Third Party & Independents Archives

Bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran was McCain’s low point as he attempted to interject his comments into Obama’s comments. The smile left his face as he realizes he was outplayed on this issue. It was a do as I say not as I do moment for McCain and he knew it. He tried to rationalize it but the explanation was unsuccessful in his attempt.

The win will once again go to Obama as he is the future and McCain is the past, which was made clear tonight for those in doubt tonight. More of the same or time for a change was made clear in this “debate”. “That one” won this one.

j2t2, that was a very dubious response from McCain. He did not appear at all prepared to have his criticism of Obama turned back on him in so direct and irrefutable manner. Its what comes of holding two different standards, one for oneself and another for one’s opponents. It lays landmines without a map to traverse back through them.

Boring debate. The polls tonight give Obama the nod once again, by a large margin, but I thought the two candidates were pretty even.

Having said that, it was a disastrous night for McCain in a strategic sense. This was one of very few chances he had left to change the game, and he failed. The dynamic will be left unchanged, and since the trends are already powerfully favoring Obama, fighting to even or winning the night devastates McCain’s chances.

David one of the two showed “statesman” , the other showed politician. McCain is a good politician but I think even he realizes it is time for a change as he is just a politician. Obama showed statesman. That is what the country needs now.

McCain even managed to upset the conservative base with another proposed bailout of those holding mortgages that need to be renegotiated. Perhaps he should have specifically said it was for big and rich speculators and real estate holding companies so they would have had a comfort level with it.

The sad thing is McCain showed himself to be all hat no cattle as he didn’t confront Obama head on with the phony charges his campaign has been spouting the past few days.

Clearly an Obama win.

It was just not a very interesting debate. It seemed that all of the answers were just excerpts from the stump speeches, and little was different from last week. The Town Hall format was supposed to make a difference in how the candidates answered questions, but (except for the effective moment with McCain shaking the hand of the Chief Petty Officer) it didn’t really make a difference. The rules were so confining and the crowd was so obediently polite that the format didn’t open things up at all. Heck, both candidates whining about the rules (to which they agreed!) will probably be the main point of ridicule on SNL.

Both candidates played it safe. For Obama, that’s ok because he’s currently very far ahead (FiveThirtyEight gives him a 89.2% chance of winning on November 4 and 270towin gives him a 99.1% lead at this moment). For McCain, though, this debate was just not enough. Barring some huge unexpected situation, this debate and next week’s debate are likely McCain’s last chances to change people’s minds. I just don’t see that McCain did anything to change the race.

Perhaps McCain’s problem is that he has used up his chances to shake things up. He’s already rolled the dice at least four times in the last few weeks: the surprising “Celebrity” ads; canceling the first day of the RNC; the shocking Sarah Palin choice; and the silly “suspension” stunt). Some of these worked for him (Celebrity, RNC, Palin at first) and some flopped (Palin once she was interviewed and the “suspension”). He needed a game changer in this debate, but maybe his bag of tricks has simply run out.

And even if he finds another trick, chances are that it wouldn’t be successful. Looking at the four gambles he took, the first was very successful at improving his numbers compared to Obama, but each successive gamble was less successful than its predecessor. It could be just coincidence (or a artifact of my bias), but I think we might be seeing diminishing returns as each gamble makes him look less Presidential.

McCain both needed a gamble tonight and would likely have been hurt by a gamble tonight. Not a good place for him to be.

LawnBoy,
Agreed. The format was completely lacking in any spontaneity. For a ‘maverick,’ McCain was surprisingly passive in a critical situation. It would have been a worthwhile gamble to skip the canned repitition of portions of his stump speech, and risked creating spontaneity. There was a crowd of people sitting right in front of him. Why not risk interacting? Ask questions, engage in some back and forth, a real conversation? Anything would have been better for McCain than what happened tonight.

The opportunity was there for the taking. Playing it safe when he was down, and sinking fast, made no sense.

Aparently Palin is being sent out again tomorrow to continue inciting the crowds. Perhaps that was the logic and intent in the first place. They needed someone with some degree of attraction, yet was totally expendable.
If I were Cindy, I think I would have gone to a different home tonight, and not the same one as the old duffer. I’m sure both the night, and McCain were going to be ugly!!
McCains actions seemed strange tonight, to me, anyway. He had an obvious attitude, and his restlessness came off as aggression. He seemed to violate Obamas’ space and hogged the camera shots.
Big loss!

Maybe I missed it, but did McCain refuse to shake Obama’s hand. At the end, I though Obama offered his hand, and McCain turned away. Maybe it was just an innocent miscommunication.

Heh. The right wingers are torching McCain for tonight’s performance.

I don’t know phx8…by that time I was really pretty bored. The format was just not conducive to a true debate. They weren’t really allowed to challenge, or correct a statement made with much detail. Brokaw kind of over-managed the event, I think.
Is the next one going to be the same format, or what? If I’ve heard, I’ve either forgotten or just blown it off… ;)

phx8,

The Handshake

As I watched the debate and not thinking about the context of the race I thought it was pretty even as a contest. I don’t think Obama did anything spectacular though he had a couple of good lines. McCain, likewise did not distinguish himself. I understand the reason for a forum of this type - getting the public involved and sometimes they ask questions that the MSM wouldn’t ask but the lack of follow limited the “debate” part of the debate. Also, the silent audiences are a little disturbing - like the proverbial crickets chirping especially after McCain tried to be funny. Even if what he had to say was funny the lack of audience response made it unfunny.

When it comes down to it America is buyin’ what McCain is sellin’ if he doesn’t have anything more to offer he might as well start folding up shop. He did recommend a further bailout of mortgages that won’t make economic conservatives very happy. He really is in a bad place he is caught between having to excite his base with all the nastiness and having to appeal to independents who are turned off by that stuff. Barring something dramatic like a picture of Obama and Bin Laden in bed together it is pretty much over.

Brokaw was lame, no doubt. He did over-manage, and both candidates played it safe.

I believe the last debate will be the same format as the first, but focus on the economy.

An intangible that works against McCain and for Obama is simply appearance. McCain looks old. Obama looks young and composed and confident.

Thanks….

LawnBoy,
Thanks for the link. I’m not sure about trusting my perceptions of that handshake, or lack thereof. It looks like McCain would not shake hands with Obama, and that is a really classless act. I’d be curious to see how others weigh in on this.

Republican strategist Peggy Noonan said John McCain is “not big enough for the moment,” and even though it’s really just a small gesture, that kind of rude behavior confirms her statement. It tells everyone just who is really willing to reach across the aisle, and who is not.

phx8, the format and rules were designed and agreed upon by the campaigns, NOT Brokaw. Don’t blame Brokaw for what McCain and Obama put insisted on, which was SAFETY.

The reason the debate was boring, the rules aside, was because the format was designed to insure neither candidate risked anything. Not with the audience, and not with each other. Unfortunately for McCain, that advantages the front runner in the polls, not him. For a man with such an ego about his military prowess, he sure is risk averse when it comes to mixing it up with a young upstart like Obama.

Where was the courage, the bold and daring, the machismo which McCain brags about all the time when referring to his career and past? McCain is a fraud IMO and I have maintained that position for quite some time now, ever since learning about his history and hearing him talk about his history in his own words.

This is a man who, by his own words, is full of regrets and guilt for past actions. Such feelings about oneself do not translate into in boldness, fearless response to criticism, and courage under fire. The way Obama smacked McCain back with bomb bomb Iran, and Cheering the invasion of Iraq after McCain attempted smacked Obama with Obama’s saying he would go after bin Laden, is the kind of thing McCain is afraid of.

And there is a self-fulfilling prophecy lurking behind every fear. Most psychologists are acutely aware of that fundamental of human behavior. McCain’s past lacks consistency and constancy, and as weaknesses, these traits now permeate his campaign of contradicitons.

Hm - the handshake.

When McCain was flying jets, there was still quite a bit of racism in the military. Filipino immigrants who were in the Navy at that time had only recently been granted permission to be in specialties other than the military equivalent of ‘cabin boy’. Not so long ago, McCain referred to the Vietnamese as ‘gooks’.

Sure, his wife may have adopted a non-white child…but that means nothing. I’ve seen many, many times where “person A” of one color shows real kindness to “person B”, who is another color…all the while “person A” is as racist as the day is long. All that means is that “person A” is pretty good at disguising his or her thoughts.

Is McCain racist? Maybe. Don’t know. I hope we’ll never have the chance to know.

I want to add here that I was very disappointed by Obama’s thinking tonight on a number of issues. His insistence on cutting taxes for 95% of taxpayers is not only a lie, but, a contradiction to what he said in the last debate, that some of his plans would need to be modified in light of the current economic situation.

Obama knows all too well that we are facing a recession and very slow growth if any in 2009. That means dramatically lower federal revenues, and much higher deficits, even higher than any under GW Bush, if tries to go through with this tax cuts in full. It was abysmally dishonest of him to defend his previous tax cut plans tonight.

He should have risked a bit of courage and leveled with the American people. The independents get it, that our government is going broke here, and a majority would likely have respected such a fresh breath of honesty in this debate.

Obama also demonstrated very shallow thinking about attacking into Pakistan to take out bin Laden. He either has no plan for dealing with the potential repercussion scenarios of such a move, or, they are so scary as to be avoided at all cost during an election campaign. This too, is very dishonest toward voters who have a vested interest in knowing what those consequences might be.

Finally, his response to Putin and Russia was lame at best. The only solid point he made was on cutting Russia’s petro dollars by weaning ourselves off foreign oil imports in 10 years. But, make no mistake, Russia is going to use this new found wealth to assert its authoritarian rule beyond its borders, and Obama has no, or is not sharing any, plans for dealing with the VERY REAL potential for another cold war arms race with an economically renewed Russia.

To be fair, McCain was equally unforthcoming on these minor incidental details of monumental consequence to the American voters and their children going forward.

Both of them sucked like a Hoover on nuts and bolts revenues and spending specifics that would potentially address the bankrupting of the U.S. government.

David -

“And there is a self-fulfilling prophecy lurking behind every fear. Most psychologists are acutely aware of that fundamental of human behavior. McCain’s past lacks consistency and constancy, and as weaknesses, these traits now permeate his campaign of contradicitons.”

Bingo! And his campaign’s getting close to calling ‘bingo’ right now, to borrow a bit of Navy pilot lingo. IMO his campaign’s slogan should be “In Diebold We Trust”…because it looks increasingly like Diebold’s his only hope.

Is McCain racist? Maybe.

The only ones I hear bringing up race in this campaign is the left. Considering their history and what many see as the using of a race’s needs for political gains, you’d think they would keep their mouths shut about it unless it was something obvious.

Progressives racists? Maybe.

I’m so sad to say it, but the liberals have at least the next four years to show us what an Obama presidency can do. I have absolutely no faith that it will do anything but prop up a bigger welfare tax-and-spend state to the further detriment of our economy - but one thing is clear - McCain is not a winner - and Obama is.

Obama is a better speaker, despite the disrespect of often using McCain’s first name, he does appear more gracious. He is quick to smile, and comes off as presidential. McCain is quick to wrinkle and frown - it’s unfair. Cest la Vi.

Nothing short of a massive terrorist attack could steer this country McCain’s way, and if that happens between now and election day then I’ll buy the conspiracy theories and God help us.

As for Watchblog, I have made a point to speak my mind here, but Obama has too many personal qualities that are presidential for his policies to matter.

David - your last line says McCain’s past lacks consistency and constancy, implying that Obama’s does not, and you are right, Obama has consistently voted radical left. Perhaps this country needs a slap in the face from the left hand now after a hard slap from the right hand before it will awaken and put a stop to the corruption of Washington.

I will say this, electing a black man will provide long lasting water to douse the bogus and fiery claims from the left that this is a fundamentally racist nation. Maybe after November that one-trick pony can finally be put down.

I can’t wait to see what job creation looks like after Obama’s tax increases hit the wallets of the nations producers… I will be letting my employees go when I start taking home less than they do.

Rhinehold - If you think race isn’t an issue brought up by the right…then you haven’t been paying attention (or you’ve been paying lots of attention, but just not any that might tell you what you don’t want to hear). Given my life story, I think I could say I’m better acquainted with racism than the great majority of my fellow whites…and it is there among the right-wingers, sir.

A little story - back in ‘76, I attended an all-white school in Indianola, Mississippi. The N-word was an everyday thing, as were the jokes that came along with them. I didn’t know better, and I told just as many as anyone else. The next year I attended a school in Ruleville, MS, where I was one of about 20 whites in a student body of about 480. I experienced almost NO racism there…and that was the year that “Roots” came out.

And I couldn’t help but remember such experiences when the Democratic convention had 40% minorities, and the Republican convention had maybe 1%.

I have seen that the more racially homogeneous a group, the more racially prejudiced they will be against those who are not one of that group. The proof can be found in Japan, in China, in the Middle East, in every racially ‘pure’ culture.

Glenn’s rule on racism: The level of racism is inversely proportional (if roughly so) to the level of racial diversity in any sizable group of people.

I strongly feel this would apply to the Republican party. Prove me wrong if you can, please.

If you did not watch the debate, you did not get lied to.

This may be the first time in our history that we elect a person president whom is known, before hand, to be criminally neglegent in the conduct of his duties as an elected official.

There is no longer any doubt that the two political parties, the corporations and the media are co-conspirators, both in the suppression of other voices and in the creation of a capitalist oligarchy that is looking more and more like fascism.

The Mantra of the American people: See the evil, hear the evil, speak of the evil, reward the evil. Our national anthem,”Lie To Me.”

What message does America send to the world as we prepare to reelect politicians that are bankrupt of morals and ideas?

David

One of the reasons that neither was hot last night was that each of their respective ecomomic advisors warned them about the Aisian and european markets this morning.

Thus, both had to spin on that subject as they ( and no one else for that matter), have a clue as to what to do except to let all the dead wood clear out of the system.

Here is what McCain has to do:

9I know that McCain’s advisors read WB too becasue anything I say they do) :)

1. McCain has to pound home this litany:
Carter: Clinton: Fannie and Freddy relationship between the two; Barney and Dodd.

If a link is established between Democratic zeal for housing for the poor and a straight line to Clinton and Fannie, then he will effectively counter the Bush bashing.

As any dolt knows, blame Busgh for everything, but this guy did not start the this problem.

In the law, Democratic zeal was the “proximate cause ” of this problem.

Ask yourself “Who CREATED the harm? Who createe this situation?

Answer lies with the Dems.

At worst, Bush failed to regulate,but wasn’t the proximate cause, the leagl cause of this problem.

If you think race isn’t an issue brought up by the right…then you haven’t been paying attention (or you’ve been paying lots of attention, but just not any that might tell you what you don’t want to hear).

Did I mention the right? No, I pretty much pointed out that your race baiting was disgusting and gave you a taste of your own medicine. Didn’t like it? Perhaps you shouldn’t be throwing out the accusations so ignorantly in the future.

Given my life story, I think I could say I’m better acquainted with racism than the great majority of my fellow whites…and it is there among the right-wingers, sir.

What a crock. If you think there is such a thing as race then you will eventually fall into racist thoughts. Only by shedding it will anyone rise above it and it knows know party or political lines, Glenn. As evidenced by your attempt to wield the attack at an opponent so disgustingly.

And I couldn’t help but remember such experiences when the Democratic convention had 40% minorities, and the Republican convention had maybe 1%.

There are political reasons for this considering that the party of the abolitionists were the Republicans and the party of the Jim Crowe laws were the Democrats at one time. It has to do with identifying a chance to take political power, not with enlightenment. Do you really think that progressives and liberals are just incapable of being racist? Or is it more likely that the ones that are racist are just using those of color for their own political purposes?

Painting with a wide brush makes it hard to stay in the lines. It also gets a lot wrong. But is sure is convenient, isn’t it?

I strongly feel this would apply to the Republican party. Prove me wrong if you can, please.

Your analysis is not correct, but it is also besides the point. Not once did I mention the republican party, yet you seem to just want to rise to the occasion of being just a little bit better than them. In fact, that is really what this presidential and congressional debate has been about for this year and the past several elections, hasn’t it?

You are the one who threw out ignorant and hateful accusations of racism, not me. That you helped me make my point so well makes it clear, to me, that few people are really ready to move beyond race, even those that profess to be champions of it.

I see the Racism issue spewed around from both sides some folks speak from experience such as being a child in the 1950s and 1960s or going through it, our country has had a sad history of it and it still exists today, we must look within, if someone thinks or implies that pulling a lever one way or another automatically makes one a racist then i think we have truly failed this great idea.

Obama - McCain Debate 2 - A Winner Emerges.

But it mostly likely ain’t America.

Both of the candidates’ voting records, positions, and deeds stink.

Neither of them have a clue as to how they are going to fund all of their grandiose programs.

McCain lost, because he appeared to be a bigger hyprocrite than Obama. Especially the statements about speaking carefully to other nations, despite his “Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran” comment. He certainly set himself up on that one. What a total idiot. Obama was probably saying to himself “OHHhh boy, I’ve got a zinger for him … Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran”. If McCain had any sense, he would stop going down that route, yet this isn’t the first time McCain set himself up on that issue.

But both are hypocrites, FOR-SALE, elitist, deceitful, irresponsible, and demonstrative of the pathetic crop of choices coming out of Congress and the corrupt and dysfunctional political system in America.

Both have had associations with questionable people. Both have received perks and campaign donations from questionable people (e.g. Charles Keating, Tony Rezko, etc.).

Corruption and greed is so rampant, it is no wonder none of the candidates can say with a straight face that they are without sin.

However, voters are culpable too.

After all, it is the voters who give Congress dismally low approval ratings, but then repeatedly reward those same incumbent politicians with 85%-to-90% approval ratings.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

By the way, BOTH candidates want to make us believe they don’t vote on pork-barrel, when BOTH of them just voted on one of the BIGGEST pork-barrel BILLs in history (H.R. 1424) to bail-out irresponsible and dishonest banks and corporations, and stick it to the tax payers (again).

“That One” was the clear winner last night.
McCain looked, sounded and acted like an angry, tired and frail old man who has already been beaten by his younger, smarter, and better prepared opponent. Lots of “get off my lawn” vibe on display last night.

Again McCain displayed an attitude of contempt for Obama. It came through many times in the course of the debate — which was “town hall” style as he himself had requested — though it didn’t help him one iota.

Can any of you imagine McCain pointing and saying “That One” to any other fellow Democratic Senator as McCain did to Obama last night? Or refusing to shake their hand afterward?
No, I can’t either. I really don’t know if it’s racism or simply hatred powering this attitude, but the blatant disrespect is more than obvious and completely undeniable.
What an unwise, immature, erratic, vicious, and classless Sore Loser John McCain has proven to be.

This race for the presidency is just about over — thank goodness — and I think most of us know who the winner will be:
Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and We the People.

Boring. A most succinct description of last night’s debate.

Why?

There were no “town hall” questions. There were no “boxers or briefs” questions. All the questions asked (and picked) by Brokaw played directly to the candidate’s talking points.

All Obama and McCain had to do is remember their stump speeches and blather for 90 minutes.

Obama…McCain…Brokaw…pathetic.

We the People

Well, you were almost right…

Veritas Vincit,

Using the colloquial “that one” and this missed handshake are hardly indicators of anything except age.

I cannot, nor can anyone say, from the video I’ve seen, whether or not John saw Barrack’s out reached hand. Cindy saw it, and grabbed it.

The phrase “that one” I’ve heard used by my grandparents without any kind of racial or mean connotation attached.

Rhinehold:

To misquote a former President, it depends on the meaning of “we”.

The race issue in this presidential race might be a factor but seeing as I thought that all but the most ardent racists would keep their views close to the vest. I have been a bit surprised that I have heard so much anecdotal evidence that some wouldn’t vote for a person because of his color. Not that it is happening but that people admit it. But I think much of the racism is more subtle and those that will not vote for Obama because of his color will say “he’s not experienced enough” “he’s too liberal” or some other excuse to mask the real reason (before anyone goes off on me - I don’t think that everyone who doesn’t like Obama because of these legitimate reasons are racists just that those that are racists will use convenient excuses). That being said, it isn’t Republican racism, it is Democratic and Independent racism that will be the factor. A Republican racist would vote for John McCain no matter whether Obama is black, white, red, yellow, or green. Not that there aren’t race problems in the GOP - just look at their convention and you see their problems. They don’t have a platform that has appeal outside the rich white, and poor white vote (which is an interesting demographic). It’s people that would otherwise agree with the basic platform Obama is running on but voting for McCain because of his color. That being said, I don’t think that we will see a “Bradley effect” come election day. I would think that most of the polls are as accurate as they ever are. It might be costing him a couple of points in the race and he might be up by 10 or 11 points rather than 6 or 7 either way, with the current climate and past couple of close elections would be a resounding blow out.

The debate would have been a lot more exciting and a lot more informative with Ralph on the stage.

Rhinehold -

Did I mention the right? No, I pretty much pointed out that your race baiting was disgusting and gave you a taste of your own medicine.

What you said, Rhinehold, was “The only ones I hear bringing up race in this campaign is the left.” Logically, if you say ONLY ONE group (out of two groups) is doing a thing, then you are by extension claiming that the other group is NOT doing that same thing. That’s basic logic, Rhinehold…and that’s why I said you haven’t been paying attention.

What a crock. If you think there is such a thing as race then you will eventually fall into racist thoughts. Only by shedding it will anyone rise above it and it knows know party or political lines, Glenn.

You were replying to my statement that, given my life story, I’m much more acquainted with racism than are most of my fellow whites. Rhinehold, you do not know my life story. You’re taking the old Libertarian (AND Republican) line of “Okay, we agree racism’s wrong so we won’t do it anymore - so if you accuse us of being racist, it’s actually YOU who’s racist.” What a crock, indeed!

Rhinehold, are you truly so naive? You can outlaw racism all you want. You can make it as politically incorrect at the point of a gun if you want…but as long as there different races of people, there will be racism. As with any other crime, you’ll never be completely rid of it. All you can do is expose it and - if appropriate - prosecute it.

There are political reasons for this considering that the party of the abolitionists were the Republicans and the party of the Jim Crowe laws were the Democrats at one time. It has to do with identifying a chance to take political power, not with enlightenment. Do you really think that progressives and liberals are just incapable of being racist? Or is it more likely that the ones that are racist are just using those of color for their own political purposes?

Rhinehold, do you really think I’m that naive? I know the Republicans were once the party of abolitionists, and the Democrats the party of Jim Crow…but it’s not that way NOW.

I grew up maybe five miles from James O. Eastland, once an employer of my grandmother. He offered to nominate me for the Naval Academy (I declined, thank God). He was a Democratic Senator, and twice served as the permanent Senate President during a vacancy of the Vice Presidency. It was not until three years ago that I found out he was also the most powerful racist in America for a generation.

No, Rhinehold, I wear no blinders - such belong to those who would pretend racism doesn’t play a role in everyday life, especially in the lives of those whose color is not the same as those in power.

You are the one who threw out ignorant and hateful accusations of racism, not me. That you helped me make my point so well makes it clear, to me, that few people are really ready to move beyond race, even those that profess to be champions of it.

Such high rhetoric…such ignorance of humanity. You will find in ALL of human history, NO INSTANCE of a society in which racism (AND cultural intolerance AND religious intolerance) did not play a major role. The only difference is that, since the 1960’s (and ONLY since the 1960’s), America has shown the courage to change, to lead the world in striving towards true racial equality…and this can only be done by exposing the racism, by making its hypocrisy glaringly obvious to all and sundry.

The statement that we should ‘move beyond racism’ is every bit as naive as saying that we should ‘move beyond crime’. Racism, like crime, will be with us always. All we can do is to strive to diminish it.

tcsned

I have to believe that race is a factor for McCain. If elections were held today he would be a two time loser. And a loser to a black man none the less. It is documented that McCain is a serious gambler. I have known a few of his type in my time and they all have erratic behavior tendencies and a bad night at the boat almost always inures a follow up day of anger and sulking. They absolutely detest losing but when they are winners anyone who isn’t familiar with their gambling problems might think they are the happiest most well adjusted people in the world. McCain has taken some pretty bad gambles to date and they have not seen returns so far. The results present us with the obviously more assertive and flammable McCain. Personally, I see no good that would come from a big stakes gambler in the big house.

Did I mention the right? No, I pretty much pointed out that your race baiting was disgusting and gave you a taste of your own medicine.

What you said, Rhinehold, was “The only ones I hear bringing up race in this campaign is the left.” Logically, if you say ONLY ONE group (out of two groups) is doing a thing, then you are by extension claiming that the other group is NOT doing that same thing. That’s basic logic, Rhinehold…and that’s why I said you haven’t been paying attention.

You missed again, Glenn. Please tell me where anyone on the right is mentioning anything about race. You want to infer that the fact that they are Republicans makes a statement about race is ludicrous when it is the left that has been mentioning racism every other day. Are they racist? What that statement racist? Is Bill Clinton racist? On and on and on. Obama said that ‘They will say ….’ and listed all kinds of things that no one is saying during this election.

It is the left that is displaying racism, for their own gain, I might add. So much easier to shoot down someone else by claiming that they are racist than deal with the actual issues. Obama is leading for christ’s sake and you still want to inject it. It’s like a learned behavior, Pavlov’s dog…

What a crock. If you think there is such a thing as race then you will eventually fall into racist thoughts. Only by shedding it will anyone rise above it and it knows know party or political lines, Glenn.

You were replying to my statement that, given my life story, I’m much more acquainted with racism than are most of my fellow whites. Rhinehold, you do not know my life story.

And you don’t know mine but you are willing to say you know more so that your ‘views’ can be held up to a higher standard as unimpeachable. It won’t work.

You’re taking the old Libertarian (AND Republican) line of “Okay, we agree racism’s wrong so we won’t do it anymore - so if you accuse us of being racist, it’s actually YOU who’s racist.” What a crock, indeed!

Some of us have never done it Glenn. That’s the problem with the big brush that you want to keep painting with. It’s good for political power grabs but it does not help anyone who is now being treated like a racist who doesn’t and never has had any racist thoughts in their head. We should be seeking out these people and lifting them up as examples instead of lumping them in with those who actually are racists for political points. Instead you only foster animosity where none existed before. Sort of like the ‘breeding terrorism’ mindset, only directed at us instead of them.

Rhinehold, are you truly so naive? You can outlaw racism all you want. You can make it as politically incorrect at the point of a gun if you want…but as long as there different races of people, there will be racism. As with any other crime, you’ll never be completely rid of it. All you can do is expose it and - if appropriate - prosecute it.

And I agree completely with this statement. But that is not what is going on. Instead the left is USING racism and the politically incorrectness of it to shout people down who display NO racism just for political gain. You can ignore the reality of it all you want but I can point to example after example, YOUR assertion that McCain was a racist is just one in the line of many feeble-minded ‘take the easy way out’ arguments I hear repeatedly, and almost always from the left.

And instead of just saying ‘yeah, I shouldn’t have said that, it was not right’ you want to defend it by saying that the Republican party is the party of racists… *sigh*

There are political reasons for this considering that the party of the abolitionists were the Republicans and the party of the Jim Crowe laws were the Democrats at one time. It has to do with identifying a chance to take political power, not with enlightenment. Do you really think that progressives and liberals are just incapable of being racist? Or is it more likely that the ones that are racist are just using those of color for their own political purposes?

Rhinehold, do you really think I’m that naive? I know the Republicans were once the party of abolitionists, and the Democrats the party of Jim Crow…but it’s not that way NOW.

No, one party just figured out it is better to keep people slaves by promising to take care of their every need instead of holding them to the same standard you want for everyone else…

I grew up maybe five miles from James O. Eastland, once an employer of my grandmother. He offered to nominate me for the Naval Academy (I declined, thank God). He was a Democratic Senator, and twice served as the permanent Senate President during a vacancy of the Vice Presidency. It was not until three years ago that I found out he was also the most powerful racist in America for a generation.

The point? There are racists out there? Well doggone it, who woulda thunk.

No, Rhinehold, I wear no blinders - such belong to those who would pretend racism doesn’t play a role in everyday life, especially in the lives of those whose color is not the same as those in power.

Glenn, there are all kinds of people out there. If you want to live your live thinking about what they think, you, and everyone else, is going to have a very very sad existence in life. Racists should be pitied and ignored, unless they attempt to violate the rights of those they hate (because they hate themselves and can’t internalize that emotion they express it outwards on any number of differences, including race). Pitied and ignored. Not pointed out and used to smear a whole philosophy or party or race.

You are the one who threw out ignorant and hateful accusations of racism, not me. That you helped me make my point so well makes it clear, to me, that few people are really ready to move beyond race, even those that profess to be champions of it.

Such high rhetoric…such ignorance of humanity. You will find in ALL of human history, NO INSTANCE of a society in which racism (AND cultural intolerance AND religious intolerance) did not play a major role. The only difference is that, since the 1960’s (and ONLY since the 1960’s), America has shown the courage to change, to lead the world in striving towards true racial equality…and this can only be done by exposing the racism, by making its hypocrisy glaringly obvious to all and sundry.

For a while. Until there is a point when it gets used as a tool to silence political enemies, slander societal enemies, gain power, gain money, etc.

When you start painting people who aren’t racist as racist by using a wide brush you end up causing more harm than good. And children, who usually don’t see or care about racism, are going to learn that ‘racism is a huge problem’ and suddenly they are taught all of the things we had hoped they wouldn’t learn.

It is better, IMO, to lose this generation than future ones. But who am I? Just a guy who doesn’t see race because I know that there really is no such thing…

The statement that we should ‘move beyond racism’ is every bit as naive as saying that we should ‘move beyond crime’. Racism, like crime, will be with us always. All we can do is to strive to diminish it.

Yes, and it is how we choose to do that that will decide if it continues and gets stronger or is almost completely forgotten except for those who really need emotional and psychological help.

Now, do you still think that McCain is a racist because he didn’t shake Obama’s hand last night or are you going to admit that you threw it out there for effect and to slander another human being?

As with any other crime, you’ll never be completely rid of it. All you can do is expose it and - if appropriate - prosecute it.

And I agree completely with this statement.

Actually, I must confess I do not agree completely as I reread this.

Being a racist is, and never should be, a crime, Glenn. What we think about ourselves, other people, our government, our world, should never be open to prosecution.

It is when we violate the rights of others, no matter what the reasons, that should be a crime. If it is done for racist reasons, it is still a violation of their rights. It could have been done because the person’s eyes were blooshot for all I care, it is still a violation and should be prosecuted the same.

Only, I fear we are starting to enter that Orwellian future we all had hoped to avoid. I think most people thought it would be out of a place of evil that such a society would exists, but it reality it usually comes out of honest attempts to Do The Right Thing. Only good intentions, when backed with physical force, usually end in authoritarian rule, and to be honest I think either candidate winning will put us closer to that.

For the most part, nobody that matters has been bringing up race and that’s good, especially considering during Palin’s first two weeks the republicans put everyone on notice that any rough stuff was blatant sexism.

If only CNN would shut up about it then, they are on right now talking it up a storm… :(

>I cannot, nor can anyone say, from the video I’ve seen, whether or not John saw Barrack’s out reached hand. Cindy saw it, and grabbed it.

Posted by: googlumpugus at October 8, 2008 12:33 PM

goog,

You might be right, and I’d like to think so, but when I saw the video, I think she first jerked her hand away, as if to touch would burn, but immediately thought better of it and extended for the shake.

She had said some very unpleasant things about Obama during the day, and she might have feared he’d grab her hand to twist her arm???

glen contrarian,

Please don’t mind Rhinehold, for he knows not what he says…but will argue with a signpost…all the while telling it how stupid it is.

Dude -

Yeah, you’re right. It’s actually an argument between one who’s making the assumption that racism does play a part in Republican politics…and one who believes it’s racist to make such an assumption.

I normally castigate others for making assumptions of any type, but in this case I feel strongly justified in stating that racism certainly plays a role in Republican politics. I cannot prove it other than by pointing out the lily-white nature of Republican gatherings, but it’s there…and just because I can’t point to hard physical proof, that does NOT mean the racism is not there.

Absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence. The Republican crowds are for the most part lily-white. I think that says a lot.

Rhinehold said: “Being a racist is, and never should be, a crime, Glenn. What we think about ourselves, other people, our government, our world, should never be open to prosecution.”

Your point is extremely well made, Rhinehold, and deserves emphasis. Thought police is about as anti-American a concept as ever dreamed up. Behavior is subject to law, not thoughts, ideas, or preferences.

jlw, great point. It is an American obscenity that Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney, McEnulty, and Nader were barred from the presidential debates by the Dem/Rep controlled Commission on Presidential Debates. It is an affront to the democracy those parties hypocritically exhalt.

It’s actually an argument between one who’s making the assumption that racism does play a part in Republican politics…and one who believes it’s racist to make such an assumption.

Not exactly, but close.

It’s an argument between one who assumes that racism does play a part in Republican politics, so they assume that their presidential candidate is racists…and one who believes that an individual should be proven to be a racist before being called one. While throwing in the suggestion that racism plays a role in Democratic politics as well as Republican because no one party holds themselves free from those thoughts and deeds of one who is self-loathing enough to find fault in another for something they have no control over…

But you are close.

Marysdude,

Your comment below violates our Rules regarding flame baiting other participants at WatchBlog. Comply with our rules or lose the privilege to participate here. Critique his words, not what you think he knows or does not know.

“Please don’t mind Rhinehold, for he knows not what he says…but will argue with a signpost…all the while telling it how stupid it is.”

Most of this would not make any difference, except this is a national campaign, and the result will have national impact.

A party that excludes a significant portion of the population, can hardly be trusted to represent the entire population when in office…and , if that significant portion of the population is excluded, who else will be effected similarly?..Independents?..Democrats?

Rhinehold, my apologies for saying you would argue with a signpost, and tell it how stupid it is…I was critiquing the messenger, not the message…mea culpa.

Thank you Marysdude, but I have one question.

How are the Republicans ‘excluding’ anyone? I am pretty sure that they would love to a greater percentage of every ‘group’ to be part of their party, but are unwilling to go to the lengths of the Democrats to entice them. I don’t know of anyone in the Republican leadership actively ‘excluding’ them…

If there were exclusion, I daresay that there would be zero members of some ‘group’ or another, yet I know that there are a large number of every imaginable group as members of the Republican party.

Rhinehold,

I’m sorry, but I did not know you were not cognizant of the various methods of exclusion…must I list them, or do you think you can come up with a few on your own? Try a good thesaurus…

If you could list a couple, that would help. I am just trying to understand something you said. I am apparently unaware of some method that you have been privy to and as always I seek knowledge.

Rhinehold -

“so they assume that their presidential candidate is racists”

I did NOT say McCain IS racist. I DID say ‘maybe he is’…which clearly carries the implication that ‘maybe he is NOT’. Except for my statement about racism playing a part in Republican politics (which statement I stand behind), you will be hard-pressed to find an accusation I’ve made without evidence…and if you do, I’ve already proven to you on your personal blog and on Watchblog that I am sincerely grateful for correction and (unlike some) am not afraid to admit in public when I am wrong. Concerning my statement about McCain, I am not wrong, but simply stating a possibility.

David -

Please note that I said that racism, like any crime, should be exposed and, if appropriate, prosecuted. The racism to which I refer are DEEDS, not thoughts; I thought that much would have been obvious. My apology for the misunderstanding.

And for both Rhinehold and David -

I see that the caveats I included in my statements were not obvious enough. Some would point the finger and say that both of you should have read more carefully, but the fault is mine alone for not making my caveats and qualifying statements more clearly. I’ll do better next time.

I am pretty sure that they would love to a greater percentage of every ‘group’ to be part of their party, but are unwilling to go to the lengths of the Democrats to entice them.

What lengths are they not willing to go? Supporting their interests? Supporting their rights? Granted their has been a lot of pandering and taking minority groups for granted. On the other hand, the Democratic Party isn’t actively trying to suppress their right to vote. People have been know to take that kind of thing personally. I don’t think it is an accident that minorities flock to the Democratic Party - not that they are perfect by any means.

Here’s an example from my home the Commonwealth of Virginia about 60 miles north up Interstate 81. McCain’s campaign chairman, Bobby May, in Buchanan said of a possible Obama Administration:

“FREEDOM OF RELIGION: Mandatory Black Liberation Theology classes taught in all churches - raise taxes to pay for this mandate. Put Rev. Jeremiah Wright in charge….”

“DRUG CRISIS: Raise taxes to pay for free drugs for Obama’s inner-city political base….”

“2ND AMENDMENT: Under Obama will only apply to gang-bangers, illegal aliens, Islamo-Fascist terrorists, and Senator Jim Webb’s aide….”

“FOREIGN RELATIONS: Appoint Rev. Al Sharpton as Secretary of State, Jesse Jackson as UN Representative, and let Bill Clinton handle all other “foreign relations” … As long as Hillary doesn’t find out…!”

“THE WHITE HOUSE: Hire rapper Ludacris to “paint it black.” Taxes to be increased to buy enough paint for the job plus spray-paint for graffiti….”

Thankfully he has been fired but this kind of thing doesn’t help attract minorities to the GOP. It would also help to not put former senator and idiot, George Allen in charge minority outreach efforts.

pardon my sloppy proofreading. It should read “Granted there has been a lot of pandering”

Concerning my statement about McCain, I am not wrong, but simply stating a possibility.

And I did the same for the Democratic Party. You seemed to take umbrage at that when I used your own words.

Glenn, happens to us all from time to time. Racist thoughts vs. racist deeds is not distinguishable by the use of the word ‘racism’.

Being a political site with a bunch of pendantic lawyer wannabe’s like me, picking out the lack of clarifications is an important aspect of debate and communication. Your comment’s wordage, as used, did implicate the necessity of pointing out the conflict with the First Amendment.

It is us who should apologize for having missed our calling, and hence, exercising such precision in word usage here, instead of in a courtroom or legislature where it would do a whole hekuva lot more good. (Maybe :-)

tcsned -

Thanks - very well said. But please be careful or you’ll be accused of being a racist because you had the impertinence to point out someone else’s racism….

On the other hand, the Democratic Party isn’t actively trying to suppress their right to vote.

Interesting accusation, surely there is evidence behind this, say an indictment or conviction? Something more than innuendo and supposition?

I’m sure they aren’t just trying to counter the efforts of ACORN in getting as many fraudulent names on the ballot as they can…

A guy was just arrested in Louisiana for saying that he would “empty his shotgun”, ostensibly to “keep that n****r out of office”.

The article does not say what the man’s political leanings were, but is there ANYONE here who thinks the guy’s a Democrat? Hey - he might be a Democrat, for I’ve certainly known some racist Democrats too…but I think we ALL know that the REAL likelihood is that he is not a Democrat.

Whoops! There I go being a racist again by implying the guy was a Republican!

Rhinehold - Maybe if we had a Department of Justice that took its title seriously there would be some investigations and convictions but since we have the politicized, corrupted Justice Department we have I doubt there will be any. It’s much easier to suppress the vote when you can guarantee freedom from prosecution or even investigation.

tscned,

So the answer is no then?

I’m sorry tcsned, I mistyped your name, that was a typo and not deliberate. I know I am not happy about it when others do it to me.

What is all this fuss about racism? Racism is all-partisan. We all know that. Racism comes in varying levels of degrees, (e.g. don’t mind my son being friends with one, but, I will disown him if he marries one). We all know that too.

The political parties blatantly cater to some or all races in their campaigns. Which is, in and of itself, a small bit racist. The GOP and Democratic Party know better today than to blatantly derogate a particular race, but, both sides engage in the implications that the other side does.

It is also a fact that African Americans in a majority favor the Democratic Party, while Cuban Americans favor the Republican Party. They have their reasons.

Going beyond this fact set, without controlled research to back it up, is nothing but speculation and partisan banter which goes nowhere, that I can see.

no problem Rhinehold - I have had my name butchered much worse than that :)

as to examples:
2006 here in VA - documented cases:
* Democratic voters receiving calls incorrectly informing them voting will lead to arrest.
* Widespread calls fraudulently claiming to be “Webb Volunteers,” falsely telling voters their voting location had changed.
* Fliers paid for by the Republican Party , stating “SKIP THIS ELECTION” caused was allegedly an attempt to suppress African-American turnout.

an actual FBI investigation was launched in this case.

2004 - an email accidentally sent to a Bush parody site contained an attachment with almost 2,000 names of registered voters in a highly African-American area to be used to challenge voters.

Michigan Republican state legislator John Pappageorge, was quoted as saying, “If we do not suppress the Detroit vote, we’re going to have a tough time in this election.

1981 - New Jersey the RNC sent had 45,000 letters returned that had been sent to predominantly black neighborhoods and used this to compile a list to challenge votes. In addition, they got off-duty police officers to hang posters in heavily black neighborhoods that warned of arrest for violating election laws.

I’m sure a young Karl Rove saw this an took note.

Rhinehold,

Snubs…made to feel unimportant…made to feel uninvited…words of condescension…hints of superiority…platform planks that show less interest in considered important things…subtle references…playing this game makes me tired…

The nice folks of Georgia are currently being investigated for placing too many roadblocks up for African American voters…shades of Jim Crow…The Sec of State just happens to be Republican, who swears she’s just trying to make sure all voters are documented citizens. I wonder what the occurrence factors are of non-citizen voters in previous elections…previous elections were shoe-ins for Republican candidates though…with Obama running—not so much a shoe-in…perhaps it has nothing to do with it?

Marysdude - In VA fliers have been circulating warning voters that if they have any outstanding warrants including traffic violations that they will be arrested at the polls. This isn’t the kind of thing that the Democratic Party would do.

The only way to combat this crap is to make sure that things aren’t close enough that these suppression efforts and other games can’t make a difference. PALIN/mccain are making sure that it happens by running a nasty and borderline racist finish to this campaign by painting Obama as “The Other” looking for foreign names on his donor list, mentioning Obama’s middle name at every stop, engaging in intimidation of minority voters. They are pulling out all the stops and they should be called out for what they are doing. Only idiots buy into this crap - though there are plenty of them out there - it ain’t gonna work.

I notice that on FOX this morning the media misfits are ready to boil Obama in oil over that Ayers stupidity…there is so much earwax at Fox, it’s a wonder they all don’t melt under the Kleig lights…are Kleigs still used?..no matter, I guess that kind of ear wax doesn’t melt under heat…

Marysdude - it’s ridiculous that while we are in the midst of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression that this is what they got. Bill Ayers? Sad, sad, sad. The media wing of the GOP otherwise known as Fox News will do the bidding of their parent company as I saw another shameless hannity interview with tweedle dumb and tweedle dumber last night they are desperate and grasping. It will be nice to see them get rejected by the voters on Nov. 4. I usually feel bad for candidates that lose elections from either party. They have put themselves out there and were rejected in front of the whole country and in this case the whole world. However, after the completely dishonorable way PALIN/mccain have comported themselves in this race I will dance on the grave of their campaign with a big smile on my face.

I think Obama needs a new campaign slogan - THAT ONE! ‘08

Wednesday afternoon, in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, McCain actually called the crowd at a McCain-Palin rally “my fellow prisoners.”

lol now thats a funny gaff

I just saw a clip of Obama on ABC last night calling mccain out for being a coward and being afraid to make his ludicrous charges to his face. Way to go Obama. If mccain starts to behave with even a little bit of honor I will capitalize his name again. Until then this small man gets small letters.

McCain has now abandoned nearly every core principle his rhetoric stood by. He voted against Veteran’s benefits, while saying he loves them. He has launched the very same smear and fear campaign against Obama which he absolutely condemned when it was done to him in 2000 regarding the out of wedlock dark skinned baby campaign.

Now he has abandoned entirely personal and individual responsibility as he seeks to spend another 2 to 300 billion dollars in a direct buyout of foreclosing mortgages in order to keep people who made bad decisions in their luxuriously large homes well beyond their means.

John McCain is an unpredictable maverick for only one reason, he will do and say anything to get what he wants. He wants this presidency to die on as his legacy as if it would somehow shore up his many self-confessed failures and low points in his life caused by his own decisions.

No one should believe he will work for the common person. McCain works for himself, and those who will help him work for himself. He revels in the dishonesty of saying one thing to foreign nations while hiding offensive military strike options from them. This was the meaning of his attack on Obama telegraphing to Pakistan that we will take bin Laden out.

McCain is deceptive, unpredictable, unprincipled, and he has dishonored himself, by his own words, several times in his life in important ways. Is this the character of the person America wants to replace GW Bush with?

It does indeed take a low information crowd or blind loyalty to Party to stand enthusiastically behind a McCain presidential bid. And that crowd should not become the majority deciding factor if our democratic republic is to withstand the assaults upon past, present, and future.

Democracy works best when the majority is made of the highest common denominator, not the lowest, of its people. Obama is not an ideal candidate in substantive policy issue ways, but, he is far and away the better candidate in this race.

He has not stooped to character assassination and fear mongering and appeals to the least of the population in order to seek a leadership role. And he seeks that role truly as much or more for his and our daughter’s and son’s futures as for himself personally.

If the presidency is to be decided on character, Obama should win this race hands down. That is, if the majority of the American population which votes is of the highest common denominator of rational and objective thought decision making process, rather than the basest of emotive, subjective, fearful, irrationally suspicious, and discriminating lowest common denominator.

This race for president is for all intents and purposes a mirror on the character and intelligence of the American people, and the whole world is watching that mirror to see which image emerges. The same image or worse than that which elected and reelected GW Bush, or the image of a wiser, more deliberative, and better informed America.

mccain is a liar yet again. Last night on hannity he said of Obama’s relationship with Bill Ayers that Obama said he was just a guy in the neighborhood and mccain said that it is more than that - we know it. Well, mccain - if it was true that you know more then we would have seen it already since your campaign has no substance left and is only about character assassination. Do you really think that your know more than you are letting on. What a joke.

Wow!!!

Although my WOW was for D Remer’s effective description of this race, it could also be used for tcsned’s rip on mccain (good idea the small letters for the small man)…

Marysdude - I agree with you on David’s assessment of the state of the campaign. When mccain start acting like a man he will get his upper-case letters back.

Now they are all up in arms because of a picture in Newsweek that shows PALIN has a small mustache and they didn’t airbrush it out. They all but call Obama a terrorist and they are whining about a mustache. They are accusing them of doing this to help Obama. What a joke. They really don’t have much left in the tank do they?

The question is, are the voters ready to deal a serious blow to the Democrats and the Republicans or are they going to vote for more of the same? I’m betting on more of the same. How about you?

The Newsweek/Palin thing is a hoot! MSNBC this morning reported a rep. for Newsweek stated simply that they don’t believe in airbrushing subjects….kind of like the “what you see is what you get” thing.
What with those T hormones raging, it explains the bloodlust …

If you put a mustache on a pig, is it still a pig? ;-)

mccain will most likely get the two point whatever percent of hardcore republican and neocon idiots that refuse to acknowledge the obvious. He is trying to dodge the guise of a republican party that cares little about the voters of this country until election time. Even though my spell checker disagrees I like the idea of no longer capitalizing his name. He has of late proven himself unprincipled and not worthy of such respect.

If you put a mustache on a pig, is it still a pig? ;-)

Yes!!

john mccain is banking on the “Ayers” attack to influence Bob Schieffer to ask Obama about “Ayers” during Wednesday’s third presidential debate.
mccain is questioning Obama’s patriotism and says that “Ayers” has not repented on his past.
If we are going to discuss patriotism, terrorism, and repenting, then we must go full throttle.
These are mccain’s own words:”I fell in love with America when I was a prisoner in Vietnam.”
In other words, it took a beating at the hands of the Vietnamese for him to begin to love his country, so much for mccain’s patriotism.
As far as terrorism is concerned, 4, 175 American troops have been killed in mccain’s Iraq war. mccain’s Iraq war has killed a lot more Americans than Osama Bin Laden killed on 9/11.
The Iraq War had nothing to do with 9/11.
Osama Bin Laden is a despicable coward and terrorist.
mccain has to date not repented for such actions.
If Bob Schieffer is going to ask Obama about “Ayers”, then he should ask mccain to repent and apologize for the death of 4,175 American troops in mccain’s Iraq war.

Were ya’ll aware that mccain’s buy-back plan has changed since the debate? Yesterday, when the plan was promulgated by the mccain campaign, it came out to buy mortgages at lein value, not current appraisal value. Wow! What a favor to the mortgage holders. And, what a disfavor to taxpayers…

He is saying, in effect, you mortgage lenders engaged in an entrepreneurial gamble and lost…well not if I have MY way. If I have MY way only taxpayers will lose, you guys will come out with all profits intact.

Does that sound like the plan he talked about at the debate?

I thought it was Bush’s war?

>I thought it was Bush’s war?
Posted by: kctim at October 9, 2008 02:17 PM

kctim,

Samo-Samo…

Kctim:
You stand corrected.
If mccain wants to take credit for the surge, then he should take credit for the war.
he cannot have it both ways.
It is mccain’s Iraq War and the death toll is 4, 175 plus troops killed because of mccain’s wrong judgment, and he must repent for his mistake and apologize to America for his lack of judgment.
And he should do it during the debate on Wednesday, in front of the American people.
If he won’t do it, then Bob Schieffer should ask him to do it.

Ah, thats right Dude, I forgot about that talking point. My bad.

Steve
Those who see it as “McCains war” are going to vote for Obama no matter what, so I wouldn’t hold my breath for him to “repent” if I was you.

mccain is bringing up the Ayers thing again today. They must know something they are keeping in their pocket - waiting to pull it out.

Speaking of mccain’s war - I heard that the intelligence estimate on Iraq that the administration is holding back till after the election is not good news. Ethnic issues that this wonderful surge supposedly wiped away are bubbling under the surface and could explode again soon - as I have said many times before. Not only that, but Bob Woodward’s new book is relaying a much different story than the surge has worked. He is claiming some secret new innovation as the reason for the sharp drop off in violence and not the surge at all. If mccain is so knowledgeable about Iraq then he should know this. He is certainly privy to whatever the Bushies know. So, either he is misinformed about the surge which means he once again is making another gaff like the Sunni/Shiite gaff which means he understands Iraq about as much as he understands the economy. Or, he is lying. Not that it is really out of character for him to lie but it shows a lot of gall that he can chastise Obama for not agreeing that the surge has been the best thing since sliced bread when he knows that it is not the case. Not only that but if this surge idea was really his and he pushed Bush into adopting it, and what Bob Woodward is reporting is true, then he is responsible for the rise in US casualties that came along with this tactic (not a strategy as he claims).

john mccain is banking on the “Ayers” attack to influence Bob Schieffer to ask Obama about “Ayers” during Wednesday’s third presidential debate.

I’ve been thinking about this, and I just don’t see how it could happen with the debate format. Both candidates are asked the same question, and the questions are supposed to appear neutral. So, how do you bring up something like this”

“So, Senator McCain, do you think your opponent is too fond of terrorists?” I mean, I just can’t see that question being asked.

Tcsned:

As I recall they are PAYING the Sunni’s and some Shia not to fight. It’ll work fine until they stop paying ‘em and the Sunni’s figure out the Shia control all the oil money.

BTW, it might be nice to have some of that cash back as we roll into Bush’s depression. It’s starting to look like they waited too late to bring transparency (which they haven’t done yet) or be honest about the several trillion dollar size of bad debt. No leverage problem, plenty of over regulation of CDS market (heavy on the sarcasm)

Oh well, we’re in place to declare Iraq a new US territory. That ought to go over well. Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran. It’s ONE way out of a depression. WWII worked just fine. Too bad about the few million bodies. Of course the oceans won’t likely protect us as well, now.

Lawn Boy:
One of mccain’s surrogates made that suggestion while exercising his talking points on one of the major tv networks today.
I sincerely hope that you are right and that question, or any question on personal attacks on either side does not come up.
The debate formats have not served the voters well.
What limited time there is in this upcoming debate on Wednesday should be spent on requiring both candidates to lay out their solutions to the financial crisis and other issues that are of importance to the American people.
Health care, social security, jobs, energy, global warming, education, foreign policy, etc., etc.

Whichever of these two jokers is elected president, I imagine the U.S. will be cutting and running out of Iraq and Afganistan asap.

DRRemer, “It is an American obscenity that Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney, McEnulty, and Nader were barred from the presidential debates…”

The local 7-11 has coffee cups in blue and red with Obama and McCain written on them, so I asked Sirajoul where the green cups were for Cynthia McKinney. He didn’t know who that was.

Craig Ferguson on the debate:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jCH1qbY9o8

googlumpugus - yeah part of the drop in violence has been the buy-off of the Sunnis. However, part of this deal was to incorporate the Sunnis into the security forces. The Shiites are are on the verge of backing out of the agreement to incorporate them and have been making noise about wanting them to turn in their arms or be arrested. I predict that won’t go over too well. The next president is going to have to make some tough choices about what to do in Iraq and mccain’s strategy - stubbornness isn’t what we need.

This issue has been kind of moved from the stage because of the global financial meltdown that mccain had a hand in but it will rear its ugly head soon enough.

He’s running on a pretty thin resume of success in the last 8 years. He’s done nothing in 26 years to help achieve energy independence. I shouldn’t say he has done nothing, he has actively worked against energy independence. He has pushed for deregulation that has been at the core of this meltdown that has seen the Dow Jones drop 6,000 points in a year. He is reliving the Vietnam war though Iraq and if allowed the reigns will do nothing to extract us from the quagmire we are in. Name one thing he and his party have done well. Oh yeah, he had birthday cake on a runway with George Bush while people were dying in New Orleans after Katrina. That’s what I call a steady (or cool) hand at the tiller.

mccain’s Iraq war is not a talking point, it is a tragedy.
It is a tragedy that should have been prevented.
mccain has stated time and time again that he will hold anyone responsible of any faults, accountable.
And who will hold him accountable for the death of American troops who died in a war that was a capricious irresponsible bad judgment?
Those troops did not die for America’s freedom.
Iraq was not an immediate threat to America.
4,175 plus homes will miss a loved one this coming Christmas.
They were someone’s mother, father, son, daughter, sister, brother, uncle, aunt, grandfather, grandmother, fiancé, friend, and fellow American.
I do not condone, and I do condemn, Ayer’s past ideology.
But he is not responsible for the loss of one single human life.
mccain is responsible for the unnecessary death of 4,175 American troops.
He must be held accountable.
The media and the internet are blazing with the Ayer’s story.
How irresponsible of those that perpetuate such a story and discount the unnecessary death of 4,175 plus American troops as yesterday’s news.
How irresponsible of those that perpetuate that story for the sake of media ratings and the destruction of a candidate.
How irresponsible of those that perpetuate that story and do not have the moral conviction to hold mccain accountable for the unnecessary death of 4,175 American troops.
mccain’s Iraq War must be ended.

ohrealy, Yep! Shame on America, that a presidential race can be conducted with only 1/3 of the people’s major party’s candidates given exposure in the debates.

It is incredible that independent registered voters now outnumber either Democrats 36%, or Republicans 31%, and have no representation in the presidential debates. We will just have to continue growing the registered independent voters and turning them on to the Vote Out Incumbents concept in order to get them representation.

Remer writes; “Sen. Obama did prioritize them 1, 2, and 3. Sen. McCain said he would address them all simultaneously. Most Americans trying to manage their budgets and income, know all too well, that prioritizing is essential to progress.”

Thanks for the confirmation that obama is incapable of handling more than one issue at a time. John McCain understands that ordinary American’s handle life’s necessities; food, clothing, and shelter every day. obama would have them choose just one of these. And, as president Mr. McCain understands and is capable of handling our economy, war, and our future well-being all at the same time.

When obama begins to wear long pants perhaps he will be capable of multi-tasking also.

“Absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence. The Republican crowds are for the most part lily-white. I think that says a lot.”
Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at October 8, 2008 05:11 PM

Of course your correct Glenn. It’s the same reason that the Baptist church service isn’t well attended by Catholics. Great reasoning…most blacks support the democrat party but should be found in huge numbers supporting Republican events. I don’t find many abortion advocates supporting pro-life rally’s either.

Doc Rene,
Guess you didn’t Brokaw is a Republican. He thanked McCain six times, and Obama only once. Brokaw reprimanded Obama for going over the allotted time, more than once, and he never reprimanded McCain, even though both candidates went long.

Wall Street is not reacting to Obama. A Democratic victory this year was always more likely than not. The credit markets are frozen because a deregulated market in credit default swaps failed, and the major financial institutions have the cds contracts, and have lost trillions of dollars. The equity market is only just now coming to the realization that this is going to be worse than expected.

and have lost trillions of dollars.

Except they haven’t, really. Just on paper. Just because our Federal government makes them show a loss where there isn’t one because of the overreaction to Enron.

And we find it better to take tax payer money to run an insurance scheme instead of allowing those institutions to show the actual real value, not the market value, of those debts on their books and regain their liquidity.

What a country.

Any doubts about Sarah and her clean hands??
Check this out:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/10/10/palin_chryson/

janedoe,

Good link…interesting…VERY interesting…

If the future of America is based on electing someone with clean hands, America is finished.

jlw, I agree, but, that also means America MUST get about the business of finding one huge bar of soap and PDQ.

Rhinehold:

…….and have lost trillions.

Ummm , yes they have. Don’t you read the papers? He wasn’t necessarily talking about loan values or even CDS values. The stock market has lost trillions. That money is long gone.

Sorry, Rhinehold, very few people, especially at this point, believe fiat values of CDS’s will work. One could simply remove capital requirements (which is effectively going on for some) for banks and achieve the same results. BTW, a Lehmans auction was held today, and got 8 cents on the dollar for these instruments.