Obama vs. McCain II

[I'm Rich Bitch]

Originally Posted by Tuco

Waiting for IRB's response to my request, though you valiantly attempted to replace him in it!

I don't have time to formulate a complete retort to you and Khorum but let me give you my argument for voting for Barack Obama. I vote based on a weighted scale of five high level categories:

• Past Accomplishments
• Campaign Accomplishments
• Campaign Rhetoric
• Communication
• Vision/Leadership for the Future

Past Accompishments (Weight = 10)

I value past accomplishments very little as they are just an indication of the politics the candidate had to make to get in the position to lead their respective party. Plus, in this specific situation Obama is 47 and McCain is 72 so of course McCain will have an advantage in this category. For past votes and positions see Obama on the issues.

Although I think Obama's strength from his past is his Harvard education, Constitutional Law teaching, and grass root politics, I give the advantage in this category to McCain for the shear number of years he has been a senator and his military experience.

Advantage = John McCain

Campaign Accomplishments (Weight = 20)

The candidates have campaigned for two years. Therefore, what they have said and done during the campaign matters more than past accomplishments or legislation. The only experience that matters for being President is being President therefore the candidates start each campaign tied. Otherwise we would not have campaigns, we would just compare resumes and elect a President based on resume. In that situation the oldest person will always win. That means we would have had Richard Nixon over JFK or Bob Dole over Bill Clinton.

• Obama was able to navigate the corrupt politics of "The Chicago Way" and remain relatively clean.
• Campaign Team organization. Obama beat the best political team in modern history, the Clintons. McCain was handed his nomination.
• Against going to Iraq when it was popular to go to war. This demonstrates correct judgment where it really counts.
• Diplomacy with enemies. Obama is correct that we need to talk to our enemies. This has come to past in North Korea and is in progress in Iran.
• Obama has stated that unilateral attacks on areas within Pakistan are warranted. The US is currently pursuing unilateral attacks in Pakistan to root our the Taliban.
• Obama proposed a 16 month timetable to get out of Iraq. This timetable has been endorsed by PM Maliki, President Bush, and John McCain.
• During the Democratic Primary the notion of removing the gas tax was mentioned by Hillary Clinton and now by John McCain. Over 200 top economist has sided with Obama against this idea and it is simply a gimmick that John McCain continue to advocate.
• Obama is a strong advocate of green technology. Not only will this benefit the environment and help to stop our dependence on foreign oil but it creates jobs in former manufacturing states such as Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.
• Obama and his campaign have changed with way campaigns are financed. Obama's campaign is financed by millions of regular Americans giving small donations. Obama truly will be a President of the people, not big oil.

For a complete list of where Obama stands on the issues see:

Barack Obama | Change We Can Believe In | Issues


Advantage = Barack Obama

Campaign Rhetoric (Weight = 20)

Obama is our best hope to unify the country. Obama will have an innate ability to bring together Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, White, Jews, Muslims, and Christians based on his heritage. This is a significant change from the Republican/George W. Bush politics of division, fear, war, alienation, and cowboy diplomacy.

Republicans and their conservative media have greatly divided this country for political purposes. An Obama victory will put a big dent in these divisive politics and will make the country strong again. United we stand, divided we fall.

Advantage = Barack Obama

Communication (Weight = 20)

Ronald Reagan was known as the great communicator due to his oratory and high level vision. He was able to successfully communicate that vision to the country. The majority of the President's time is spent giving speeches and communicating US policy to fellow Americans, Allies, and Enemies. Obama has a landslide in this category not only via speeches but because he is a man of this generation who can speak to the challenges of the Muslim threat.

Obama's star status and general likability will go far in dealing with our friends and enemies. We have seen how George W. Bush has been vilified and how that has lowered his ability to govern effectively.

Advantage = Barack Obama

Vision/Leadership for the Future (Weight = 30)

Just like a corporate CEO, the President of the US is the visionary for the country and indirectly the world. Whereas a General like Petraeus, and Patton are tasked with specific tactical strategies, the President is the strategic visionary. Obama thinks in terms of the big picture. Sometimes this vision is hard for the general public to understand but the President predicts the future and makes an informed judgment call based on his vision. McCain, Bush, and Republicans in general are "seat of the pants" Leaders. They react to events in the geopolitical landscape rather than architect the geopolitical landscape.

Obama's opposition to the Iraq war and his determination to change the mindset that go us into the war in an example of his Leadership advantage. Obama is a visionary not a tactical military commander.

Advantage = Barack Obama

Therefore, out of a weighted average of 100, Barack Obama has a 90-10 advantage over John McCain. The campaign matters and we should look at what the candidates are saying right now. Not only that but there is a subjective advantage to Obama that McCain can never hope to close the gap on. Barack Obama is the modern day Democrat version of Ronald Reagan. He will be seen as a transformative President in much the same way. He is the person we need in the White House at this point in our history.

John McCain knows that his only chance is character assassination of Obama. His campaign is strictly negative because he does not have a positive message that is valid or even believable after 8 years of a Republican in the White House. If McCain and his politics of negatively, cynicism, and division win, our country will sink deeper. McCain is a old, pathetic, character assassin. That is not a positive Presidential trait and will not lead to a positive administration. It is just pathetic.

Barack Obama's candidacy has made millions of people more interested in politics. People here in DC have always been keenly interested in politics but now the rest of the country and indeed the world is interested. This is a very good thing for the country. A President Obama administration will move this country is a very positive direction. We have no idea what the next President will encounter but an administration based on a strong foundation of positive politics is more beneficial than one based on negativity, hatred, and Karl Rove-type divisive politics. John McCain represents a continuation of the Rove/Bush/Cheney politics that have so greatly damaged this country. Barack Obama represents the change we need.

[Frax]

Originally Posted by I'm Rich Bitch

I don't have time to formulate a complete retort to you and Khorum but let me give you my argument for voting for Barack Obama. I vote based on a weighted scale of five high level categories:

• Past Accomplishments
• Campaign Accomplishments
• Campaign Rhetoric
• Communication
• Vision/Leadership for the Future

Past Accompishments (Weight = 10)

I value past accomplishments very little as they are just an indication of the politics the candidate had to make to get in the position to lead their respective party. Plus, in this specific situation Obama is 47 and McCain is 72 so of course McCain will have an advantage in this category. For past votes and positions see Obama on the issues.

Although I think Obama's strength from his past is his Harvard education, Constitutional Law teaching, and grass root politics, I give the advantage in this category to McCain for the shear number of years he has been a senator and his military experience.

Advantage = John McCain

Campaign Accomplishments (Weight = 20)

The candidates have campaigned for two years. Therefore, what they have said and done during the campaign matters more than past accomplishments or legislation. The only experience that matters for being President is being President therefore the candidates start each campaign tied. Otherwise we would not have campaigns, we would just compare resumes and elect a President based on resume. In that situation the oldest person will always win. That means we would have had Richard Nixon over JFK or Bob Dole over Bill Clinton.

• Obama was able to navigate the corrupt politics of "The Chicago Way" and remain relatively clean.
• Campaign Team organization. Obama beat the best political team in modern history, the Clintons. McCain was handed his nomination.
• Against going to Iraq when it was popular to go to war. This demonstrates correct judgment where it really counts.
• Diplomacy with enemies. Obama is correct that we need to talk to our enemies. This has come to past in North Korea and is in progress in Iran.
• Obama has stated that unilateral attacks on areas within Pakistan are warranted. The US is currently pursuing unilateral attacks in Pakistan to root our the Taliban.
• Obama proposed a 16 month timetable to get out of Iraq. This timetable has been endorsed by PM Maliki, President Bush, and John McCain.
• During the Democratic Primary the notion of removing the gas tax was mentioned by Hillary Clinton and now by John McCain. Over 200 top economist has sided with Obama against this idea and it is simply a gimmick that John McCain continue to advocate.
• Obama is a strong advocate of green technology. Not only will this benefit the environment and help to stop our dependence on foreign oil but it creates jobs in former manufacturing states such as Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.
• Obama and his campaign have changed with way campaigns are financed. Obama's campaign is financed by millions of regular Americans giving small donations. Obama truly will be a President of the people, not big oil.

For a complete list of where Obama stands on the issues see:

Barack Obama | Change We Can Believe In | Issues


Advantage = Barack Obama

Campaign Rhetoric (Weight = 20)

Obama is our best hope to unify the country. Obama will have an innate ability to bring together Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, White, Jews, Muslims, and Christians based on his heritage. This is a significant change from the Republican/George W. Bush politics of division, fear, war, alienation, and cowboy diplomacy.

Republicans and their conservative media have greatly divided this country for political purposes. An Obama victory will put a big dent in these divisive politics and will make the country strong again. United we stand, divided we fall.

Advantage = Barack Obama

Communication (Weight = 20)

Ronald Reagan was known as the great communicator due to his oratory and high level vision. He was able to successfully communicate that vision to the country. The majority of the President's time is spent giving speeches and communicating US policy to fellow Americans, Allies, and Enemies. Obama has a landslide in this category not only via speeches but because he is a man of this generation who can speak to the challenges of the Muslim threat.

Obama's star status and general likability will go far in dealing with our friends and enemies. We have seen how George W. Bush has been vilified and how that has lowered his ability to govern effectively.

Advantage = Barack Obama

Vision/Leadership for the Future (Weight = 30)

Just like a corporate CEO, the President of the US is the visionary for the country and indirectly the world. Whereas a General like Petraeus, and Patton are tasked with specific tactical strategies, the President is the strategic visionary. Obama thinks in terms of the big picture. Sometimes this vision is hard for the general public to understand but the President predicts the future and makes an informed judgment call based on his vision. McCain, Bush, and Republicans in general are "seat of the pants" Leaders. They react to events in the geopolitical landscape rather than architect the geopolitical landscape.

Obama's opposition to the Iraq war and his determination to change the mindset that go us into the war in an example of his Leadership advantage. Obama is a visionary not a tactical military commander.

Advantage = Barack Obama

Therefore, out of a weighted average of 100, Barack Obama has a 90-10 advantage over John McCain. The campaign matters and we should look at what the candidates are saying right now. Not only that but there is a subjective advantage to Obama that McCain can never hope to close the gap on. Barack Obama is the modern day Democrat version of Ronald Reagan. He will be seen as a transformative President in much the same way. He is the person we need in the White House at this point in our history.

John McCain knows that his only chance is character assassination of Obama. His campaign is strictly negative because he does not have a positive message that is valid or even believable after 8 years of a Republican in the White House. If McCain and his politics of negatively, cynicism, and division win, our country will sink deeper. McCain is a old, pathetic, character assassin. That is not a positive Presidential trait and will not lead to a positive administration. It is just pathetic.

Barack Obama's candidacy has made millions of people more interested in politics. People here in DC have always been keenly interested in politics but now the rest of the country and indeed the world is interested. This is a very good thing for the country. A President Obama administration will move this country is a very positive direction. We have no idea what the next President will encounter but an administration based on a strong foundation of positive politics is more beneficial than one based on negativity, hatred, and Karl Rove-type divisive politics. John McCain represents a continuation of the Rove/Bush/Cheney politics that have so greatly damaged this country. Barack Obama represents the change we need.

I both hope that you do and that you don't get what you are asking for. haha.


I think this guy sums up Barack Obama pretty well. He nailed it:

Roger’s Rules » When “acknowledgment” means “perpetuation,” or Obama, liberals, and the issue of race.

There is probably a lot one could say about the piece The New York Times ran yesterday about Barack Obama’s 12-year tenure teaching law at the University of Chicago. That Obama “never completed a single work of legal scholarship” may seem surprising given that he was teaching at a major research university where, as the Times notes, “most colleagues published by the pound.” Unsurprising is that, even back then, Obama exuded an aura of “self-absorption” and was surrounded by “groupies.” Also unsurprising is that fact that much of his teaching concerned issues of race and that, as the Times puts it, he “was especially eager for his charges to understand the horrors of the past, students say.” Just this past Sunday, at a Chicago fundraiser, he lectured his audience about the “sad,” even “tragic” nature of America’s past. “I personally would want to see our tragic history, or the tragic elements of our history, acknowledged,” he said.
Glenn Reynolds asks two pertinent questions:

(1) Does Barack Obama think that American history is unusually “tragic” as compared to the history of other great nations? And (2), what does it tell us that journalists were cheering him when he said that?

Regarding the first, how does American history stack up against other countries you know about when it comes to sadness and tragedy. Take Germany–no, that’s too easy. Take France and start in the time of Julius Caesar or, if that is too long ago, in the time of the Cathars and move forward noting the sadnesses and tragedy. Remember Arnaud-Amaury, the papal legate who over saw the siege of Béziers in 1209? Asked by one of his soldiers how they should distinguish the innocents from the Cathars, Arnaud-Amaury memorably replied, “Tuez-les tous. Dieu reconnaîtra les siens,” “Kill ‘em all. God will know his own.” Or take a look a French life under Louis XIV, or under Robespierre and his fellow virtucrats, or under Napoleon. Ask Alfred Dreyfus about sadness and tragedy. The Dreyfus affair is also convenient for those who thrill, as do many readers of the Times, at the prospect of an orgy of national guilt. And speaking of national guilt, let’s not forget Vichy France: there are lots of opportunities there to indulge in a bit of moral masturbation.
Not that France has a monopoly or even a majority interest in such sadness and tragedy, as a look at the history of the Balkans, or Russia, or India, or China, or Japan, or the entire continent of Africa demonstrates. Indeed, when it comes to the sort of sadness and tragedy that Obama dilated on in Chicago, America has been conspicuously on the mild end of such things. I don’t deny the sordidness of slavery, the horrors of the Civil War, and all the other blemishes one might exhibit to show that America has not been perfect and has suffered its share of historical unpleasantness. But in the scheme of things, does it not seem to be an unusually blessed society, one that has been unusually spared the sorts of sadness and tragedy that form such a grim recitative in many, maybe most other countries?
Obama mentions slavery early and often, but what is more significant: the fact that slavery existed in America in the 18th and half of the 19th centuries (as it did in many other parts of the world) or that Americans took it upon themselves to end it and that today Barack Obama is a millionaire and the presumptive Democratic candidate for President?
And as for “acknowledging” the bad things from the past, what else have we been doing for the last three decades. How much expiation does Barack Obama, or Al Sharpton, or Jesse Jackson want? Just a few days ago, the U.S. Congress formally “apologized” for slavery: I employ scare quotes, because the apology is as meaningless as it is hypocritical. Really, I suspect, what is wanted is not “acknowledgment” but perpetual obeisance to an ever receding, impossible ideal of political rectitude.
Which brings me back to the Times’s story on Obama’s career at the University of Chicago. In the course of that story, the reporter confronts the reader with “what may be the ultimate test of racial equality–whether Americans will elect a black president.”
I stopped short reading that because I think it gets the issue 100% wrong. The implication is that if Obama is not elected, then Americans fail the test. But that, I submit, is a racist idea. How many liberals do you know who plan to vote for Barack Obama because he is black, that is to say, for a racist reason? Sure, they also like the fact that he plans to institute a European-style confiscatory tax plan. They approve of his socialistic plans to increase the size and intrusiveness of the government. They share his skepticism about our presence in Iraq and contemplate his call for “civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the United States military with equanimity, even pleasure. Really, though, all that is icing on the cake. They have closed ranks around Obama on account of the very thing that Obama pretends he wishes to transcend: the color of his skin.

Also, IRB is just like one of those people in Guyana slurping down the lime kool-aid, chanting 'jim jones! jim jones!"

[whatsamattau]

Funny you'd mention Kool-aid mere words after running to a staunch conservative blogger for your opinions.

Roger Kimball - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Who's slurping who's Kool-aid?

[I'm Rich Bitch]

Originally Posted by Frax

I both hope that you do and that you don't get what you are asking for. haha.


I think this guy sums up Barack Obama pretty well. He nailed it:

Roger’s Rules » When “acknowledgment” means “perpetuation,” or Obama, liberals, and the issue of race.




Also, IRB is just like one of those people in Guyana slurping down the lime kool-aid, chanting 'jim jones! jim jones!"

That article is nothing but another "Conservative" (new name for "Racist") trying to associate Obama to reparations as an argument to vote for John McCain. Again the Republican attempts to cast Obama as the Black President and associate him with Sharpton and Jackson are pathetic. Next...

Your divisive politics will not work this time buddy. Not this year. This blogger and his ilk are overdue to be put out to pasture. They can go put back on the white hoods and protest with the confederate flags again. Their time in Washington is done.

[Frax]

So you link a pretty good wikipedia article about Roger Kimball that just says "Roger Kimball (born 1953) is a conservative U.S. art critic and social commentator." So that makes him racist? His main thing is how pop culture is destroying our real culture. He also realizes Obama is a fraud and the essay I first linked is about how the left is preying on people's guilt to get people to vote for 'a black president', regardless of that candidate's credentials. Credentials which Obama lacks tremendously.

I'm pretty much anti-racist myself, if I felt he was a racist (like Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton or whatever white guy is the most hated racist atm) I wouldn't read his articles.

[I'm Rich Bitch]

Kathy Hilton responds to the McCain Paris Hilton ad. They gave money to this idiot.

I've been asked again and again for my response to the now infamous McCain celebrity ad. I actually have three responses. It is a complete waste of the money John McCain's contributors have donated to his campaign. It is a complete waste of the country's time and attention at the very moment when millions of people are losing their homes and their jobs. And it is a completely frivolous way to choose the next President of the United States.

[Frax]

Originally Posted by I'm Rich Bitch

Kathy Hilton responds to the McCain Paris Hilton ad. They gave money to this idiot.

I agree, McCain doesn't need to go low to beat Obama. I bet he could take him in a fair fight even at the age of 72.

[I'm Rich Bitch]

Originally Posted by Frax

I agree, McCain doesn't need to go low to beat Obama. I bet he could take him in a fair fight even at the age of 72.

We will not know because McCain can not win on a 1 vs. 1 fight without these tactics. This is only the beginning of Karl Rove entering the election. McCain will sink lower.

[Horse]

Originally Posted by Simas

Clearly this is McCain straight talking about issues.

I think your campaign would be better served by not responding to EVERY SINGLE FUCKING THING THAT IS SAID like someone just fucked your ass with a rocket.

I'd point this out as McCain being so fucking insane that even his smears come across like public access looney tunes, rather than treating it with any sort of gravity.


For your reference "straight talking about issues" is not the opposite of "smear."


And guess what, anyone with any firing neurons should be asking the same question: is Obama ready to lead? I just wouldn't ask the question with a HOLLYWOOD MOVIE of moses parting the Red Sea as a backdrop.

I had really charismatic teachers, too. In fact I attended the school where Obama taught, and he was by far not the most charismatic. I look at his track record in politics thus far and I am seeing a mismatch between what his campaign is attempting to beat into everyone's head and him just not being another politician via his hardly progressive voting history.

I suppose the excuse/idea there is that once he's president and has obtained it by playing it conservative the floodgates will open... but right now the only HOPE anyone has is HOPE that he isn't full of shit just like every other career politician has been.

[Horse]

Originally Posted by Frax

So you link a pretty good wikipedia article about Roger Kimball that just says "Roger Kimball (born 1953) is a conservative U.S. art critic and social commentator." So that makes him racist? His main thing is how pop culture is destroying our real culture. He also realizes Obama is a fraud and the essay I first linked is about how the left is preying on people's guilt to get people to vote for 'a black president', regardless of that candidate's credentials. Credentials which Obama lacks tremendously.

I'm pretty much anti-racist myself, if I felt he was a racist (like Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton or whatever white guy is the most hated racist atm) I wouldn't read his articles.

Kimball's interests range from the work of literary figures such as G.C. Lichtenberg, Robert Musil, Walter Pater, Anthony Trollope, Milan Kundera, and P.G. Wodehouse.

Yes, clearly this person has his finger on the pulse of culture. By no means is he some hyper-educated douchebag who cloys to the sensibilities of the powerful elite. P.G. Wodehouse? He's the guy who invented Jeeves, the wise butler. Are you fucking kidding me?




We don't have a "real culture." Pop-culture is the closest thing we have to it. The premise of the USA has long been the melting pot, right? Mish mash of cultures that all get crapped on by capitalism?



If Clinton would have won, your 'a black president' would read 'a woman president,' and I'm pretty sure the minority vote is guilt-free in voting for Obama.


ps > you won't win the credentials war because it is obvious that credentials are not necessary to do a good job at something. The logic of that is lewd and paradoxical.

Neither of these men have been president, so who gives a shit either way?

You seem to be missing the fact that a lot of people LIKE Obama because he DOESN'T have a lot of credentials. Just like the vast majority of people who vote have little or no knowledge of politics causes the simplification of messaging.

Oh no, he isn't a career politician with a history of lies and rubbing elbows with silver haired old men, setting policy to maintaining his wealth and power? OH NO!

[Soriak]

Originally Posted by Horse

I think your campaign would be better served by not responding to EVERY SINGLE FUCKING THING THAT IS SAID like someone just fucked your ass with a rocket.

John Kerry wants to have a word with you...


Another crazy ad... does this actually air on TV?

[I'm Rich Bitch]

Originally Posted by Horse

And guess what, anyone with any firing neurons should be asking the same question: is Obama ready to lead?

That is indeed a valid question, however we do not know this is true for McCain either. The answer of "yes" is solely based on sleeping in the Senate for 30 years. We can only make a judgment call on who is best based on what we hear from each campaign and how each candidate carries himself. So far by going into the gutter, McCain fails this test.

[Sinter1]

Originally Posted by Frax

So you link a pretty good wikipedia article about Roger Kimball that just says "Roger Kimball (born 1953) is a conservative U.S. art critic and social commentator." So that makes him racist? His main thing is how pop culture is destroying our real culture. He also realizes Obama is a fraud and the essay I first linked is about how the left is preying on people's guilt to get people to vote for 'a black president', regardless of that candidate's credentials. Credentials which Obama lacks tremendously.

I'm pretty much anti-racist myself, if I felt he was a racist (like Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton or whatever white guy is the most hated racist atm) I wouldn't read his articles.

The same John McCain who clearly supports the troops but voted against giving each soldier who has served in Iraq a free college education upon returning from service? The same John McCain who has been quoted as claiming he is for social equality yet voted against equal pay for equal work for women? The same John McCain who is supposedly the model person for morals and character yet was a womanizer who cheated on his first wife upon returning home from being a PoW and marrying up for money? The same John McCain who is the complete opposite of his early 2000 counterpart, backing out of much bi-partisan legislation such as immigration reform because he knew it would hurt his chances of winning the Republican nominee?

And please do tell me, besides him being a Prisoner of War and being born into a family with a great military heritage, what credentials does the great John McCain have? Stop being a narrow sighted and realize shit works both ways buddy. His completely negative campaign against Obama has told me nothing except that he was a PoW and that he has flip flopped on off shore drilling. Not to mention he has no clue how the economy works and his top economist had no response when his own fucking plan was completely shot down by Goolsbee, stating at a meeting about taxes and the economy that "taxes aren't everything". Are you fucking kidding me?

[I'm Rich Bitch]

Originally Posted by Frax

So you link a pretty good wikipedia article about Roger Kimball that just says "Roger Kimball (born 1953) is a conservative U.S. art critic and social commentator." So that makes him racist? His main thing is how pop culture is destroying our real culture. He also realizes Obama is a fraud and the essay I first linked is about how the left is preying on people's guilt to get people to vote for 'a black president', regardless of that candidate's credentials. Credentials which Obama lacks tremendously.

I'm pretty much anti-racist myself, if I felt he was a racist (like Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton or whatever white guy is the most hated racist atm) I wouldn't read his articles.

Conservative = Racist, yes. I can not make it any more clear. Jesse Helms was the poster boy for conservatives. Some are more subtle than others but they represent the same thing. Conservatives are predictable and all have the same talking points. Nothing is ever new.

Obama has spoken out about how pop culture is destroying the country. Does that make him a conservative? No. So called conservatives are very predictable. Let me help you. Try to form a post without the following:

• Kool-aid drinker.
• Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton
• Tax and Spend Liberal
• Flip Flop
• Nancy Pelosi
• San Francisco
• White guilt (From Rush Limbaugh. It is old and played out.
• Empty suit.
• Muslim
• Black radical
• Rev. Wright
• flag pin
• Conservatives own the notion of patriotism.
• Elitist
• Arrogant

Any new reasons to justify why you are voting for a RHINO? When a so called conservative says something that is not from the lips of Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity I will listen to you. Otherwise you are simply a Dittohead like the rest. Listening to conservatives is like playing the same CD over and over and over. Looks like the only way to get you guys to shut the fuck up is winning the Presidency and a congressional majority. Maybe then you guys can get back under the hoods and show your real agenda.

If being Black was the only reason Obama will be President then we should have had numerous Black presidents already. Think about your idiotic talking points before regurgitating them here. I listen to Rush. I have already heard everything you have to say. As I have said before, the Republicans have no policy, just evil attacks and character assassination of their opponents. John McCain has no issue and is not right on any issue. All he can do is attack Obama and whine about the media. He is a complete piece of shit and a fraud.

This idiot you reference is just another Republican smear merchant; nothing more, nothing less.

[Sinter1]

That's cute love the neg rep for posting facts about the great American hero John Sidney McCain. The neocons on this board should really get the sand out of their vagina, especially when they call Obama a fraud with no credentials meanwhile McCain, Bush, Cheney etc are just as fake if not more so. Keep it coming boys.