The Chickens Really Are Coming Home, TOO ROOST!

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by wkmac, May 6, 2008.

  1. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    Some time ago, I posted some info about Obama's connection to BIG MONEY and of course we still hear the tired old red herrings of Obama being a commie, etc. I find the people who make those claims are clueless to the fact that the "REPUBLICAN" they will vote for has himself made votes in the past that on a technical basis would qualify in ways to make the great Karl Marx proud.

    But that said, let's get back to Obama. Seems the "Great Messiah" is among some progressives not going to get his ride into Jerusalem on palms if they have anything to do with it!

    From the May 5th Counterpunch website:

    http://www.counterpunch.org/martens05052008.html

    From today's Counterpunch:

    http://www.counterpunch.org/martens05062008.html

    And if you think this means automatic Hillary, guess again:

    http://www.counterpunch.org/santina04232008.html


    Amazing how at one time it looked such a sho in for a democrat to take the WH and now instead we may see the 3rd "democrat" John McCain take it all! Well the good news is that bothsides are losing more and more of their core base to frustration and many are finding common ground in the 3rd party world. A very healthy thing IMHO.
     
  2. diesel96

    diesel96 New Member

    McCain wealthy backers will spend hundreds of millions of dollars running "Rev. Wright" ads and other such garbage, and then the corporate media will rerun their ads for free, over and over, just like they reran the Swift Boat Liars' smears of John Kerry.

    John McCain is an unpleasant and unappealing turkey of a politician who cannot inspire large numbers of ordinary people to make campaign contributions the way Obama can. That is Obama's advantage over McCain and the military-corporate-media complex that supports McCain. Obama should use that advantage and let the Wall Street Journal hacks whine all they want about Obama's FAIR advantage over McCain in fund-raising ability. At least it's a change from the increasingly tiresome and increasingy racist hit pieces about the Rev. Wright.

    Okay - so lets say 79 billionaires raised $200,000 each. That means that they raised around $18 million. And Obama has taken in $240 million plus. So, that would mean that the billionaires raised less than 8% of his total - and the other 92%+ came from people who are not billionaires - Okay. That's fine with me...50% of his financing came from people who have given less than $200.

    Let's compare apples to apples here - the way they wrote the story is a little disingenuous and made it sound like the billionaires raised a lot more than they did. Not to mention your talking individuals and employees.

    Less than 8% of his financing came from these super-rich billionaires and 50% has come from people who gave less than $200.

    Any way you slice it - he has well over a MILLION donors. :peaceful:

    If Democrats manage to lose this election, I just might join you in that 3rd party.
     
  3. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    Diesel,

    McCain is a good guy and a great public servent but not necessarily a strong candidate for president. With that said I don't think the reverend wright stuff is necessarily garbage.

    Obama is promising change. Obama promising to clean up the the politics as usual.

    So far his actions do not make a compelling case. He has served in congress and voted along party lines.

    he sat in that church pew for twenty years and never spoke out against any the rev had to say. he was married by the rev. the rev was his mentor. He thought enough of the rev to appoint him the head of his religious council.

    when he caught flack for it he quickly turned on the reverend and dumped him.

    To change washington as Obama promises you need to be a strong leader with strong convictions. Obama did not stand up to wright during that twenty years and did not stand behind his man when the opposition raised hell about wrights teachings. This does not speak well for Obama as a leader but it does indicate he is a politician who will either go with the flow or turn on people if its politically expedient to do so.
     
  4. diesel96

    diesel96 New Member

    I know there's know convincing you about Obama's Rev....It's not like Rev Wright made a 9/11-like sermon every sunday for twenty years. Your practise of judging charcter from two or three sound bites is your hang up, I'll judge from a lifelong of good he achieved in his community and service to his country and accept his faults that certainly don't outweigh his good deeds. Whatever...... Barack seems to be recovering from the onslaught of the GOP playbook of attacks for befriending his Rev. Now.... come OCT, the Dark Side(GOP) will have to actually focus on issues and substance, because your running out of character smears. He's kind of developing that Reagon teflon shield, don't you think?.....
     
  5. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    Diesel,

    its not really a hang up as you put it. Obama in public service terms is really coming out of nowhere. He has very little public history. In that time he really has not distinguished himself to stand up for anything. I see someone who talks a good game, looks pretty but has no substanance.

    Promising to change washington requires more then speechs. It requires a strong leader. He does not exhibit the character traits of a strong leader.

    So the few examples you have of Obamas record in congress and his handling of the reverend wright do become very relevant since he has layed low and given us nothing else to judge him by.

    Someone who promises to change washington should be an innovater. Look at Obama's few sucesses in congress and he does not show anything substantial. Again he had a chance to innovate and or change washington while in congress and did not even try.

    Where was he when he claims to have been against Iraq. Why didn't he rally the oposition and start raising hell against the war, before the war started? Simply saying he is against it does nothing. No leadership here again.

    So right now the Obama packages offers us a guy who looks pretty and talks pretty but has no absolutely nothing behind it.
     
  6. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member


    D,

    What shocks me is the fact that the republican nominee is McCain who really isn't a republican anyway and because of much of what has happened in the last 8 years, it seemed an almost slam dunk for the democrats. No doubt they'll hold Congress and I suspect those numbers will grow. Under most normal years that might have held true but this year just leaves me scratching my head. I say this laughing but you know you hear people from time to time say that some nefarious party contrive the electoral process and that in the end we have no say or don't really get what we want so to speak. Looking at this current mess. I have to wonder if there isn't a bit of truth there. Only by some conspiracy could things be this screwy and our choices this bad!
    :happy-very:

    I mean our choices are these 3 clowns. A manical white guy who has IMO a Napoleanic complex, a 2 faced 8itch who will lie as much as she tells the truth and then a brother who sez he's anti war but his voting record makes one step back with great concern. The Wright deal? I honestly believe it's a pure symbiotic relationship from the beginning as Obama used Wright and his church for a base and local standing to establish his own creditials as he built his local political career.

    Now that Obama made the national stage, it was payback time to help Wright build his own national soapbox so to speak but Obama double crossed him. IMHO based on Wright's own words, I've concluded this whole thing was as much an alliance as Bill and Hillary's marriage is.

    If I were Osama Bin Laden and many others in the Mideast, I'd be LMAO at this whole exercise and what a useful tool to show brother islamist what idiots Americans really are. We don't need to withdraw from Iraq to proof to these guys we are nothing, we do that perfectly well by going to vote!

    As for the writers of these pieces being as you say "a little disingenuous". That's your POV obviously and in fairness I know you fashion yourself a democrat and thus were the roles reversed between us I too might feel the same. However Counterpunch is a well known and thought of website among independent thinking progressives of which some would call liberal. It surely ain't the favorite among any self respecting republican! LOL!

    Counterpunch has even made strong and I mean very strong stands on the side of labor in the unionist movement which I'm sure you would appreciate as well as on the environmental issue so it's not like the Obama pieces are coming from a "rightwing rag" if you will. Ironically, Obama has gotten some good press in such places as the libertarian website AntiWar.com and even the paleo-conservative magazine The American Conservative only because he's seen as President as someone who would roll back the spread of American Empire and as a non-interventionist of the founding fathers mold, I too have hopes but to much has been said now that raises my doubts about him. Like Paul on the GOP side, I believe Kuchinich was the "empire killer" on the democrat side and even though I strongly disagree on many economic fronts with Dennis, if there was no other place for my vote, I'd vote for Dennis because at this point I find nothing maleus about him and in this day and age that more than any other maybe the most important factor of all when entering that ballot box.

    As for Obama, I will give credit that he's forced the real Hillary Clinton to emerge and that's the global elitist and American Empire builder we knew she really was from her husband's years as she's declared she'd nuke Iran and she now wants to destroy OPEC although that last one I think is pure BS. I know to democrats, the Clinton years were proud moments as the Reagan years are to republicans but in the case of both men and their years in office, a lot of policy and law was set in place which will comeback to haunt us and our children IMO.

    A lot of new voters this year will enter the elective arena as in NC they saw a 170% increase in new registered voters (not the operation chaos party switchers). I think Rush's publicity game must be a nightmare for statasticians reading polling data because how do you read the data when you aren't sure how much is skewed by folks like Brett. I understand making the democrat fight go all the way to convention and I think it would regardless of Rush but where I do applaud folks like Brett is they are screwing up the pollsters and political wonks to no end and IMO that in itself is a great service. They can't count the numbers and transfer that to the general because they have no way of knowing how many of the voters are doing as Brett.

    Nice job Brett although I take it your ultimate aim is to elect McCain and I'll fight ya on that one. I'm sick and tired of this monopoly elective process where the arena of ideas is controlled so in that spirit I'm a pure anarchist and revolutionary and so want to overthrow the entire process. Anything that skews it and cause the voter to lose faith in the 2 party process I highly encourage.
     
  7. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

    wkmac.....just curious. Do you ever get the warning after you have typed up a post that you've exceeded 10,000 words ??

    just wondering.:happy2:
     
  8. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    I've never seen anything like that. Is there such a thing?
    Is this a joke?

    BTW: That's the first LONG post I've written in a while but since you raised the subject, I've posted a total of just over 3k posts and I see you've posted 4 times that many with over 13k posts. If we added em up word for word I wonder who would have the most?

    LOL!
     
  9. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

    It's no joke. There have been a couple of times where I wanted to post something (like an article) and I've had to eliminate paragraphs until it came under the 10,000 words.

    I don't know who would have the most words, but if they were attached end to end, we'd circle the globe !!!:wink2:
     
  10. diesel96

    diesel96 New Member

    Obama is often minimized by his opponents as being green behind the ears but a smart guy who is a great talker. Realistically, is there any other type of experience that is more important for the job of president than learning how to be a great talker and motivater?

    No experience but a great talker? Er, like Ronald Reagan? What exactly qualified HIM to be Governor of California, much less President?( ya..maybe we should ask Arnold) Just good enough for his handlers. Politics is an inferior form of acting, just below TV soaps and just above amateur commercials done by the owner of the business.
    Apparently, Fred Thompson is no Ronald Reagan. But he could probably sell you a used car.
    The whole purpose of the constitution was that anyone has the right to be President.

    Obama, being an Illinoisan, brings to mind the case of Abraham Lincoln, a one-term member of the House of Representatives and, in 1858, unsuccessful candidate for U.S. Senate. Even if you add Lincoln's eight years in the Illinois Legislature, his experience was dwarfed by that of Buchanan, his predecessor. Historians place Buchanan at the bottom of the list.
     
  11. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    You keep trying to argue the experience point. I'm looking for specific examples that tell me that Obama will show the leadership needed to make the changes he has promised. His limited track record shows somone who will not be an innovator but will passively do nothing until public opinion forces him into action as shown with reverend wright. I would appreciate it if one of you Obama supporters could show where Obama has shown himself to be a strong willed advocate of change instead of telling me how screwed up McCain is. I already know that McCain and Clinton are weak.
     
  12. toonertoo

    toonertoo Most Awesome Dog Staff Member

    Im not happy with the choice of candidates, but if I was in a fight, would I want a guy who cant even throw a bowling ball, a girl who cant handle a philandering husband, or a guy who could withstand torture for years.
    We are in a fight, and we will be in one for years. Even if we bring all our good soldiers home. So who do we want?
    Someone with tenacity, proven strength. So what if hes old. Better to be old and admit you need help with economics, etc. Than to think you know it all, and the answer is to raise taxes. I can hardly wait.
    Osama in some cave somewhere is cheering for Obama. And the American people just may be stupid enough to give him the highest office in the country. Scary stuff. Even Hillary would be better than this guy, Reverend Wright aside, what does he have to offer, Zip. He can speak, whoo hoo.
    Just my humble little opinion.
     
  13. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

    Tooner....I totally agree !!
     
  14. av8torntn

    av8torntn Well-Known Member

  15. HazMatMan

    HazMatMan New Member

    Don't forget McCain in 1983 voting against MLK Day. Why on earth would he do that? You compare Wright to the KKK. Did Wright ever burn a cross on a lawn? Did he ever hang a black man? I think Wright may have struck a nerve with you because some of the things he speaks about may not cut it with mainstream (white) America.
     
  16. diesel96

    diesel96 New Member

    Obama officially pulled ahead for endorsements from colleagues in the U.S. Senate.
    http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/04/28/with_bingaman_endorsement_obam.html
    If his peers are supporting Obama, who are you or I to argue specifics. There's obvisiously some substance there about the man.
    Obama brings to the campaign some fresh thought on approaches that are non-status quo.
    Obama portrays himself as a new kind of leader who transcends conventional politics. Judging by the economists he has enlisted in his campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, he may just be.
    Whats more interesting is that more super-delegates and economic Bloomberg-types backing Obama.
    And who knows, there might even be a Obama-Bloomberg ticket......Can you conservatives imagine, a Blackman and a Jew running for the highest office in American...LOL... :rofl:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/27/obamabloomberg-ticket-m_n_93699.html?pa
     
  17. diesel96

    diesel96 New Member

    ToonerII, I know you don't mean to perpetuate the conservative myth of the tough republican masculine guy vs the Democratic pansy. Unfortunately that's what you've been conditioned to believe, but in a fight I would take Jimmy Carter, Al Gore, and John Kerry, all veterans who volunteered their services rather than avoided combat such as Bush, Chaney, Gringrich,Thompson,Limbaugh, Guliani, Hannity and the rest of the right wing noise machine. Granted McCain has served his country well, but their are vietnam veterans out there who question John McCain's fortitude as a pow as far as relinquishing classified military information to the enemy in lieu of some medical treatment. Supposedly he was granted upgraded medical treatment but you have to question at what price? And then in 1992 you have to question why McCain blocked all attempts to access pow/mia documents and intel from vietnam. Was he, and still is he blocking something from being released to the public?

    Vietnam Veterans Against McCain
    JMHO also...:peaceful: BTW..with his shorten arms , I wonder how well he can thru a bowling ball.....If that means anything about being president ..I guess not.
     
  18. av8torntn

    av8torntn Well-Known Member


    I know this was not directed at me but come on man. I would guess you would be the first to complain about the swift boat veterans for truth and you have been the first to complain about wanting to stay on the issues even though when given the opportunity to stay on th issues you chose to post about the candidates name. How can any of us question his time spent as a POW. Look I do not agree with him on many issues but this is a stretch. His duty was to resist. I am would not be surprised if he gave up information after years of torture. So what? How long would it take you? Or me? I am talking about real torture not making you wear your boxers on your head.

    Do you really want this to be an issue?


    I know you are a very hard line party guy but do you really want to bring his military service up as an issue in the election cycle?

    I am not taking a shot at you here but I am honestly shocked you would bring something like this up. I would like to hear your thought process for this.

    Is it also an issue if I found a vietnam veteran to oppose Hussein?
     
  19. diesel96

    diesel96 New Member

    Lets face it, McCain IS running for president. People are under the impression that it's ok to question (D)John Kerry's military service but not (R)John McCain? Is there some kind of double standard here? Besides do we just disreguard these other Vietnam Veterans as chop liver who ARE the ones raising these issues about John McCain's heroic past thats being used in a presidential campaign to build up his canididacy. It is not I, using his heroic military record, but the GOP strategist and the right wing establishment as well as the media. The issue is not about downplaying his torture and suffering, he's admitted in his book that he gave limited intel to the enemy. The question is how much intel and why did he take the lead in 92' not to have any pow/mia documents release out of Vietnam? Are Americans not allowed to question a potential (R) presidential canidate who might sit in the most powerful office in the land and not know exactly happened during a 5/6 yr duration in captivity?

    I would love for the media and the DC beltway politcal process to stay on issues, but in Brown Cafe when I see GOP opinionated propaganda such as ToonerII's hijacking a debate and market their canidate as the rough and rugged Marlboro Man at the same time calling Obama supporters stupid, then McCain's record becomes an issue. GOP has been playing this game for years and it's been very effective, and now you call foul when more and more Democrats are finally growing a spine and putting a spin on the GOP methodology.
     
  20. av8torntn

    av8torntn Well-Known Member

    Oh I almost forgot you guys are always the victim of some grand conspiracy. After all it is not you that brought this up after all your complaints of staying on the issue.

    I do not call foul. I just think it will do much more harm to your candidate if you decide to move the debate to the military service of the candidates. It is after all a fact that McCain was a pilot and a POW and tortured.

    If you went to SEAR school you tell me how much you are to resist torture by the enemy. You tell me what information is acceptable to give up and what is not.

    You ask if we are to disregard all the veterans who are speaking out against McCain but at the same time you are disregarding his fellow former POW's who are speaking up on his behalf.

    Question away. Remind the voters we are a nation at war and your candidate wants to surrender.

    Question away. Remind the voters your candidate has no military service.

    All I asked was why after all your complaints. Go ahead and compare the service of McCain with that of Kerry since Hussein has none. I am not sure why you wanted to do this or why you think this is an issue but if you think it is go for it.