Why vote Obama?
-
Now Obama’s got Colin Powell AND Google?
http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2008/10/21/now-obamas-got-colin-powell-and-google/
-
@tomsdesk said:
What the "mavericks" are doing with this seems to be case in point:
Also please note he said "if Obama is in the Whitehouse" not "only if Obama is in the Whitehouse" (how they twist the true into the false and then actually say it out loud is just crazy)...either candidate will most likely be tested in this manner: nearly all since Kennedy have been also. (At least Obama won't have be dealing with a "crisis" from a republican Congress as well :`)
Good boy, Tom.
-
@solo said:
Now Obama’s got Colin Powell AND Google?
http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2008/10/21/now-obamas-got-colin-powell-and-google/
Barack Hussein Obama has always had Google. No surprise here.
Tell me you're proud of Biden. Come on, be honest about this, please. You too, Tom.
-
Proud? what's to be proud of?, he ain't my daddy. I support and trust in his abillities, and maybe when he is elected will I be proud of the America that made the right choice.
Oh, another republican crossed over .... Ken Adelman
-
Ken Adelman...don't know him. Be careful, don't get too cocky here, there's plenty of time left for either one of them to hang themselves.
Do not underestimate the Bill Ayers anchor on Obama.
-
I am not cocky at all, in fact I'm concerned of such a scenario, as posted above ....
"Don't underestimate the capacity of Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory,"
-
@solo said:
Proud? what's to be proud of?, he ain't my daddy...
Sorry, I wasn't clear. Are you proud of Biden's latest gaffe regarding the "testing" of Obama? This is Biden at his embarrassingly best. His ego won't let him stay in the background and this could prove fatal. We'll see.
-
@solo said:
I am not cocky at all, in fact I'm concerned of such a scenario, as posted above ....
"Don't underestimate the capacity of Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory,"
I know...2000 and 2004 must have been a bummer. I was surprised Bush won in 2004, I really was. If Obama loses, I see steady work for morticians.
-
I did a Google news search and only one report from Faux news appeared, guess it's just not news worthy to the other networks, so it's a non-issue.
Y'all are grasping at desperate straws now ...tsk, tsk.
-
Really?? You haven't heard what Biden said? This story is fairly current....today.
-
Can't be that important.
-
Pete, I think he's talking about the links I posted.
-
@solo said:
I did a Google news search and only one report from Faux news appeared, guess it's just not news worthy to the other networks, so it's a non-issue.
Y'all are grasping at desperate straws now ...tsk, tsk.
Classic.
-
-
Have not read them yet, will check it out in a while.
I got a rare glimpse of Bob Barr last night on PBS news hour, His views on the credid crisis are definately better and bolder than the sum of the two candidates, and his opinion of Iraq is almost word for word the same as Obama's, he doesn't think very much of McCain either I see.
-
BYW, Tom's link is a video and not very long; maybe you've already seen it. I wish I'd seen Bob Barr on TV; he doesn't make many appearances. I've heard him speak about McCain before. It's a real shame there were NO third party candidates in the debates. I think if enough people vote third party (Libertarian, in my case) we could pressure the networks into including them.
The only change we'll get with Obama is a more liberal/socialist government. The only change we'll get with McCain is....well.... no change. Neither one is acceptable to me.
-
What the "mavericks" are doing with this seems to be case in point:
Also please note he said "if Obama is in the Whitehouse" not "only if Obama is in the Whitehouse" (how they twist the true into the false and then actually say it out loud is just crazy)...either candidate will most likely be tested in this manner: nearly all since Kennedy have been also. (At least Obama won't have be dealing with a "crisis" from a republican Congress as well :`)
-
Okay learned something today: the link to the Biden speech was to my google search yesterday...which has added content today, sorry. Here's the direct link to the youtube video:
If anyone has found the full transcript of the speech (my second link is to a partial) please post, thanks.
-
In a piece for the New York Times Magazine, Robert Draper peers behind the curtain of the McCain operation and cycles through, by his count, the six narratives that the campaign has pushed. (The latest being “The Fighter (Again) vs. the Tax-and-Spend Liberal”). But what’s remarkable about the piece is the extent to which McCain, who is supposed to be a born leader, is, in fact, the creature of his advisers. His chief campaign strategist, Steve Schmidt, severed McCain from his old garrulous self by insisting that the candidate keep the media at bay. Schmidt and other advisers apparently chose Sarah Palin (who, it turns out, has a voice coach) as his best-possible running mate before they even mentioned her to McCain. When all is said and done, it seems that McCain’s campaign will be best by a new narrative: McCain vs. his advisers.
Here is link to the story: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/26/magazine/26mccain-t.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
-
@bellwells said:
It's a real shame there were NO third party candidates in the debates. I think if enough people vote third party (Libertarian, in my case) we could pressure the networks into including them.
I agree it's a shame there were only two, but last I counted there were about eight people running for the office of the President (most of whom I never even heard of), and including them all would have been too much. The networks do not determine who is included in the debates, but rather the Commission on Presidential Debates. Amongst their criteria, a candidate must have support from 15% of the national electorate, as indicated by five national polling organizations, such as Ross Perot had in '92.
Advertisement