Is it me? Or do both of these candidates suck? (Page 2 of 4)

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/12/ … index.html

This doesn't speak highly for the whole "uncorrupted by politics" thing.  Sounds more like she's a mob member.

I know, I know, innocent until proven guilty...

Just has me worried.

I really hate Palin and everything she stands for. Not that I think much of Obama, but if Palin actually becomes the most powerful woman in the world, I think I would actually be ashamed to call myself American. Considering everything else that has gone on in the last decade, I believe that this says a lot.

She's going to be like Laura Roslin ok.

I wouldn't even ask that you say you will vote for Obama, but at least don't buy in to all the crap John McCain and the other neocons are saying about him.  Just at least before you believe something they say, go and look up on the internet or something what the facts are, and dont make it be johnmccain.com or something

Electing Obama is something rather similar. I know he has more experience than Palin, but not too terribly much. So in one case, you are placing experienced president with inexperienced VP, which many people find OMG SO SCARY and then countering that with inexperienced president with experienced VP and going OMG OBAMA BRINGS CHANGE AND IS FREE OF CORRUPTION BECAUSE OF HIS LACK OF EXPERIENCE WHICH WILL BE HELPED BY ALL THE EXPERIENCE BIDEN HAS! Pot calling kettle black? Check.

Also, to those of you around here who are claiming that Obama is taking the high road and has so much integrity not like that lying liar McCain, are any of you guys on Obama's newsletter? I joined it when I got tickets to his speech here in Austin and was "strongly encouraged" to sign up for the newsletter in order to get in (lol). After getting 2-3 emails a day for over a year that were full of just as much inane bickering and clambering for donations, I finally got off of it just to not have to clear them out after reading through them. There is no high-road here, they are both lying and slandering because they both want to be elected.

Example:
Jeff --

In the excitement of the past few days, there's some news you may have missed.

John McCain and the Republican National Committee released their fundraising numbers for May, and we've got our work cut out for us.

The McCain campaign raised $21 million, which will be combined with $23.7 million raised in partnership with the Republican National Committee.

That's nearly $45 million dollars in one month -- money that will be used to attack Barack Obama and support John McCain's effort to extend the policies of George W. Bush for another four years.

We need to respond quickly and show that we are ready to take on Senator McCain in the general election.

Now is the time to take the next step and own a piece of this campaign.

If you make a $25 donation today, your gift will be matched by a previous donor who has agreed to give again.  You can even choose to exchange a note with them about why you support Barack.

Help reach the goal of 10,000 first-time donors and build our movement to take on John McCain:

https://donate.barackobama.com/match900

Even more disturbing than the amount of money John McCain and the RNC have raised is the way they raised it.

They depend on donations from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs.  And top officials in McCain's campaign have been asking these donors to write checks and raise money from their clients to the tune of $50,000 each.

Barack is doing things differently.

This campaign has never accepted donations from Washington lobbyists or special interest PACs.  And yesterday the Democratic National Committee announced that they will follow the same restriction.

We are going to compete in the general election the same way we have all along -- by depending on a movement of more than 1.5 million people giving only what they can afford.

Make your first $25 donation today and double your impact:

https://donate.barackobama.com/match900

I'm sure you've heard that Hillary Clinton is suspending her campaign and announcing her support for Barack. We all owe Senator Clinton -- and her supporters -- a great deal of respect for running an incredible campaign and strengthening our party in all 50 states.

But John McCain and his allies are not missing a beat in their campaign to continue the Bush agenda.

As the presumptive nominee, John McCain had a three-month head start to build his party and raise money.  But we can't afford to let him have the advantage.

For all his talk of reform, John McCain is willing to rely on huge donations from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs.

We have a historic opportunity to run a new kind of campaign and elect a new kind of leader.

Thank you for your support and for being a part of this movement,

David

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America
Donate: https://donate.barackobama.com/match900

Or

Dear Jeff --

Barack recorded a special video invitation for you to join him at the Democratic National Convention in Denver.

Watch it now and make a donation of $5 or more before midnight this Thursday, July 31st, and you could go backstage with Barack:

https://donate.barackobama.com/backstage23

Or

Jeff --

A few hours ago John McCain, the same man who just months ago promised to run a "respectful campaign," said he is "proud" of his latest attack ad.

That's the one attacking your enthusiasm, comparing me to Paris Hilton and Britney Spears, and making false claims about my energy plan.

Now, we're facing some serious challenges in this country -- our economy is struggling, energy costs are skyrocketing, and families don't have health care.

Given the seriousness of these issues, you'd think we'd be having a serious debate. But instead, John McCain is running an expensive, negative campaign against us. Each day brings a desperate new set of attacks.

And they're not just attacking me. They're attacking you.

They're mocking the desire of millions of Americans to step up and take ownership of the political process.

They're trying to convince you that your enthusiasm won't amount to anything -- that the people you persuade, the phone calls you make, the donations you give, the doors you knock on are all an illusion. They believe that in this election the same old smears and negative attacks will prevail again. 

They're wrong.

And right now, we have a few hours left to prove them wrong in a very concrete way.

Make a donation of $5 or more before the July fundraising deadline at midnight tonight:

https://donate.barackobama.com/deadlinemidnight1

Show the strength of our movement for change.

Thank you,

Barack

Donate: https://donate.barackobama.com/deadlinemidnight1

And the last one I'll post although I could go on

Jeff --

If somebody asked you, you probably wouldn't have to think about it.

But when a reporter asked John McCain how many houses he owns, he stumbled and said, "I think -- I'll have my staff get to you."

If you're like the millions of people who are struggling to keep up with their mortgage, you might have a different perspective.

Not only does John McCain have trouble keeping track of all his houses, he looks at record gas prices and a crippling foreclosure crisis and thinks the economy is fundamentally "strong." And last weekend he said anyone making less than $5 million a year isn't rich.

This is the side of John McCain his campaign wants to hide.

So yesterday, we launched a TV ad to show everyone how out-of-touch John McCain is with the economic realities of regular Americans.

But if we're going to get the truth out, it's going to take all of us working together to make it happen.

Watch the ad and write a letter to your local newspaper exposing the real John McCain:

http://my.barackobama.com/keepingtrack

The more we hear from John McCain about the economy, the more we see just how out-of-touch he is.

You don't have to be an economist to understand that we can't afford eight more years, or four more years, or even one more year of the same failed economic policies that George Bush has put in place.

Now we need your help to make sure the word gets out.

Watch our ad now and write a letter to your local papers:

http://my.barackobama.com/keepingtrack

If John McCain understood what Americans are dealing with, he'd know that we need to be doing more.

Barack has a plan to cut taxes for middle class families by $1,000 and offer students who perform community service a $4,000 tax break to pay for college tuition. But John McCain's tax plan does nothing for 101 million middle class families.

Barack will set the minimum wage to rise with inflation. But John McCain is more concerned about making sure limits on campaign contributions rise with inflation -- and he's voted against raising the minimum wage 19 times.

That's a difference that should be easy to remember.

Thanks for your help,

David

I posted all of those just to show how there might be "all the crap John McCain and the other neocons are saying about him." but you have to realize all the crap that Obama and his campaign are saying about McCain as well. The shitstorm goes both ways. Don't get suckered into the "John McCain is an immoral lying cheater" just like you shouldn't get sucked into "Obama is a celebrity playboy fad like Paris Hilton". Stick to their policies and not their rhetoric.

Last edited by Raptor6894 (2008-09-19 13:32)

After your response to the "strong independent woman" comment, I was going to respond, "true, but what about the Wooten ordeal."  I'm glad you brought it back up.

You're probably right, of course.

Now what about the whole thing that was coming up the other day when McCain made his comment "the economy is fundamentally sound."  And the deal about one of McCain's top people saying none of the candidates would make effective CEOs?

Do you consider all that spin?

I could say that yes, it seems like spin.... On the other hand, disregarding the semantics of McCain's "fundamentally sound" statement,  I could still argue that the comment was made at all showed a sense of disregard and misunderstanding about the whole economic situation we're in.    As far as straight issues, as far as the economy goes, I think this week swings the debate widely in favor of Obama.

What do you think? 

again, I'm new to the political scene, and am COMPLETELY uninformed about the economic scene.  So I'm one of your few readers who's willing to change his opinions

The one good thing you can say about Obama, even if you don't like him, is he has the younger generations interested in politics again.

Raptor - I don't need to read that wall o' text unless you had a counter for my pointing out that ya Obama is much, much more experienced than Palin.

http://doubledemon.newsvine.com/_news/2 … experience

That compares to Hillary's experience but its enough to get my point across.

So I dont really know why you want to argue with a claim that historians are making.  It is just objective fact, there is no room for interpretation here.

Also, I bet Obama at least knows what the President does every day.  I'd go out on a limb and say probably the Vice President as well.  He also isn't involved in a bunch of scandals and allegations that seem to suggest he routinely abuses his power.  Palin on the other hand has been in office not nearly as long but seems to be well versed in abusing the power handed to her as governor of a sparsely populated state, and you want to throw her behind the wheel of the whole country?

LMD, my point wasn't to say that Palin was more/less experienced than Obama or to argue with historians. My point was to say that on this issue, the "inexperienced" person is either in the secondary role or the primary role. I'm not arguing that Palin is the least experienced VP ever, I am arguing that many, many people were saying the exact same thing about Obama during the primaries and questioning if he had enough experience to run the country. So, from your stance, its bad that Palin has so little experience and she shouldn't qualify to be the VP according to historians, and many political types have those same views about Obama, but you find that his inexperience is better than Palin's so its ok? Or that his inexperience means he's untainted so he can bring change? Or what? You can't rip on one for lacking experience and then say the other inexperienced candidate, who is in the more powerful position, is somehow ok.

The wall of text was more in dealing with how absurd it is to think that McCain is running a horribly dirty campaign and that Obama is staying clean and dry.

Also, again on the spin, KoNY can you at least acknowledge the spin in the quote you have? On one hand, its a "Chief Technology Officer" for Obama...but the guy writing the article calls Bush's technology advisor a "Cybersecurity czar" and you want to believe all the things that writer is claiming?

Listen guys, my point here isn't to sway you over to McCain's side or turn you against Obama, I am still very torn in who I should vote for due to a variety of issues. My point is to only encourage an objective stance over who you will vote for. I'm trying to point out the absurdities on both sides, and it just so happens that with way more Obama supporters here I am stuck attacking him and defending McCain. I would just encourage you all to get away from the campaign spin and focus on real, solid plans that they both have and what those mean to you. I would hate to have a president elected because they call their technology guy a "technology officer" while saying the other side has a "technology czar" and then you eating the rest of the piece hook, line, and sinker.

LC, I appreciate the candor and I'll try to get to it tomorrow, I'm off to bed though so I was just giving quick answers.

A lot of Neocons were saying that Obama was underqualified, therefore it is true.

???

Raptor - first of all, why would you assume that the historians are "super liberal college history professors"?  I doubt you have any ground from which to claim that.

Secondly, that doesn't dispute the claim at all.  Thats called ad hominem, attacking the person instead of the argument.  In this case you are making up theoretical traits of people you have never seen or met or know anything about to attack.  It is objective fact if it is historically true and accurate.  If they look at what her factual history is and see that "hey, she has X number of months/years in office as her experience" that isn't spin at all, and any theoretical extremest leaning you want to assume they have is completely irrelevant.  IT JUST *IS* TRUE.  If you want to go on pretending that Palin is super experienced and ignore any historical facts to the contrary, thats fine I guess but don't expect anyone to give that claim any weight if they subscribe to reality.  It isn't worth my time to have this discussion if we aren't going to agree on such things as what constitutes reality.

yeah, but we're allowed to not know these things, because we're not running for president.  You're not making policy that directly affects the peoples mentioned.

Wow, just wow. It's called sarcasm. I thought I would have made that pretty clear in my approach to that topic. On the one hand, you said "Palin is the most inexperienced VP ever. Historians said it." but then I point out how inexperienced Obama is and you come back with "Oh thats just a bunch of Neocons and that makes it not true. It wasn't just Neocons, just like it wasn't just some attack from the other side to smear him. He is inexperienced as far as presidential candidates go. That's just fact. I was responding to your quick little one liner defense with some of my own with the whole super liberal college professor attack. No, I don't believe they are. No, I wasn't using that as my attack against your statement. I was never trying to argue Palin is experienced, I don't think I have ever said anything to that extent. In fact, I said:

3 posts ago but you only came back with a one liner, and now are back to saying things I never said. Round and round we go.