned if they donn't situation. Either way they cloud the issues.

 

BTW watch how republicans respond to stuff like this. Remeber how quickly they went on the offensive and how loud and boisterous they were when the Dan Rather thing hit the air? When the GWB Drunk driving thing hit the air? They don't let the little stuff slide at all.

 

Also it now appears that we are putting on a military Push to find BinLaden again. Did they do this in 2004 and in 2006 also, then shortly after the elections the intensified search quietly was scaled back?

Each person who is going to vote should take ownership for that vote. If you support Obama, don't try to win the election in the press, win it one person at a time. Someone brings crap up, remind them that it is form over substance, and turn the discussion to a real issue, one that you know about and feel strongly enough about that you can say why you're voting for Obama -- or McCain for that matter. If you know what issue the person values, speak about those issues.

 

This empty crap is mob mentality -- the media that's too lazy to do anything but show video and sound bites, the public that's too lazy to switch channel, let alone seek fact from fiction.

[Central Scrutinizer]

Well I'll be gal-darned. I by no means have a PhD in economics, but those reckless lefties over at that clearly liberally-biased "news" rag know as Business Week seem to like Obama's tax plan.

Note that BusinessWeek will enable you to send an e-mail copy of the story to anyone that you know ...

[EL the Famous]

But the more of these stupid spun statements that go unchalleneged the more legitimate they become. It is the rock and a hard place scenario. I fully belive that the issues speak for themselves, but that the air gets clouded with all the other crap.

 

i agree to a certain extent, but address them and move on. plus, as far as obama is concerned, let biden and your other campaign folks run defense and/or offense, depending on the scenario. he's becoming more fired up on addressing the lack of focus as a whole recently, which is the right way to approach it. don't get bogged down in addressing sarah palin or what she's said yourself...you aren't running against palin. you and joe biden are running against mccain/palin.

 

don't get me wrong, the passive/agressive double-standards w/ the whole sexism claims by the republican camp is pure insanity and a blatant smokescreen from going toe to toe on cold hard facts. but it's working and the dems are spending too much time wandering around in it. don't ignore it, but call 'em out and then hammer them on their track record on foreign policy and the economy and lack of viable ideas to self-govern themselves out of the failed policy left in THEIR wake. did the 'surge' 'work'?! fuck if i know, but it doesn't change the fucked up rationale that got us esconsed there in the first place and the botched handling of it that required a 'surge' in the first place. shit like that.

 

i completely disagree 'that the issues speak for themselves'. especially, the real important ones. they aren't being spoken to or, maybe, nobody can hear them amongst the prattle over semantics, gaffes and internet rumors. i mean, seriously, i watched CNN last night and almost the entire hour was dedicated to the pig in lipstick thing and/or debunking/verifying sarah palin rumors. wtf?!

 

i don't know. i know i'm oversimplifying things and understand that the political game has and will be full of this stuff for a long time. it's just sad, all the way around.

[Sir Stewart]

Well I'll be gal-darned. I by no means have a PhD in economics, but those reckless lefties over at that clearly liberally-biased "news" rag know as Business Week seem to like Obama's tax plan.

jack mathews Sep 9, 2008 9:53 PM GMT

they are both gay

[mountain bed]

 

My wife has zero patience for politics. She avoids the topic as much as she can (although I give her credit for having an astonishingly good BS-detector without having to spend hours on end obsessing about it, like we've all been doing around here lately). But I guess since I'm usually pretty level-headed, she hates election season because it never fails to push every last button I have.

Oh man. That describes our house perfectly!

[EL the Famous]

As I

[lamradio]

Just a thought:

 

• You couldn't get a job at McDonalds and become district manager after 143 days of experience.
  
• You couldn't become chief of surgery after 143 days of experience of being a surgeon.
  
• You couldn't get a job as a teacher and be the superintendent after 143 days of experience.
  
• You couldn't join the military and become a colonel after a 143 days of experience.
  
• You couldn't get a job as a reporter and become the nightly news anchor after 143 days of experience.
  

BUT....

 

• 'From the time Barack Obama was sworn in as a United State Senator, to the time he announced he was forming a Presidential exploratory committee, he logged 143 days of experience in the Senate.
  
• That's how many days the Senate was actually in session and working.
  
• After 143 days of work experience, Obama believed he was ready to be Commander In Chief, Leader of the Free World, and fill the shoes of Abraham Lincoln, FDR, JFK and Ronald Reagan. 143 days?
  

We all have to start somewhere. The senate is a good start, but after 143 days, that's all it is - a start.

 

 

AND, strangely, a large sector of the American public seems to feel comfortable with this and campaigning for him.

 

 

We wouldn't accept this in our own line of work, yet some are OK with this for the President of the United States of America ?

 

 

Come on folks, we are not voting for the next American Idol.

[Analogman]

I think he will do just fine.

[Sir Stewart]

Good Lord.

[lamradio]

Like I said, it's just a thought... Not saying I agree/disagree with it.. He may very well do just fine if he gets elected.

[Analogman]

Like I said, it's just a thought... Not saying I agree/disagree with it.. He may very well do just fine if he gets elected.

 

If you vote for him, I will tell you some unknown by the public at large Stonewall Jackson stories.

[Duck-Billed Catechist]

Exploratory committee? That's the cutoff for counting his experience?

[EL the Famous]

If you vote for him, I will tell you some unknown by the public at large Stonewall Jackson stories.

 

'pig in lipstick'?

[Analogman]

'pig in lipstick'?

 

 

I can say no more.