Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Newsvine
RedditFirst the McCain campaign baited Barack Obama to visit Iraq. He went--and was practically endorsed by the Iraqi government. Then the press corps waited for him to make a mistake on the trip abroad--say something stupid, reverse a previous policy, get caught up in the landmine of Israeli-Palestinian politics. That didn't happened. So expectations got ratcheted up.
After a brilliantly orchestrated week for Obama and a disastrous one for McCain, people are wondering: why hasn't Obama gotten more of a bounce in the polls at home? Has his trip prompted a backlash from struggling Americans, concerned that Obama is ignoring their problems? Is it possible that things went a little too well and now Obama is viewed as the next Messiah?
My sense is that the trip (it's still not over, he's in France today and Britain tomorrow) has helped Obama is ways not instantly quantifiable in polls, and that his stop in Iraq--and the Iraqi government's backing of his timetable for withdrawal of American combat troops--went a long way toward reducing John McCain's signature advantage: that McCain is supremely more qualified than Obama to be the next leader of the free world and Commander-In-Chief.
Yet despite all the success Obama has had lately, I'm not surprised this race remains close. Obama partisans should take a deep breath: he's black (or, if you prefer, multiracial), his middle name is Hussein, people think he's a Muslim, he's a one-term Senator, his opponent remains one of the most popular Republicans in the country, some Clinton supporters are still bitter over Hillary's defeat, Republicans have won the last two presidential elections, etc, etc.
Yes, Obama's a rock star who's redefining politics at home and abroad, but we're also in uncharted territory here. A lot of people will hate Obama for the same things his supporters love about him. So even though the Democratic brand trumps the Republican brand these days, why, exactly, do we expect that this race should be a landslide in Obama's favor? I expect it will be close, brutal and largely decided in September and October, not July.
Convention News & Analysis »
- Atrios
- Arts and Letters Daily
- The Caucus
- Campus Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- The Daily Gotham
- Daily Kos
- FAIR
- Feministe
- Feministing
- Firedoglake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Gothamist
- In these Times
- Hendrick Hertzberg
- Huffington Post
- Matthew Yglesias
- Media Matters
- Mother Jones
- My DD
- New York Review of Books
- Openleft
- Pam's House Blend
- Political Wire
- The Progressive
- RaceWire
- Real Clear Politics
- Roberto Lovato
- Romenesko
- Swing State Project
- Talking Points Memo
- Ta-Nehisi Coates
- Tapped
- Tech President
- Tompaine
- The Washington Note
- Wonkette
"some Clinton supporters are still bitter over Hillary's defeat"
Well....one...here, anyway.
LOL
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 12:37pm
Ah, so Ari Berman says the race remains close because after all, Obama as black. And we all know what that means...
It couldn't be that the guy is the most completely unqualified as a Presidential candidate in history, with the thinnest of resumes, that he has almost know experience at home and none at all abroad, and that his positions keep shifting with the political winds... Nope, let's just focus on the fact that he is, sort of, black.
Now, who's the most racist here?
Posted by pontificus at 07/25/2008 @ 12:55pm
This was bound to happen. It's the apart of the problem of going into uncharted territory. I am still sure he will win. Happy and I now have a bet on it. So I don't think there is going to be a problem. I just think people right now are disillusioned. They have a Democratic do nothing Congress and Republican do bad things President.
As Lewis black says:
"The Democrats are the party of no ideas..and the Republicans are the party of bad ideas. So when they get together a Republican goes "I HAVE A SHITTY IDEA." The Democrat goes "AND I KNOW HOW TO MAKE IT SHITTIER."
People are a little anxious right now and I think a little fed up with politics. Especially the politics of old. Give it time.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 12:57pm
Posted by pontificus at 07/25/2008 @ 12:55pm
So, PONTIFICUS says....there are no racists who won't vote for Obama strictly on the color of his skin?
At all?
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 12:58pm
Ah, so Ari Berman says the race remains close because after all, Obama as black. And we all know what that means... It couldn't be that the guy is the most completely unqualified as a Presidential candidate in history, with the thinnest of resumes, that he has almost know experience at home and none at all abroad, and that his positions keep shifting with the political winds... Nope, let's just focus on the fact that he is, sort of, black. Now, who's the most racist here? Posted by pontificus at 07/25/2008 @ 12:55pm
Well the Republicans on this site and Frank were saying that America would never vote for a black man from the beginning. Why is it now that someone is agreeing with them all of a sudden the person saying what they were saying 2 months ago is now a racist?
"It couldn't be that the guy is the most completely unqualified as a Presidential candidate in history, with the thinnest of resumes, that he has almost know experience at home and none at all abroad, and that his positions keep shifting with the political winds"
Who says we need to teach English to immigrants. Hell the people who are most adamant about not letting Spanish be spoken in this country can't speak English to begin with.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 1:00pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 12:37pm
Get help.
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:01pm
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:01pm
Sorry, FRANK, did I mention your name?!?!?!?
LOL
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 1:05pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 12:57pm
Could it be that Obama's halo is dimming and people are finally starting to pay attention? Could it be that they trust John McCain and they don't trust Barry? Could it be that people don't like their Presidential candidates going to Europe and apologizing for America while our troops are dying? Could it be that the GOP machine is gearing up and starting to fight back?
You have a bet with Happy? At ten to one odds? You're the man.
BTW, Lewis Black is of course, a commediene.
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:08pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 1:05pm
You're completely transparent and soooooo easy. BTW, I'm glad you're now using the'LOL' instead of the hee hee that made you sound like a little twit.
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:10pm
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:08pm
Could it be that people want McCain to win, so that Hillary can win in 2012?
If you knew what I knew, you'd agree!!!!
heheh
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 1:11pm
So, PONTIFICUS says....there are no racists who won't vote for Obama strictly on the color of his skin?
At all?
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 12:58pm
There are almost no postings where you have not absolutely distorted someone's position.
Ponti did not say that at all. He was pointing out that Ari Berman was focusing on the least of Obama's problems (not that being black is a problem).
It is his qualifications (or rather the lack of) we keep harping on.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 1:11pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 1:11pm
And I'M focusing on what PONTI was focusing on, Larry.
Mr Berman listed racism as ONE of the elements....PONTI picked it out and tried to make it seem as if "It's not about racism at all, it's about experience!"
So I asked...does PONTI think there is NO racial motivation in a vote against Obama...at all?
Do you? If you do, maybe FG will tell us another "robot joke"?
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 1:13pm
Cindy Sheehan was just kicked out of the Impeachment hearing by John Conyers.
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:15pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 1:11pm
Yes, that's what Hillary's supporters are hoping for. LOL
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:22pm
You have a bet with Happy? At ten to one odds? You're the man. BTW, Lewis Black is of course, a commediene. Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:08pm
Not 10:1, 5:1. I am not the man I just trust my own judgment.
Comedian?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 1:22pm
BTW Dillweed. Just what exactly is your problem with a woman as President. You're awfully transparent in your disgust of at the prospect.
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:23pm
You're completely transparent and soooooo easy. BTW, I'm glad you're now using the'LOL' instead of the hee hee that made you sound like a little twit. Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:10pm
In my experience, LOL makes you sound like a moron. That's just me personally. But when I see LOL I want to punch the person who wrote it.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 1:23pm
BTW Dillweed. Just what exactly is your problem with a woman as President. You're awfully transparent in your disgust of at the prospect. Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:23pm
You realize we can apply your logic to you right? What's your problem with having a black man as President frank. You are awfully transparent in your disgust at the prospect.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 1:24pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 1:22pm
Sorry, of course another one of my frequent typings and mis-spellings.
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:25pm
lvliberty1,
Are you and Dillweed on a first name basis now?
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:26pm
Do you? If you do, maybe FG will tell us another "robot joke"?
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 1:13pm
Of course racism will be an element in this election, unfortunately.
Obama if he is defeated, should be defeated because of his ideas and his vision for the US. For myself, Ponti, JM, and some others, we have consistently said that we will not vote for Obama because his views and agenda are the antithesis of what we believe America is and what it offers.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 1:28pm
For my part, I simply don't understand the hoopla over this Grand Trip B.O. took - how is he suddenly a better or worse candidate than he was a few weeks ago because he went to a number of countries and made speeches? Positive press aside, this was just a big ol' photo op.
I'll still vote for Obama, but this media hoopla is really looking like a waste of time. B.O. could be campaigning on real issues not "I went here and met so and so and he buttered me up."
Posted by Zero at 07/25/2008 @ 1:29pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 1:13pm
Are you a black man/woman? If you are, are you able to discuss the problem of racism in this country with candor and a little humor as well? If you are a white man/woman, are you able as well?
Because Obama does have a real problem representing himself as a black man when exactly have his heritage is white. Will people hold that against him? Well the jury's in on the black community but it's still out on the white and latino communities.
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:30pm
frank: get over your bitter little self already. she lost. people can lose elections. quit being such an angry little twit. you'll be a much happier man and people will have more respect for you -
Posted by Zero at 07/25/2008 @ 1:30pm
Are you and Dillweed on a first name basis now?
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:26pm
you might think so, but I have no idea what his name really is. Unlike Mask, JM and I have furnished our real identities. And I might add, I have given my email address for those who are serious about dialogue rather than the usual blog jabs.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 1:30pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 1:23pm
You like hee hee better. I got Dillweed to switch to heh heh so he's sound mor like Butthead. Now he's switched to LOL. Seems he laughs alot. No sense of humor when it comes to off color jokes though.
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:32pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 1:24pm
I have ho problem in a black man or woman as President so long as they're qualified and REALLY black. Is there one running that I don't know about?
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:34pm
BTW Dillweed. Just what exactly is your problem with a woman as President. You're awfully transparent in your disgust of at the prospect. Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:23pm
I would expect you to try a little harder than this Frank. You are saying that JUST because he doesn't like HILLARY he must not like the idea of a woman being president. Why would you apply that logic knowing that it could also be applied to you? All you are doing is taking his dislike of one person and changing it into a dislike of a whole group.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 1:34pm
I have ho problem in a black man or woman as President so long as they're qualified and REALLY black. Is there one running that I don't know about? Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:34pm
What is it that makes you "really" black frank?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 1:36pm
The wild card in all this is going to be the price of oil and the inability of the dems to do anything that will increase production while the republicans will do something. Quite frankly, anyone marked as the "Messiah", is going to have problems with the expectation thing let alone the high ridicule quotient.
Posted by pyeatte at 07/25/2008 @ 1:36pm
Big Brother, I'm trying to stay on topic here but I have to spen a lot of time replying to others who don't seem to want to. Please don't ban me again. Also, are you taking notice of the shots being taken at me?
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:37pm
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:30pm
I didn't realize telling racist jokes was "discussing the problems of racism", FRANK?
That mean we can tell sexist jokes about Hillary and we're just "discussing the problem of gender inequality in this country with candor and a little humor as well"????
Oh please say so...and contradict your rant against how "there were all those sexist jokes about Hillary"!
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 1:39pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 1:34pm
BTW, CCC....FG can pull my old posts.
I said I'd vote for WHOEVER the Dems put up...even Hillary.
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 1:45pm
This is one time where, to an extent, I can agree with Berman. Obama does have to meet unreal expectations. But he knew going in that if he ran as a blackman, he would be under the microscope from start to finish. Now, I think everyone can admit that he's had a lot of support from the media. Comparison's have show that he has recieved lop-sided favorable support from the MSM to an unbelievable degree. People are starting to resent it, to the tune of 64%. That SIXTY-FOUR perceny. That's a problem for Barry.
Obama was able to knock-off Hillary Clinton because he had the better campaign added to that, the fact of the MSM totally on his side. All you heard was Obama this and Obama that and it was aLL favorable from the start except for the Rev. Wright thing who Barry subsequently threw under the bus along with his white grandmother.
Now however, he is up against a candidate who is totally respected and admired by most of the electorate. Add to that, the people's realization that Barry is being shoved down their throats and the gearing up of the Republican attack machine and Barry finds himself in deep doo doo.
We'll see how things shake out from this point on but you can be sure that this trip to foreign countries and the words he spoke will be thrown right back at him. I can just hear McCain at the first debate telling America that you'll never see him go to a foreign country, especially Germany, and dis America in wartime or not.
No-one's asleep anymore.
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:47pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 1:39pm
I think I posted several jokes about Hillary as well. Check your file. Did you see where Liberty, er, Larry pointed out to you that you constantly try to mis-represent what everyone says here? BTW, do you have any friends?
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:50pm
>>>After a brilliantly orchestrated week for Obama and a disastrous one for McCain, people are wondering: why hasn't Obama gotten more of a bounce in the polls at home? <<<
Polls usually trail event like this by at least three days, and he is STILL over there! :et's check again, Ari, next week.
Of the states that are clearly red or blue or clearly leaning that way, Obama is up 221 to 189 electoral college votes.
In the 11 toss up states (FL, VA, NH, OH, MI, MN, IA, MO, NM, CO, and NV), Obama is ahead in 8 of them (although Virginia is considered a tie at 44% a piece according to Rasmussen).
These 8 states would obviously put Obama well over the the 270 electoral votes needed to become president.
In fact, in these toss up states, Obama only needs to win Minnesota, Michigan, Iowa, and New Mexico - all states where he currently leads - in order to win.
Translation: He can lose past battleground states of Florida, Ohio, Missouri and Virginia and STILL WIN!
Posted by Metteyya at 07/25/2008 @ 1:51pm
Big Brother, this is the part where I attack back if attacked first. Remember our discussion?
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:51pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 1:45pm
Who cares who you vote for? It's nobody's business. You're really not that important.
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:52pm
Posted by Metteyya at 07/25/2008 @ 1:51pm
OK, now post the comparison to where Obama was in June. I think you'll find that Mccain has the BIG MO.
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:53pm
I'd like to stick around and spar with you folks a little longer but I'm hungry so it's time to eat. See you later.
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:54pm
Well, FRANK, I'm just glad that you and LVLIBERTY are such pals now...
OLD FRANK wasn't....
"No, the future of this country will be a dismal one if left in conservative republican evangelical hands."----Posted by frankgrits at 08/30/2005 @ 11:08pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 1:57pm
Again, FG on "momentum"...
"OK, now post the comparison to where Obama was in June. I think you'll find that Mccain has the BIG MO."----Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:53pm
"Hillary finished very strong and has the momentum."----Posted by frankgrits at 06/02/2008 @ 5:48pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 1:59pm
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:53pm
Except for New Mexico, Obama has huge leads in the 4 states I mentioned above (MI, IA, MN, NM) that would put him over the top, and he can swap out New Mexico for Colorado, where he has a 7 point lead, and win by an even bigger margin!
I personally think the Colorado voter would be a much more receptive voter to Obama's message than New Mexico, but I am not running the campaign ;-)
Posted by Metteyya at 07/25/2008 @ 2:03pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 12:58pm
More faulty logic, MASK. There are hundreds of thousands, probably millions of people who won't vote for Obama because he's black. But that's NOT his major problem. His major problem is that his ideas are wrong, nay his entire throw-out-the-baby-with-the-bathwater, ivory tower philosophy of self-loathing. The philosophy that says that because America is not perfect, then everything is wrong. The idea that America must appease its enemies, and address 'root causes', as if real evil does not exist in the world. It's the same type of moral dry rot of a philosophy that thrives in the ivory towers and leafy campuses of our country, sheltered from reality for too long by a strong, hardy, and prosperous nation. A philosophy of self-loathing, grievance, and entitlement pandered to on this site and many others every day. Those of us who were around in it's last day in the sun during the Carter Administration are quite well aware of how this movie ends.
Posted by pontificus at 07/25/2008 @ 2:08pm
Except for New Mexico, Obama has huge leads in the 4 states I mentioned above (MI, IA, MN, NM) that would put him over the top, and he can swap out New Mexico for Colorado, where he has a 7 point lead, and win by an even bigger margin!
I personally think the Colorado voter would be a much more receptive voter to Obama's message than New Mexico, but I am not running the campaign ;-)
Posted by Metteyya at 07/25/2008 @ 2:03pm
Where do you get your numbers? That is not what the latest polls show. Also, paying much attention to the polls in the summer is meaningless.
For instance MN-Rasmussen has Obama by 13 but Quinnipac has Obama by 2
Michigan is 4 points are statistical tie
Colorado is McCain by 2 =again a statistical tie
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 2:22pm
PONTIFICUS:
Not that I am an Obama supporter, but are you really trying to say that Obama is less qualified to be president than Bush? Seriously now, please explain to me how Bush had ANYTHING in his past that would have prepared him for the office?
And that's just ONE example that undermines your claim about Obama's preparedness...
Your idiocy never ceases to amaze me.
Posted by jorcheim at 07/25/2008 @ 2:27pm
"More faulty logic, MASK. There are hundreds of thousands, probably millions of people who won't vote for Obama because he's black. But that's NOT his major problem."----Posted by pontificus at 07/25/2008 @ 2:08pm
Not a "major problem"?!??!!
Hmmmm....how many votes did Bush win Florida by, PONTI? How many did he win Ohio by?
(Please maintain your perfect record and don't give a specific answer to that question before pontificating...heheh)
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 2:28pm
whenever "frank" shows up these comment threads go from generally less-than-serious to downright stupid. he must drive the average IQ of the group from "mundane" down to "pretty dumb".
Posted by Zero at 07/25/2008 @ 2:31pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 2:22pm
Colorado by 7 according to Rassmusen
http://tinyurl.com/3w5ltm
Minnesota by 12 according to Rassmusen
http://tinyurl.com/5tfsx3
Michigan by 12 according to Rassmusen
http://tinyurl.com/6q877k
Quinnipac has been way off in the past if you compare their primary polls to actual results.
Posted by Metteyya at 07/25/2008 @ 2:31pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 1:59pm
Yeah. That was then, this is now. Two different candidates. Plus people now know that Obama can't be trusted. He's flip-flopped on just about everythink that the progressives counted on him to support. Yep. Different time, different candidate.
But if it makes you feel important, keep posting old stuff. It's meaningless today.
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 2:35pm
Posted by Metteyya at 07/25/2008 @ 2:31pm
LVLIB toeing the line on Obama's polls, METTE.
If he's up...he's "not up enough, should be up 10-15 points over McCain".
If McCain's up..."Sheen has come off the Obama golden chariot...he's losing it!"
Obama goes back up..."Of course, he just had the MSM fawn all over him in Europe."
McCain goes up after he picks a Veep..."Public finally waking up to the lack of experience of Obama"...
rinse, lather, repeat until Novmeber 4th!
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 2:37pm
Not that I am an Obama supporter, but are you really trying to say that Obama is less qualified to be president than Bush? Seriously now, please explain to me how Bush had ANYTHING in his past that would have prepared him for the office?
And that's just ONE example that undermines your claim about Obama's preparedness...
Your idiocy never ceases to amaze me.
Posted by jorcheim at 07/25/2008 @ 2:27pm
Other than the fact that Obama is at least 35 years of age and a natural born US citizen, what are his qualifications to be president?
Where has he ever had an executive or managerial position?
What experience does he have in hiring or firing?
Where has he ever had a profit/loss responsibility?
Where did he serve in the military if no corporate experience?
Was he leader of the Illinois Legislature? Answer no
Was he formally in a US Senate leadership position? Answer no.
Other than actively being in the Senate for hearings and votes for about 600 days (approx), what has he done in life to hold the most important and powerful position in the world?
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 2:37pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 2:37pm
LVLIB, did you mention BUSH (which was Jorcheim's question) ONCE in that post?
Oh and please cite his experience as Governor of Texas...
one of the LEAST powerful governorships in the Union, where the legislature is more powerful and where the state government only meets every other year!
Oh and don't mention Sammy Sosa! or the oil company stuff!
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 2:38pm
Yeah. That was then, this is now.....
It's meaningless today."----Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 2:35pm |
Apparently since you just threw it out...
it was meaningless THEN too!
heheh AND LOL (try again on that one too, FRANCIS)
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 2:40pm
"These Democratic primary numbers are a good indication that despite the tight three-way race in Iowa, the fight for the nomination is not very close and that Sen. Clinton's lead remains very large and deep," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. December 20th, 2007
I think Quinnipac's methodology is flawed. They should leave polling to the pros and try to do something else to make a name for their university.
Posted by Metteyya at 07/25/2008 @ 2:45pm
Posted by Metteyya at 07/25/2008 @ 2:45pm
That's odd. They say that obama will win big in Connecticut. Are you disagreeing with that?
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 2:56pm
LVLIB, did you mention BUSH (which was Jorcheim's question) ONCE in that post?
Oh and please cite his experience as Governor of Texas...
one of the LEAST powerful governorships in the Union, where the legislature is more powerful and where the state government only meets every other year!
Oh and don't mention Sammy Sosa! or the oil company stuff!
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 2:38pm
I didn't mention Bush, but since you ask.
Compared to Obama, Bush is a giant in terms of experience. Compared to Obama, Clinton who had less experience than Bush, is a giant. Compared to Obama, Reagan was a giant. Compared to Obama, Carter was a giant. Compared to Obama, Ford was even a giant.
So how about you answer what none of the other libs or leftists will answer;
Other than being at least 35 years of age and a natural born US citizen, what are Obama's qualifications to be the most powerful man/leader in the world?
Think you can do that without another sidestep?
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 2:59pm
LVLIBERTY1:
You make claims, yet you don't back them up. I asked, with the preface of me not being an Obama supporter, how PONTI could make the claim that Obama is the least prepared candidate for president ever in the face of someone like Bush. I was not trying to make the point that Obama is supremely prepared. I was questioning his assertion, ask MASK pointed out.
Then you come back responding with pure assertions, and no facts. You CLAIM that Bush, Reagan, Ford, Carter were all more prepared, yet you fail to cite examples of these assertions. Either cite specific examples, or don't try to argue PONTI's point.
Posted by jorcheim at 07/25/2008 @ 3:05pm
For Mask,
More on your Bush comparison.
Bush had hire/fire responsibility in several positions-
Obama never
Bush had to approve or veto budgets in both government and the corporate world
Obama-never
Bush had to do the final review on life or death for death row inmates-
Obama never
Bush has had to answer to stockholders-
Obama-never
Bush served in the military (and with an honorable discharge despite the buffoonish slurs by the left)-
Obama-never served
Bush demonstrated negotiating ability by putting together corporate deals and mergers-
Obama-no similar or comparable experience
There is more. but that is certainly a good foundation for comparison.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 3:06pm
I don't know why people keep quoting polls. Polls are worthless right now. It would be more useful to just spin a wheel and guess.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 3:13pm
LVLIBERTY1:
Oh boy... this is gonna be fun. I am finding it difficult to believe you were able to type that out with a straight face.
Now, I am not going to deal with the Obama claims, because that was not the point of my question. but i will deal with the Bush claims. So... here goes...
You said:
Bush had hire/fire responsibility in several positions-
My response:
Please cite examples. It is widely known that Bush's time with all of the oil and oil services companies in which he was involved, he was there to bring the cache' of his name, being the son of a for CIA director, then Vice-President, then President. By all accounts, he shirked all of his responsibilities.
You said:
Bush had to approve or veto budgets in both government and the corporate world
My response:
Bush has only used the veto I believe 6 times in his entire 8 years as president. And under his watch, he has allowed the federal budget deficit to explode, and the national debt to more than double. And we alreay know his "corporate experience" is a joke as well. All of his companies failed.
Plus, corporate experience should never EVER be used as a reference for experience for an elected office. Working in the corporate world in the position of any power is more akin to being a dictator or a tyrant than being a duly elected official. Hence fascism. Of course, that may be why Bush joked that being a dictator would make his job easier...
You said:
Bush had to do the final review on life or death for death row inmates-
My response:
How many did he ever commute, even in the face of substantial evidence of innocence?
If I remember correctly, zero.
You said:
Bush has had to answer to stockholders-
My response:
And his answer was generally insider trading to bail out of sinking corporations. Just ask the shareholders of Arbusto, Spectrum 7, and Harken.
You said:
Bush served in the military (and with an honorable discharge despite the buffoonish slurs by the left)-
My response:
No... he served in the TX Air Guard, which was a repository for Dallas Cowboys football players and the scions of oil and property wealth in Texas. He never saw combat, even in the height of the Viet Nam War.
You said:
Bush demonstrated negotiating ability by putting together corporate deals and mergers-
My response:
A buyout is not a merger. Both Arbusto and Spectrum 7 were bought out by friendly "angels" who were friends of Poppy Bush. Go look into James Bath, for one. He was a liason for middle eastern oil shieks.
So... as it stands, you have yet to bring up a SINGLE cogent example of Bush having ANY applicable experience prior to being appointed President... except being a US citizen and being over 35 years old. Care to try again?
Posted by jorcheim at 07/25/2008 @ 3:27pm
Posted by jorcheim at 07/25/2008 @ 3:27pm
Now, be fair, JORCHEIM...
under Bush's "hire experience"...he FAILED to hire Sammy Sosa for the Rangers...
and his experience in the business world was....being an oil company that couldn't find oil....
in Bahrain!
Posted by Maskdelta at 07/25/2008 @ 4:11pm
Posted by jorcheim at 07/25/2008 @ 3:27pm
He will just come back and say that those are all lies. He is one of the people never willing to admit that Bush is deficient no matter how much evidence there is against him.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 4:12pm
So... as it stands, you have yet to bring up a SINGLE cogent example of Bush having ANY applicable experience prior to being appointed President... except being a US citizen and being over 35 years old. Care to try again?
Posted by jorcheim at 07/25/2008 @ 3:27pm
Jorcheim, you never disappoint. You failed utterly to make your point through either ignoring the facts or changing the statements
1. He was CEO of Arbusto Energy,Spectrum 7, and Harken Energy. That is hire/fire responsibility. The issue was not a personal judgment of his effectiveness but rather whether someone has any experience. Do you have specific knowledge that refutes that he had that responsibility?
And most Americans would disagree with you that a corporate leadership background should never be used as a reference for qualification for president. That just reveals your lack of good judgment.
2. As Managing General Partner of the Texas Rangers, did he not have a negotiating and budget responsibility? That is the issue not your opinion as to how good a job he did.
3. Military-you slur all of the wonderful men and women who serve and have served in the National Guard.
Read the facts. He has an honorable discharge and is entitled to Veterans benefits.
4.Review of death sentences-your opinion again on this is not relevant. That is unless you have also had that responsibility and have reviewed each of the cases.
The fact remains that all of these responsibilities put Bush lightyears ahead of Obama whom you and every other lib have yet to show has any qualifications to be president.
So Jorcheim, even with this rare new appearance on the blog, you still show that you lack any substantive argument.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 4:15pm
He will just come back and say that those are all lies. He is one of the people never willing to admit that Bush is deficient no matter how much evidence there is against him.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 4:12pm
You almost always mis read what I will do. That is your youth combined with your left leanings again, I suspect.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 4:22pm
>>>That's odd. They say that obama will win big in Connecticut. Are you disagreeing with that?
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 2:56pm<<<
Rasmussen has Obama up 52 to 35 in Connecticut. This is probably due to voters being angry at Lieberman duping them into thinking he was a Democrat running as an independent, and representing AIPAC and Likud rather than the people of Connecticut.
Posted by Metteyya at 07/25/2008 @ 4:38pm
You almost always mis read what I will do. That is your youth combined with your left leanings again, I suspect. Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 4:22pm
Says the guy who has never gotten anything about me right. You partisan babble is hilarious because it allows you to overlook your own flaws.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 4:42pm
The fact remains that all of these responsibilities put Bush lightyears ahead of Obama whom you and every other lib have yet to show has any qualifications to be president. So Jorcheim, even with this rare new appearance on the blog, you still show that you lack any substantive argument. Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 4:15pm
No, it's just the ones we show aren't good enough for YOU.
Why is serving in the National Guard as a grunt a qualification for being President? Why is helping to run a bunch of companies that failed a qualifitication? In my experience if on your resume you put that you got fired it doesn't help you? If he did a bad job running companies that should a strike against him, not for him. Only in your addled partisan mind does helping companies fail equate to a positive mark on a resume.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 4:46pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 4:46pm
Like all of the rest you also have yet to answer my challenge:
What qualifications does Obama have?
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 6:09pm
>>>Like all of the rest you also have yet to answer my challenge:
What qualifications does Obama have?
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 6:09pm<<<
Barack Obama's qualifications to be president?
1) Graduate of Columbia University in International Relations
2) Community organizer on South Side of Chicago helping the homeless, the jobless, and ex-offenders re-integrate into society.
3) Graduate of Harvard Law school where he was the FIRST black editor-in-chief of the Harvard law review in the 200 year history of the school.
4) Civil rights lawyer at one of the most prestigious boutique law firms in Chicago helping victims of civil rights abuses.
5) Law professor at the University of Chicago where he taught Constitutional law.
6) State Senator in Illinois where he rose to president of the Senate in just eight years.
7) United States Senator from Illinois where he serves on the Foreign Relations committee, Environment and Public Works Committee, and Veterans Affairs Committee.
Aside from these resume type experiences, the man is a POLITICAL PHENOM with extraordinary political skill. He used this skill to bring Republicans and Democrats together to pass PROGRESSIVE legislation.
And on top of all of this, he has MASTERED the power of the bully pulpit as one of the best orators and inspirational speakers in several generations, which is necessary for ANY president who wants to distinguish himself in office.
When you compare this background to McCain's bottom-of-his-class performance at the Naval Academy, his father-assisted appointments in the Navy, his recklessness as a pilot that led to him being shot down in Vietnam, his cowardice as a POW for cracking under pressure, his latching onto big money by marrying the daughter of a wealthy campaign contributor, his defense of Charles Keating - a despicable asshole who fleeced the savings of the elderly so he could gamble on risky real estate development projects - in the Savings and Loan debacle, his INABILTY to command the bully pulpit and inspire Americans, and his lack of vision and command of basic facts necessary to lead in a WIDE RANGE of public policy areas...it is clear that Barack Obama is extraordinarily qualified to be president and John McCain is a lame old has-been, who would have never been nominated to be president had the right-wing of the Republican party not split their vote between Romney and Huckabee!
Posted by Metteyya at 07/25/2008 @ 6:35pm
Posted by Metteyya at 07/25/2008 @ 6:35pm
Other than the US Senate experience, there is nothing there that is a qualification for president.
The Community Organizer is the biggest joke of all the listings.
He was a one man crew working for a far left radical organization, ACORN. How does that help him make presidential decisions?
Where has he ever had to make executive decisions, life or death decsisions?
Answer,never.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 6:38pm
6) State Senator in Illinois where he rose to president of the Senate in just eight years.
Posted by Metteyya at 07/25/2008 @ 6:35pm
BTW, you lied. Obama was never president of the Illinois Senate
He did serve for the final 1 1/2 years of his time in the Ill Senate as Chairman of the Health and Human Services Committee. But that is hardly a leadership position.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_Senate_career_of_Barack_Obama
He was not a law professor, but a part-time lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School.
As for the law firm, he worked as a part-time associate and never achieved the more credible status of partner.
Sorry, he's just someone who used his race to put himself into mostly part-time positions in order to build a resume for this very moment.
As a former executive, I've looked at thousands of similar "resumes" that look powerful on the surface until you really examine them for the details.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 6:52pm
Why is serving in the National Guard as a grunt a qualification for being President? Why is helping to run a bunch of companies that failed a qualifitication? In my experience if on your resume you put that you got fired it doesn't help you? If he did a bad job running companies that should a strike against him, not for him. Only in your addled partisan mind does helping companies fail equate to a positive mark on a resume.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 4:46pm
Bush was not a grunt. That is a ground soldier. Bush was certified and top rated pilot according to his military records.
"Bush then returned to Ellington in Texas to complete seven months of combat crew training on the F-102 from December 1969 to June 1970. This period included five weeks of training on the T-33 Shooting Star and 16 weeks aboard the TF-102 Delta Dagger two-seat trainer and finally the single-seat F-102A. Bush graduated from the training program in June 1970. When interviewed by the Associated Press in February 2004, flight instructor Maj. Udell recalled that Lt. Bush was one of his best students saying that, "I'd rank him in the top five percent."
As Bush was completing his training and being certified as a qualified pilot, there was always the possibility that the ANG might be mobilized to send F-102 squadrons to Vietnam. However, the F-102 had originally been stationed in that theater to guard against the possibility of air attack from the North, a danger that never materialized since North Vietnamese pilots refused to stray south of the border and outside their own protective SAM barrier. This lack of a threat prompted the Air Force to gradually withdraw the F-102 from southeast Asia beginning in December 1969 and concluding in May 1971. The F-102 was instead returned to its primary role of providing air defense for the United States. This vital mission had been almost entirely transferred to the ANG by that time since the Air Force had become increasingly tasked with its overseas responsibilities in Europe and Asia.
Ellington, where Bush was stationed, has remained a National Guard air defense base until the present day. In the early 1970s, however, the facility also took on an additional duty as the only training base for all ANG F-102 pilots in the United States, including some 15 or so squadrons at the time. Lt. Bush remained in the Texas ANG as a certified F-102 pilot who participated in frequent drills and alerts through April of 1972.
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0185.shtml
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 7:09pm
How does that help him make presidential decisions?
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 6:38pm
How does being in the Air National Guard in a non-commanding position make someone make Presidential decisions?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 7:24pm
As Bush was completing his training and being certified as a qualified pilot, there was always the possibility that the ANG might be mobilized to send F-102 squadrons to Vietnam. However, the F-102 had originally been stationed in that theater to guard against the possibility of air attack from the North, a danger that never materialized since North Vietnamese pilots refused to stray south of the border and outside their own protective SAM barrier. This lack of a threat prompted the Air Force to gradually withdraw the F-102 from southeast Asia beginning in December 1969 and concluding in May 1971. The F-102 was instead returned to its primary role of providing air defense for the United States. This vital mission had been almost entirely transferred to the ANG by that time since the Air Force had become increasingly tasked with its overseas responsibilities in Europe and Asia.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 7:09pm
Sooooo, him being in a non-combat, non-commanding role makes him qualified to be President? Hell I was a boy scout, I should be President.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 7:26pm
BOUNCE BEGINS:
Gallup Poll daily tracking. Three-day rolling average. N=approx. 2,600 registers voters nationwide. MoE ± 2. June 7, 2008, & earlier: Based on a five-day rolling average. N=approx. 4,400 registers voters nationwide. MoE ± 2.
General Election Trial Heat:
Date______McCain__Obama___Unsure
7/24/08_____41______47______12
7/23/08_____43______45______13
Posted by hsuBfools at 07/25/2008 @ 7:27pm
I have ho problem in a black man or woman as President so long as they're qualified and REALLY black. Is there one running that I don't know about?
Posted by frankgrits at 07/25/2008 @ 1:34pm
DARTH VADER '08
-- Blacker than Black! --
Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 12:15am
what has he done in life to hold the most important and powerful position in the world?
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 2:37pm
obama's going to replace simon cowell?
Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 12:22am
It would be more useful to just spin a wheel and guess.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/25/2008 @ 3:13pm
that's how people vote, after all.
Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 12:25am
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 6:38pm
well,
i'm glad obama isn't so "experienced".
maybe he won't be such an asshole like the most recent presidents have been.
Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 12:27am
Sorry, he's just someone who used his race to put himself into mostly part-time positions in order to build a resume for this very moment.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/25/2008 @ 6:52pm
ah,
the ol' niggerbump resume.
Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 12:28am
Obama is like the "Emperor's New Clothes" story. No one wants to admit he panders like any other politician because his speeches sound so inspiring, he's young, good looking, etc. He's also not very good one-on-one, and of course he wants young audiences, because they're young and don't know any better.
Who really speaks to the issues The Nation pretends it cares about? Ralph Nader. He's the only honest candidate. And even if you don't vote for him, sign his petition to be on the ballot in NY. He deserves to be heard in debates and he deserves the right to run without illegal suppression tactics by the Democratic party. Ralph Nader doesn't dodge hard questions. He knows the answers.
Posted by tshirttt at 07/26/2008 @ 12:42am
"Next in importance to freedom and justice is popular education, without which neither freedom nor justice can be permanently maintained."
james garfield,
Letter accepting the Republican nomination to run for President.
Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 01:16am
It's funny to me that Sen. McCain is still attacking Sen. Obama for not admitting the 'surge' was successful. Sen. Obama has said repeatedly that our troops always complete every task we ask of them, has has never questioned the ability of our military, only adding that many other agents figure in to the level of stability we see in present day Iraq. Sen. McCain considers this a bad judgment call on Obama's part. What's funny is that Sen. McCain, as well as most of the nation it seems, has forgotten the worst judgment decision of all, that he, along with many others in our Congress made, which was to invade Iraq in the first place. When will he admit that crucial mistake in judgment that he made? Regardless of political interests, we as a nation can not afford to forget that decision. So unless Sen. McCain still believes the Iraqis have wmd's, or that their government worked with al Qadea and supported them in their attacks on our country,or that Iraq was such an immediate threat to the U.S. that we had to redirect our attention from the real culprits of our tragedy, who our still free and growing, he owes the American people an apology for this very badly misguided judgment call. Unfortunatly Sen. McCain, this was the most important test of this entire 'War on Terror' saga, and you failed, while Sen. Obama was head-of-class. So the next time Sen. McCain decides to flaunt his 'great judgment', just remember why any decision ever had to be made with our troops in Iraq. Remember why Sen. McCain thought it was so important we invade Iraq instead of finishing what we started in Afghanastan (not on the border of Iraq, by the way), and the 'judgment' he used in that decision. With the truths about statements supporting the Iraqi invasion completely destroying their credibility, what was his judgment based on?
Posted by mikeba at 07/26/2008 @ 01:52am
Another view:
"This is just unforgivable. Obama had the opportunity to go visit those American who have given a part of themselves to America, and because he couldn't turn it into a media circus he bowed out. American troops are not PR props Senator. They sacrificed for this country, why could you not sacrifice a few minutes of air time to quietly and respectfully go meet with them?
How hard would it have been to visit them and give them a thank you no matter what the restrictions? How hard would it have been to simply honor and respect their sacrifices? Not hard at all in reality. You don't have to agree with the policies to thank those who volunteered and took their orders to implement those policies. I cannot fathom what was going through Obama's thick head. These American troops are "The World" too.
This incident shows Obama to be weak and self absorbed. He was confounded by a simple requirement which required the visit to be for the benefit of the wounded, not to the one visiting the troops. If he can't work through this simple challenge he has no hope of running America. Clearly, the Obama campaign could not be bothered with going through the necessary hoops to visit the troops. When it became tough they quit and walked away.
Senator, you are no leader of America. Run for President of Europe- which I must note hosts the most nationalistic ‘tribes' you will find on the planet, and who are not people of the World but Frenchman, Germans, Greeks, etc first. See if any of these white anglo-saxon countries of the world would ever elect someone as their leader who has ancestors tracing back to Africa. They applauded you as a puppet, and you lapped it up. Then you turned your back on those Americans who have given more to this country than you could ever hope to give.
Smooth move, Barry.
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/5705
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/26/2008 @ 04:51am
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/26/2008 @ 04:51am
haven't you come to realize that in the last 7 years, much of the world has become fed up with the u.s.?
i'm trying to be polite.
Posted by frosty zoom at 07/26/2008 @ 09:15am
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS 2008
Obama - 284
McCave - 147
Toss-up - 107
http://www.pollster.com/
Posted by hsuBfools at 07/26/2008 @ 2:24pm
Very telling:
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll. July 22-23, 2008. N=900 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.
"Let's say the Democratic ticket is Barack Obama for president and Hillary Clinton on the ticket with him as vice president, and the Republican ticket is John McCain for president and Mitt Romney on the ticket with him as vice president. If you were voting today, how would you vote?"
Date_____McCain/Romney___Obama/Clinton
7/22-23/08______39_________48
6/17-18/08 ______ 41_________48
Posted by hsuBfools at 07/26/2008 @ 2:30pm
BOUNCE CONTINUES:
Gallup Poll daily tracking.
General Election Trial Heat:
Date______McCain__Obama___Unsure
7/25/08_____41______48______12
7/24/08_____41______47______12
7/23/08_____43______45______13
http://tinyurl.com/6bcsqn
Posted by hsuBfools at 07/26/2008 @ 2:40pm
Wonder if it has anything to do with even Faux Woos the hsuB/cHeney dic'tator propaganda woos wing being outed and began giving more realistic numbers:
PRESIDENT BUSH – Overall Job Rating in national polls
Poll/date_________Approve_Disapprove_Unsure
FOX/OpDy 7/22-23/08___27______66______7
FOX/OpDy 6/17-18/08___ 29______64______7
Quinnipiac 7/8-13/08____ 26______67______6
Quinnipiac 5/8-12/08____ 28______67______5
LA T/Blmbrg 6/19-23/08 _ 23______73______4
LA T/Blmbrg 2/21-25/08 _ 34______62______4
And McCave starts siding with Obama, like he was always a follower-- just hadn't picked the right one to follow...
Posted by hsuBfools at 07/26/2008 @ 3:01pm
lvliberty1, try getting your news from somewhere other then fox. Obama did not skip the hospital because he couldn't have cameras, he had to skip it because his staff(not journalists) couldn't come with him, because the retired serviceman with him was part of his campaign, and not his Senate group that had left the day before. This was all lowballing from the Pentagon, who has already admitted to 'problems' relaying the message to the Obama camp as far as restrictions on other citizens, not cameramen, that were not allowed to enter. And you make it sound like he went out of his way to avoid wounded soldiers. Nice spin. Why doesn't McCain visit again and apologize for sending our troops to a war they didn't need to fight in Iraq? Or do you still believe Iraq has wmd's and they are going to attack the U.S. soon? Or maybe you know something we don't linking the Iraqi government to the 9/11 attacks? That is why we went in to the Middle East, right? So how has our war in Iraq given justice to the victims of that horrible day? You should have a simple answer, right? McCain was right to support the war going to Iraq, right? Why?
Posted by mikeba at 07/26/2008 @ 3:58pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/26/2008 @ 04:51am
Funny. Because if he had visited them and the media followed everyone would have said he was just using them for a photo op. Plus he didn't use his time with the military as a press session. If you remember. The press wasn't there. And they complained about.
Ahh the spin. It's beautiful.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/26/2008 @ 5:11pm
Ok, but why did we begin fighting in Iraq? What was McCain's judgment on that? Why won't anyone answer that? Why was it good judgment to invade Iraq? What reason could McCain give those soldiers for getting wounded or worse in Iraq? Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, which is why they were supposed to be fighting, at least that is what our troops were told. What was McCain's reasoning to defend invading Iraq in the first place?
Posted by mikeba at 07/26/2008 @ 5:19pm
And you still didn't defend your Obama/hospital story. It wasn't the media that Obama was trying to get in. The media was never expected to go in. The Pentagon had a problem with a retired military official who was on Obama's campaign team, and because technically he is a campaign worker, he was denied access. Only the Pentagon forgot to mention this to Obama's team until it was conveniently too late.
Posted by mikeba at 07/26/2008 @ 5:29pm
pontificus; Really shallow you are. Let me entertain you with some facts from a fellow POW of J. S. McCain 111..."John S. McCain represents the entrenched of bankrupt policies of Washington as usual." "Views much the same as Bush". "Voting record to the far right". "John is not a religious man and has not been tested and tried". "Because in matters of national security, policy making, its a matter of understanding risk, its a matter of guaging your opponants and its a matter of being held accountable." "John s.McCain 111 has not done any of this in his official positions. He's been a voice on the Senate Armed Services Committee. "He hasn't held executive responsibility". " The large squadron in the Navy he commanded was not a wartime squadron." "He hasn't been there and ordered bombs to fall". "John S. McCain 111, made a propaganda tape for the enemy while he was in captivity....so that is disloyalty". "He never rose to the level of General, and question what he believe's is his military experience is?" "Getting shot down, tortured and then doing propoganda for the enemy is not command experience. "This is a man I voted for twice, but no more B.S."
Posted by nativegirl at 07/26/2008 @ 7:17pm