McCain vs. Obama

[Payndar Circusdorf]

Originally Posted by Havelock

Note the lack of indignation. He calls the Hamas spokesman a gentleman. He does not say anything negative about Hamas except that Obama disagrees with them and they have nothing in common - no criticism of their agenda or activities. No denunciation. But McCain mentions the Hamas statement and all of a sudden it's completely beyond the pale to even talk about.

I'm a believer that Michelle and Wright are noteworthy issues, and even I think this is a pretty damn weak attack on Obama.

[Payndar Circusdorf]

Originally Posted by Havelock

[Obama] dishes it out constantly, but anytime he receives criticism his supporters freak out and treat it as completely beyond the pale. Terrorism is an important issue for a number of Americans, and the fact that a terrorist group praised Obama and said they hope he wins is far more newsworthy than a lot of the campaign coverage we've seen.

This, on the other hand, I agree with.

[Havelock]

Originally Posted by chaos

This is what you wrote. Contrary to popular belief, even in Texas they teach us how to read. So fuck you and your little attitude, learn to properly convey what you mean rather than generalizing to try and portray somethinng that didn't happen.

Lol, my bad. Sorry for being such a douche.

So Obama's campaign is flattered by the JFK comparison contained in Hamas's endorsement, but when McCain mentions the endorsement it's the crazed fearmongering of a doddering genocidal maniac. I've yet to see anybody respond to the substance of this other than with namecalling. Oooh, he's a fearmonger for stating a widely reported fact. It's complete misdirection. "Pay no attention to the Hamas endorsement, John McCain is a scary warmonger with Alzheimers and he should not take the low road by smearing Obama."

[Sunder]

Look, the McCain camp had to come up with something to try and overshadow McCain's own shady land dealings with campaign contributors. This was the best they could do on short notice. The fact you keep falling for it is just hilarious.

[Havelock]

Originally Posted by Sunder

Look, the McCain camp had to come up with something to try and overshadow McCain's own shady land dealings with campaign contributors. This was the best they could do on short notice. The fact you keep falling for it is just hilarious.

That story broke awhile ago. The fact that MSNBC is making it a headline now suggests they're the ones trying to divert attention at the moment. Both candidates have shady land dealings and will be crucified about them from now until election day (and whoever wins will hear about it long after); I consider those a wash. Also, note how you don't respond to the substance of Hamas's endorsement. Misdirection, misdirection, misdirection.

I also consider low-level domestic corruption a much less important issue than a candidate's terrorism policy. Virtually all successful politicians have a few corruption skeletons in the closet; I'm impressed that both Obama and McCain are by DC standards pretty clean, though their self-righteousness with respect to character and integrity makes their ethical failings that much more obnoxious.

But again, Hamas endorsed Obama. The reasonable thing for Obama to do is, to use the language of this cycle, to reject and denounce Hamas's endorsement (as he harshly criticized Hamas when Carter met with them, which was reassuring). Rather than trying to score cheap and unjustified political points against McCain by distorting the issue, he needs to say something along the lines of "Fuck Hamas" and make it a nonissue for McCain.

[chaos]

Originally Posted by Havelock

So Obama's campaign is flattered by the JFK comparison contained in Hamas's endorsement, but when McCain mentions the endorsement it's the crazed fearmongering of a doddering genocidal maniac. I've yet to see anybody respond to the substance of this other than with namecalling. Oooh, he's a fearmonger for stating a widely reported fact. It's complete misdirection. "Pay no attention to the Hamas endorsement, John McCain is a scary warmonger with Alzheimers and he should not take the low road by smearing Obama."

The endorsement is meaningless. Why in the world should I care what Hamas thinks about our elections? What substance do you want people to respond to? I mean seriously, every time some dickhead dictator or terrorist group says something, we have to diginify them with an official response? It's ridiculous, even more ridiculous than Michelle Obama's college thesis from 1981, or "BITTERGATE"! These are the things they want us to talk about to distract us from the issues.

[Sharmai]

Why are these noteworthy issues? For McCain or obama? Why do any of these hold any weight? Are we suppose to infer from third parties or 26 degrees of separation how either of the nominees will act when president? Seriously?

McCains not crazy but he has a crazy pastor therefore I'm not voting for McCain...

Wait what?

Obama has a radical pastor but obama isn't a radical therefore I am not voting for Obama.

Wait what?

Obama's wife wrote things which might be racist 12 years ago in college but Obama didn't. Therefore I am not voting for Obama.

Wait what?

When did the people you associate with become more important that your accomplishments and what you plan to accomplish? I understand why this happened with Hilary since they were nearly the same on most issues but Obama and McCain are stark contrasts of each other. We should have mountains of topics to critque with respect to each nominee that doesn't have to go the "Well Obama is friends with a pot smoker therefore Obama is a pot supporter" arguments.

[Draegan]

Can someone explain to me how Obama slammed McCain on age? I fail to see it.

[Sunder]

Alright, let's address substance, shall we? Obama did not actively seek the endrosement of Hamas. He does not agree with their principles or their activities. On the other hand, McCain actively seeks the endorsement of an anti-Catholic, gay-bashing bigot who wants us to start a war with Iran "which will lead to the Rapture, Tribulation, and Second Coming of Christ."

Yes, let's deal with substance, shall we?

[Phelps McManus]

Originally Posted by Havelock

But again, Hamas endorsed Obama. The reasonable thing for Obama to do is, to use the language of this cycle, to reject and denounce Hamas's endorsement (as he harshly criticized Hamas when Carter met with them, which was reassuring). Rather than trying to score cheap and unjustified political points against McCain by distorting the issue, he needs to say something along the lines of "Fuck Hamas" and make it a nonissue for McCain.

Obama played this right by having an aide give an equivocal response. There was hardly any reason to even acknowledge it but what are you going to say when asked by reporters?

Now if Obama said "fuck your endorsement" and then sent them a letter saying he didn't mean it, you might have something.

[Phelps McManus]

Originally Posted by Sharmai

When did the people you associate with become more important that your accomplishments and what you plan to accomplish? I understand why this happened with Hilary since they were nearly the same on most issues but Obama and McCain are stark contrasts of each other. We should have mountains of topics to critque with respect to each nominee that doesn't have to go the "Well Obama is friends with a pot smoker therefore Obama is a pot supporter" arguments.

What makes you think that Obama has to deliver on any, let alone all, of his campaign promises if he is elected President? Maybe he doesn't have the ability (bipartisanship) to push them through Congress or maybe he just plain told you what you wanted to hear rather than his true agenda.

Just because he says he is post-racial, doesn't mean he really is. Keep in mind that Obama would be replacing liberal Supreme Court Justices who are eager to retire under a Democratic president. These side issues can give you clues as to who he would pick.

[chaos]

I fail to see how any of the bullshit issues being discussed lately would give you any insight to Obama's choice for justices. McCain either, for that matter. Yeah he called his wife a cunt, does that mean he wants John Wayne Bobbit for Supreme Court Justice? I think that is a bullshit line to excuse our tabloid sensabilities.

[Sunder]

McCain doesn't even know who he wants. He's flipped-flopped on his support for Alito so there's no telling who he'd end up nominating. People worry about Obama not having any record to run on, McCain has flip-flopped so often his record might as well not exist.

[Etoille]

oh noes its Hamas. clearly McCain brought that up with no intention of letting people infer what they wanted about that statement.

and clearly Obama must denounce the group thats offering peace right now in Israel and piss off a bunch of people so that when he's elected the peace process is that much harder instead of politely (having an aide) thanking a group that of COURSE doesnt want McCain in office because he buys the Zionist bullshit that directly affects them.

Tbh the fact that so many groups that this country has had trouble with or has demonized in one way or the other are willing to work with or talk to Barack Obama and rebuild this nations image. McCain's the status quo in terms of foreign affairs. That flat out starts with people understanding that Hamas is yes absolutely funded by Iran. WHo have had to resort to tactics of terrorism because they would be crushed in a straight up conflict.

But are people fighting for their homeland. I think a lot of people forget than when THIS country was started we were called terrorists because our fighting style was to ambush from cover instead of out in the open. I think MORE people forget that the Israelis were the ones who taught the palestinians to use car bombs and other terrorist tactics by using them against the british (during the mandate).

I heard Obama talk about Israel yesterday on CNN and to be honest i was disappointed to hear him talk of Israels commitment to democracy and equal rights. They have evaluated/are evaluating a law which will allow the state to strip an Israeli citizen of their citizenship for marrying a palestinian.

http://www.mossawacenter.org/files/f...0For%20All.pdf

Israel Shamir: “Equal rights in Palestine/Israel is no utopia� [Voltaire]

Its funny - the Israeli people themselves are far more critical of their government and policies than the United States allows itself to be.

In sum, i dont give two shits if Obama didnt denounce the endorsement b/c I view it as neutral, and I wish Obama didnt take up the line of "oh we unequivocally support Israel" based on the fallacy of sharing commonality of equal protection. But McCain absolutely brought that up to let people think what they wanted.

[Sharmai]

Originally Posted by Phelps McManus

What makes you think that Obama has to deliver on any, let alone all, of his campaign promises if he is elected President? Maybe he doesn't have the ability (bipartisanship) to push them through Congress or maybe he just plain told you what you wanted to hear rather than his true agenda.

Why should I trust McCain woud do anything he says? Your argument sucks phelps. "he might not do what he might say he will do therefore I won't vote for for him!" That crap applies to McCain to. Using Hamas or michelle or mickey mouse to prove what they might do is just as craptastic a way to make a decision to. Hamas might support Obama because he knows america doesn't like Hamas and will then vote for McCain because he likes McCain's plan. Or maybe Hamas really does like Obama. Tinfoilry! How about we just discuss the merits of the actuals plans? What an idea no?


How about "Obama might not do 'insert x here' because he has a history of not doing x 'here, here, and here'." Or how about in proving how Obama or McCain is going to act when president we use their previous histories? And where previous histories do not exist we use their statements and plans of actions that are given?