Originally Posted By friendofdd >>>Um, I think you're off by about 50, there, friendo. (I've been wanting to use that word since I saw "No Country For Old Men" but never really had the opportunity till now.) Psst - each state gets two - pass it on.<<< Boy is my face red, Dabob. My only excuse is that when I first started voting there were only twenty-five states.
Originally Posted By DlandDug I will say that i am pleased to see that my thoughtful friends here recognize this non-story for what it is-- today's diversion from the actual substantive issues of the day. Not so the good folks at the LA Times. From today's front page (above the fold, yet!): >>A political gaffe, it is said, occurs when a politician inadvertently tells the truth. Thus did John McCain's frank admission that he doesn't know how many homes he and his wife own spark the biggest, nastiest mud fight of the presidential campaign.<< And on and on it goes... <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-campaign22-2008aug22,0,2934245.story" target="_blank">http://www.latimes.com/news/po...45.story</a>
Originally Posted By mawnck >>the biggest, nastiest mud fight of the presidential campaign.<< Oh, Prunella!
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/content/images/2007/09/18/prunellascales6_396x222.jpg" target="_blank">http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/co...x222.jpg</a>
Originally Posted By Mr X ***My only excuse is that when I first started voting there were only twenty-five states.*** DD, you need to take over one of the late night comedy shows my friend! rotfl!!!
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I will say that i am pleased to see that my thoughtful friends here recognize this non-story for what it is-- today's diversion from the actual substantive issues of the day.<< Yes, and I have to say, as much as I am for Obama, this sort of "gotcha" stuff, pouncing on a gaffe is really lame. Playing these sorts of games is not "change" at all. In a video clip, he belabors this whole "how many houses does John McCain have?" thing until it's been stretched into nothingness. Is it amazing John McCain couldn't answer that question correctly and directly? Yeah, rich people always are fascinating that way. But if Obama expects me to believe that he and I are right in line with each other because he has one house and so do I, sorry, that dog ain't gonna hunt.
Originally Posted By friendofdd I saw a snippet on tv news this afternoon where one of the network newspeople reminded Obama he had made four million (book sale reference?) recently. Obama answered "It took two years". I am not surprised, nor do I care, that Senators are millionaires.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>I am not surprised, nor do I care, that Senators are millionaires.<< yup. That said, this administration had lots of fun with images of John Kerry windsurfing -- because windsurfing is some weird, elitist activity reserved for the ultra wealthy. It's all so silly.
Originally Posted By tiggertoo <<Seven properties. Although since the guy spent around five years living in a dirt hole with a gated bamboo roof you can't really begrudge him this, can you??>> One thing I’ve discovered is that a former POW can do no wrong in the eyes of some. Not to say that owning seven houses is wrong per se; I don’t think anyone would not want to be in his shoes. But I wouldn’t be surprised that in response to were McCain to one day blow his top and beat someone, certain individuals would argue “that’s what 5 yrs of torture would do to you, thus you really can’t blame him for that.” I starting to get sick of every time a tough question is asked of him or he does something which could potentially be deemed inappropriate, campaign supporters and staffers pull out the POW card as if it was a perennial “get out of jail free card.” This process is about who is qualified to be President. How being a POW make anyone qualified to be President is beyond me. It should not be anything more than a campaign footnote, or at best viewed similarly as a ‘soft’ on a law school application. As a former military family myself, I honor his service to our country; let me make that crystal clear. But it cannot be used as an excuse for everything. At least when Giuliani used the 9/11 card frequently, it had displayed a large degree of crisis management and leadership skill. Anyhow, back on topic. When I saw this television ad a couple days ago, all I could do was laugh and express in exasperation, “if this is the best that Obama and the DNC can do, McCain will be the next POTUS.” Seriously, McCain and his Rovian allies pulled off the gloves long ago. Obama has failed miserably to adequately rely. He’s bringing the proverbial slingshot to a gunfight. Unfortunately, his white-glove tactics are not going to work. Inspiring words and “the audacity of hope” is not enough. Americans aren’t energized by inspirational speeches, they respond to fear. I know, it’s pure Machiavellian, but nevertheless true. If Obama has any hope of winning in Nov, he has to match McCain blow for blow, and ask Americans if another 4 years of Bush policies are what they really want. Considering the current administrations approval ratings, I don’t think that is the case. But then again, Americans seem to have the memory and attention span of a gnat (George W. Bush who?). There’s by biannual WE post. *crawls back into cave*
Originally Posted By gadzuux Thanks for sticking around. I agree with you as far as you go, and I think it's not difficult to forcefully run against the GOP on their actual record and still take a "high road approach. Obama needs to steer clear of personal attacks against McCain - whether it's his service record or his personal life - accord McCain more respect than he deserves right now. At the same time, hammer the republican party in general, and bush and cheney in particular, on our current status quo - iraq, the economy, the debt, the deficit spending, inflation, job losses, the loss of world standing, use of torture, katrina, the corruption of our justice dept, the invasive warantless wiretapping, energy prices - the whole buffet of issues where GOP leadership has failed us miserably. McCain is a relatively popular political figure. Nothing like the popularity that Obama enjoys, but I don't think the democrats are going to win by trying to muddy up McCain. Instead, they've got the most unpopular president in modern history, and a whole cast of nefarious supporting characters. There's our villains - not McCain. I'm hoping for a stark contrast to be drawn by the back-to-back Dem and GOP conventions. With any luck, the democrats will manage to project unity and energy and a chance for a new direction. In comparison, the following week the GOP is going to trot bush and cheney out into the limelight while they stand and cheer - and then hug McCain as they pass the baton. And they're going to try and do it with a straight face. It's going to take some kind of chutzbah to stand in that spotlight and slap themselves on the back for how well they're doing. Then they're going to ask america for their vote. And then, they're going to get back into their limos and head of to the Larry Craig Int'l airport for their flights home. I don't know how you do that - it'll be interesting to watch, to say the least.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Inspiring words and “the audacity of hope” is not enough. Americans aren’t energized by inspirational speeches, they respond to fear. I know, it’s pure Machiavellian, but nevertheless true. If Obama has any hope of winning in Nov, he has to match McCain blow for blow, and ask Americans if another 4 years of Bush policies are what they really want.<< I'm of exactly the opposite opinion. I think inspirational speeches are EXACTLY what Obama needs. There's no way I can say this without coming across as a total clod, so fine, I'm a clod. The Republican party as it stands now is based entirely on competitiveness, getting ahead, being in a position of strength (real or imagined) and beating up on weakness. The Dems are more compassionate (perhaps too compassionate) and are the party of civil rights, social services, and redistributing wealth TO the weak. One of these groups is going to, by their very nature, be really good at attack politics. The other is going to suck at them. I agree that it's important to counter the lies and pointless crap that the other side throws at you, but there's a fine line between that and a campaign based entirely on reaction. And it's especially sad when the Dems think it's good to try and do GOP-style attacking for an insignificant brainfart like McCain's house thing. They stink at it, and it plays totally against what the party is supposed to be about. They look absolutely insipid. However, I think the dumbest thing the Dems have done so far in this election is reacting to the rock star thing. It seems to me that a rock star is EXACTLY what you want as your candidate. That was the period that McCain looked the most befuddled and Obama looked his strongest and most Presidential. His message was far from being hollow. It was a message of challenging his fellow Americans to take personal responsibility for their country and its success. Some dude named Kennedy also rock-starred his way into the Presidency with talk like that. And somehow the GOP managed to convince Obama's own campaign that this was a BAD thing? Americans darn well ARE energized by inspirational speaches - I know I was - and we haven't heard any of those in quite some time. And here we are, going into the Democratic convention, talking about the candidates' real estate holdings? And it's the Dems that started it? Congrats, President McCain. I'll write you from Ontario. 9_9
Originally Posted By planodisney mawnck, you couldnt be more wrong. Us conservatives just believe that kindness, generosity and helping the less fortunate is the role of us as individuals. We don't depend on the government to take care of these acts for us, we do them ourselves. I will have to look it up again, but I believe the percentage of income given to charity between Obama and McCain isn't even close. Something like 5% for Obama and 20% for McCain. I am sory that you have been brainwashed into believing we don't care by the democratic party that has been playing class warfare to stir up the masses for over 25 years now, but we just believe that Democratic party socialism isn't healthy government. Also, every poll I have seen shows that conservatives more of both their time and money to charity. That doesnt realy jive with your assertions.
Originally Posted By tiggertoo I realize I was a little vague in my post. Let me elaborate. I personally agree with you both, gadzuux and mawnck, for the most part—particularly concerning personal attacks. The Rovian swift-boat style tactics have been despicable. But, that isn’t what I’m necessarily referring to. Not all negative ads or negative campaigns are equal. You can run a negative campaign and remain on issue and avoid the gutter politics of character assassination (the “Obama doesn’t love his country” crap). I’m also talking about fear tactics that the GOP uses to generate support. Time and time again, it has been proven that a positive correlation exists between fear and relative support for the disseminating candidate (whether to produce actual support for the candidate, or to decrease support for the opposing candidate). The McCain campaign is currently smacking Obama around on weak energy policy and tax hikes (both based on inaccurate inferences). As a result, recent polling shows a trend in McCain’s favor. Obama needs to retaliate by hitting the GOP back hard—very hard—on the last 8 years of Republican policy failures, and adamantly the set the record straight on misconceptions about his own agenda. Instead, we get this seven-house schlock. Inspirational speeches offer only so much leverage in America; they work for those that are in tune with the issues and have an idea where we would like for this nation to go. But it’s not enough. For bread-and-butter Americans, those whose exposure to politics is perhaps a minute or two between channel surfing, and the occasional television ad, the only thing that is going spur these people—who make up a majority of Americans—off of there collective butts is scaring the dickens out of them. Like I said before, as unfortunate as it may be, fear works. And if Obama is not successful in reminding Americans about the past 8 years, and drive the fear of another 4 similar years into their minds, we should start writing his epitaph today and spare us 3 months of further frustration. He’s also been on the defense too much as of late; as long as he lets McCain set the campaign tone, he is playing straight into the GOP’s hands. Anyhow, maybe my faith in American competence is just low at the moment. I would truly love to be proven wrong, though. But, as I’ve been studying polling trends the past few weeks, and the arguments people are increasingly making against Obama, and all I can say is that I was far from impressed. I don’t consider myself a beacon of intellect, but when in the same paragraph, a person expressing their concern about Obama claims that Obama is a Muslim who has had an anti-American Christian pastor for 20 or so years, I can’t help doubting.
Originally Posted By tiggertoo <<…we do them ourselves.>> But that’s it, we usually don’t, at least not enough to make any considerable difference. If charity and philanthropy worked so well and great sums of money were flowing in our poverty stricken regions, there wouldn’t be any need for government subsidies to the impoverished, would there? The gap would already be filled. But even with government aid, there are still serious poverty issues throughout America. So, if/when charity ever adequately fills the void, at which time we should see a surplus, we can reduce our government aid to the poor. <<Also, every poll I have seen shows that conservatives more of both their time and money to charity.>> Not that I’m questioning whether you've seen the poll or not, but I would like to see a bit of concurring data before I accept this as fact.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Obama needs to retaliate by hitting the GOP back hard—very hard—on the last 8 years of Republican policy failures, and adamantly the set the record straight on misconceptions about his own agenda. Instead, we get this seven-house schlock.<< >> And if Obama is not successful in reminding Americans about the past 8 years, and drive the fear of another 4 similar years into their minds, we should start writing his epitaph today and spare us 3 months of further frustration.<< >>my faith in American competence is just low at the moment<< These I do agree with ... >>He’s also been on the defense too much as of late; as long as he lets McCain set the campaign tone, he is playing straight into the GOP’s hands. << And that was my main point. ;-) >>Not that I’m questioning whether you've seen the poll or not, but I would like to see a bit of concurring data before I accept this as fact. << I've seen similar polls, and it's probably right. Since church = charity, of course the group with more church people are going to give more to churches, but that doesn't negate the truth of the matter. However, I was not speaking of individual efforts, but specifically the Republican Party. (Which, fortunately for me, is exactly what I posted. I was afraid I had misspoken.) It's the party of Rush, Ann Coulter, Jesse Helms, Jerry Falwell. It's the anti-minority, anti-union, anti-environment, anti-human-rights, anti-Constitution, anti-every-country-who-doesn't-tow-the-American-line party. (Don't you dare tell me it isn't anti-minority - I was in North Carolina during the Helms vs. Gantt campaigns.) I am sorry that YOU have been brainwashed into not seeing this. Actions speak MUCH louder than words, and we have decades of actions that solidly back up every word in the last paragraph, especially during W's administration. Do I think that all (or even most) conservatives explicitly support these things? No. I think that they've allowed themselves to be bamboozled into interpreting the GOP's actions into something other than what they obviously are. They've swallowed the Kool-Aid. And ironically, it's precisely *because* they are so powerless to improve their standing - as a result of their own party's actions - that they are so willing to don these blinders. Like the song says, "everybody's gotta have somebody to look down on." That's the GOP's appeal in a nutshell. Looking down on the liberals. If that isn't what Rush and Fox News and Ann Coulter and swiftboating and the "rock star" campaign ads are all about, then pray tell me what they *are* about. Be very careful with your answer. To wrap this up, that's why the GOP is good at smear campaigns, and the Dems aren't and never will be. Kool-Aid is primarily a Republican beverage.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer Interesting to note... <a href="http://townhall.com/Common/PrintPage.aspx?g=174739b8-df16-46f6-aa6f-92a0fadb97e4&t=c" target="_blank">http://townhall.com/Common/Pri...97e4&t=c</a> >>Another example of actions speaking louder than words can be found when we listen to Obama’s money talk. According to Obama’s tax returns from 2000-2006, the Obamas have given far less to charity than John McCain has. In all but the two most recent years reported, the Obamas gave around 1% or less of their income to charity. Their contributions increased in 2005 and 2006 to 4.7% and 6.1% respectively, but still are far short of those of McCain who gave 28.6% in 2006 and 27.3% in 2007. But if you listen to Obama’s words you will hear that he is very concerned about the least among us.<<
Originally Posted By mawnck I thought we weren't allowed to see Mrs. McCain's tax returns. Besides, Darkbeer ... which is most qualified to be President? Your post is is a "how many houses" post. It may be relevant for the "philanthropist of the month" award, but has nothing to do with the Presidency.
Originally Posted By planodisney In almost every election before this current one, the democrats tell the elderly that republicans are going to take away their social security. Is that not fear tactics? In the last presidential election, there was actually a campaign around the country, within universities, telling young people that bush was going to bring back the draft. In fact, a few Democratic memebers in congress were the only politicians even talking about a draft. Is that not fear tactics. They are still usung fear tactics with ingringement talk, and then quietly voting for these same issues theay are trying to anger and scare their constituents about. I have no clue how you guys can continue to feel so morally superior because if anything, your party is worse at most of the things you say you hate about the republican party.
