Mark F. Barnes Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 I agree with almost everything you said except for your first paragraph.Maybe Biden didn't have a comeback for Palin's comments about General McClelland's words about Afghanistan two days ago because he didn't know who that was. The General's name is David McKKiernanHell I didn't know who McClelland was either, only person I'd ever heard of in modern times was Harold McClelland, he was an Air Force Engineer that's named in about every flight training manual you'll read during pilot training. He was a Pilot in WW I and WW II, and wrote most of the set procedures in the training manual for modern flight military electronics. He developed most of the radar and tracking countermeasures, way before his time. Pretty well respected in the aviation world, but he's been dead since like the 1950's and I sincerely doubt he's in Afghanistan's today. I'm pretty sure he's still in Arlington National Cemetery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 Found buried within the 451 pages of the bailout bill...SEC. 308. INCREASE IN LIMIT ON COVER OVER OF RUM EXCISE TAX TO PUERTO RICO AND THE VIRGIN ISLANDS.So, they extended the limit on taxes on my Captain Morgan for another year? Sweet! I am now officially in favor of this bailout bill! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark F. Barnes Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 Must of had a slow day at night court. I guess I should have pointed that out for you. They've been talking about that and the little wooden arrows tax for two days. Figured you'd already picked up on that. My Bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark F. Barnes Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 While we are fact checking lets try one on Honest Joe....BIDEN: Can I clarify this? This is simply not true about Barack Obama. He did not say sit down with Ahmadinejad.BIDEN: The fact of the matter is, it surprises me that Sen. McCain doesn't realize that Ahmadinejad does not control the security apparatus in Iran. The theocracy controls the security apparatus, number one.Roll the tape please.....Yes Joe he did say that, and he has been trying to get out from under that naive statement ever since. And just in case you need the Democratic take on itRoll the tape please.....He said it Joe, just say he screwed up saying it and move on. McCain screwed up saying a lot of things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N Judah Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 So where in that clip does Obama mention "Ahmadinejad" ?In the debates last week Obama even went out of his way to point out that "Ahmadinejad isn't even the most powerful person in Iran." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PuroAztlan Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 While we are fact checking lets try one on Honest Joe....We're all bored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevfiv Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 Factcheck released a summary of the debate (misstatements) here:http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/fa...lin_debate.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark F. Barnes Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 So where in that clip does Obama mention "Ahmadinejad" ?In the debates last week Obama even went out of his way to point out that "Ahmadinejad isn't even the most powerful person in Iran."Well he's the President of Iran, does that not make him the leader of the country? The question was as follows:QUESTION: In 1982, Anwar Sadat traveled to Israel, a trip that resulted in a peace agreement that has lasted ever since.In the spirit of that type of bold leadership, would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?COOPER: I should also point out that Stephen is in the crowd tonight.Senator Obama?OBAMA: I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them -- which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration -- is ridiculous.The question wasn't the most powerful man, it was the leader. You can split hairs all you want, but the point being that He did say he would meet with these leaders, "without precondition", and then he turned around later and said he didn't say it. And that point was brought up last night about him saying that he would meet with Ahmadinejad without precondition, with Ahmadinejad being recognized as the leader in Iran being the President of Iran, and Joe Biden tries to split hairs saying he isn't the most powerful man in the country, which is just BS politics at it's finest. Whether or not Ahmadinejad is the most powerful man there or not. He is however the leader of the nation, being the president of Iran, and Obama did say he would meet with the leaders or Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, you don't need a crystal ball to figure out who all the presidents, by not calling each of them by name. It was a Naive remark on his part, he's tried to refute that he said on one hand, and tried to justify saying it by saying he meant something else on the other, so which is it. He made a mistake, hell they all make mistakes. Just admit your mistake and say so. Just like the denial he said the surge wouldn't work, then he says it worked above and beyond all comprehension. It's double talk. McCain does the same thing, just roll out all his crap on the economy when he had no idea what he was talking about, by his own admission. Yet he hasn't said that his statement about "the basic fundamentals of our economy are strong". Hell I am not sure or economy has any basic fundamentals left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark F. Barnes Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 Factcheck released a summary of the debate (misstatements) here:http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/fa...lin_debate.htmlThanks for that, saves a lot of digging through the voting records in in the Thomas Archives........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 Well he's the President of Iran, does that not make him the leader of the country?No, in this case, it does not. Not even close. Someone making such a stink of this should know that.You can split hairs all you want....Those of us who believe that diplomacy should be a fundamental part of our foreign policy might make that statement about your posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N Judah Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 The question wasn't the most powerful man, it was the leader. You can split hairs all you want, but the point being that He did say he would meet with these leaders, "without precondition", and then he turned around later and said he didn't say it. And that point was brought up last night about him saying that he would meet with Ahmadinejad without precondition, with Ahmadinejad being recognized as the leader in Iran being the President of Iran, and Joe Biden tries to split hairs saying he isn't the most powerful man in the country, which is just BS politics at it's finest.So there's a huge difference between the statement "When Obama meets with leaders, he likes to meet without preconditions" and "Barack Obama wants to physically sit down with Ahmadinejad and make an agreement without knowing what he's getting into"The first one is a general statement intended to help the public understand Obama's style of diplomacy/foreign relations. The second statement relates to the nitty gritty with respect to a particular guy who is the President of Iran (and all that such a position entails, or does not entail) and the particulars of their ever-evolving relationship on the tumultuous world stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
20thStDad Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 Or when he referred to himself in the third person several time, reminded me of a Seinfeld episode I saw once. That was kinda weird, who does that, anyway?Bob Dole.HA! That popped in my head but I couldn't remember the reference. Actually in my mind it was Norm from SNL doing his Bob Dole impression, not Bob Dole himself who I thought of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barracuda Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 Looks pretty accurate to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolBuddy06 Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 No, in this case, it does not. Not even close. Someone making such a stink of this should know that.Those of us who believe that diplomacy should be a fundamental part of our foreign policy might make that statement about your posts. Guys please call a spade a spade. The fact that you support Obama doesn't mean you should lie for him. He made a gaffe, probably the biggest one in his lifetime, and he's rying to run away with it just because President Bush has a very bad foreign policy record. Not Obama, not any US president will meet with those leaders without precondition. It was a big blunder on his part. His blunder came primarily because he doesn't have debate experience at that level, and not so much because he's foreign policy stupid. If he didn't mean Ahmedinejad in his reply, he should have interrupted AC in follow up question to John Edwards. He realised what he did afterwards and chose to dress it up a little and wear it, which makes it better than what we have under Bush. But it's still not the best and I'm sure he wouldn't meet with Ahmedinejad, Castro or Chavez without preconditions. No US president will, never! So instead of doing what many republicans are known to do, just admit his mistake and inexperience then and move on. He has grown a lot since those early days. Looks pretty accurate to me. Sadly, this flowchart is right on the money! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HtownWxBoy Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 Looks pretty accurate to me. OMG it's so true! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolBuddy06 Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 For those who offered a different reason for her 'newspaper' answer: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memebag Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 Also from the MSNBC article: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 How nice of Fox News to give her a do-over. But, even here, the answer shows the shallowness of Palin's credentials, and more importantly, the disdain that the McCain campaign shows for women. It took a week for the campaign to formulate an answer to the newspaper and Supreme Court questions. The questions asked by Couric were intended to elicit SARAH PALIN's response, not the McCain campaign's. But, like everything else, Palin was not allowed to answer without their approval of the script. They do not trust her because she was not selected for her political acumen.This same control was evident in the debate. Look at this youtube clip...http://www.chron.com/commons/persona.html?...tId=personaDest(scroll halfway down)She's using note cards for her answers. No wonder she refused to answer the moderator's questions! She had to read her cards. Even her "zingers" were scripted by the McCain campaign. It gets worse. If you watch the Fox News "interview", you will see Palin comment on the McCain campaign decision to pull out of Michigan. She states that she "read it in the paper this morning". What! The rest of us knew yesterday. Now, I understand that Palin was prepping for her debate, and likely did not watch or read any news yesterday, but she is McCain's RUNNING MATE! No one cared enough about her opinion to even tell her what the campaign is doing?Clearly, Palin is to the McCain campaign what those models at the auto show are to GM. Eye candy. Just repeat your lines and show a little leg. And McCain, clueless male that he is, thought he could fake out Hillary voters with that? It may work with the Stepford crowd, but the women I talk to could not be more irritated. And, I don't blame them. So, this all gets back to McCain after all. McCain chose Palin, and we can see why. This is not a choice made by an honorable man who puts country first. It was a cynical pick by a man who thinks women can be faked out by a woman, and who thinks men will vote for a pitbull as long as it shows a little leg. On the male side, at least, for those as lecherous as McCain, it may work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N Judah Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 Alaskans are NOT in tune with the rest of the world. Alaska is a giant welfare state run by and for the big oil companies, freeloading off of everyone else's tax dollars. It is the largest per-capita consumer of federal pet-project spending. It is everything that is wrong with this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crunchtastic Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 So, this all gets back to McCain after all. McCain chose Palin, and we can see why. This is not a choice made by an honorable man who puts country first. It was a cynical pick by a man who thinks women can be faked out by a woman, and who thinks men will vote for a pitbull as long as it shows a little leg. On the male side, at least, for those as lecherous as McCain, it may work.Red, I think you may be one of the 4 men I know (including my dad) who sees this for what it's worth.Good grief! I am so offended by Palin. So, so offended. I had a woman in my office today tell me the reason "I couldn't get on board" was because I didn't have children. Au contraire. Lucky I don't have children inheriting the new deficit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HtownWxBoy Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 OMG I love how she runs right to Fox News after the debate (safe place) and then answers the questions she was unable to answer w/ Katie Couric as if she had answers for them all the time and just didn't answer them correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicman Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 OMG I love how she runs right to Fox News after the debate (safe place)you must have cable. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarahiki Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 Red, I think you may be one of the 4 men I know (including my dad) who sees this for what it's worth.Good grief! I am so offended by Palin. So, so offended. I had a woman in my office today tell me the reason "I couldn't get on board" was because I didn't have children. Au contraire. Lucky I don't have children inheriting the new deficit.I went out for drinks last night with seven other moms and believe me, none of us are "on board." You are far from alone in being offended, Crunch. I'm waiting for McCain to call me up with a personal apology. I feel like I might be waiting a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicman Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 17 million more people watched this debate than the presidential debate. just amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pineda Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 So, Crunch & Sara-You would have voted for McCain, IF he would have picked someone else for VP? That's what your posts sound like.But, I guess I kinda understand how you feel. I felt kinda "offended" too, when Barack Obama didn't pick Hillary Clinton, who was obviously much more qualified than Joe Biden and who carried potentially 18 million votes with her camp. But, seriously, I was never in a million years vote for Obama and what I perceive to be a socialist agenda ticket anyway.BTW, I was at a high school football game last night and ALL anyone was talking about was the debate and what a great job Sarah Palin did. Men and women both had that opinion and wanted to call McCain to thank him again for picking her! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trae Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 17 million more people watched this debate than the presidential debate. just amazing.That's pretty damn good. Having it on Thursday instead of a Friday also helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 LOL! You folks are hilarious. You got a SENIOR statesman with over 20 years experience in Congress and a woman who you guys want to kick around because she has about as much experience in politics as Obama, that actually held her own ALL NIGHT LONG against that walking Crest commercial. What was with all tha smiling ? He looked like the friggin' Joker. I think Biden was looking for some endorsement dollars from Polident or something. OBAMA '16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barracuda Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 LOL! You folks are hilarious. You got a SENIOR statesman with over 20 years experience in Congress and a woman who you guys want to kick around because she has about as much experience in politics as Obama, that actually held her own ALL NIGHT LONG against that walking Crest commercial. What was with all tha smiling ? He looked like the friggin' Joker. I think Biden was looking for some endorsement dollars from Polident or something. OBAMA '16 Yes, she held her own note cards. She offered no real answers or ideas, just a tirade of McCain campaign talking points. You can't seriously think she held her own? If mocking Biden's smile is the worst you can do, I'm feeling pretty good about this election Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N Judah Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 He HAD to smile like that. That's the only socially acceptable response to Palin's punk moves and cheap shots. He can't straight up call her an idiot, can he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarahiki Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 So, Crunch & Sara-You would have voted for McCain, IF he would have picked someone else for VP? That's what your posts sound like.But, I guess I kinda understand how you feel. I felt kinda "offended" too, when Barack Obama didn't pick Hillary Clinton, who was obviously much more qualified than Joe Biden and who carried potentially 18 million votes with her camp. But, seriously, I was never in a million years vote for Obama and what I perceive to be a socialist agenda ticket anyway.BTW, I was at a high school football game last night and ALL anyone was talking about was the debate and what a great job Sarah Palin did. Men and women both had that opinion and wanted to call McCain to thank him again for picking her!No, I wouldn't have voted for him. I don't agree with his policies and positions. I used to respect him, though. I'm not offended that he picked someone unqualified (I just think it shows poor judgment). I'm offended that he seems to have thought I might decide to vote for him just because he put a woman on the ticket. I'm offended that he thinks I'm that stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.