The Bush Economy

I was walking
down the isle
of the grocery store
and I heard
a little boy
ask his mother,

"Mommy,
can we buy
dog food
with
food stamps?"

bullfrog @ 3:

obama did look very presidential.

mccain was coherent, which was an improvement over the last couple weeks, but ultimately came off as a snickering, neurotic used car salesman, with yellow teeth.

Also his body language left a lot to be desired....
He also didn't do the eye contact thing and came across too angry....
Thought he came across as a jerk too....

I’m going to go against a lot of the blogosphere and MSM tonight and call tonight’s debate a draw. There weren’t really any statements by either candidate that will be getting a lot of play tomorrow, and tonight’s performances won’t move a lot of numbers in the polls (although this is ultimately good news for Obama).

I thought Obama missed a huge opportunity tonight. McCain made a fairly extraordinary, and fairly dim-witted, statement that really nobody picked up on afterward. He said that, if faced with a ballooning budget deficit, he will “freeze spending and only allow spending on defense, veteran’s benefits, and entitlements”. That leaves out a whole slew of things that are absolutely vital to the American people. Medicare, Medicaid, children’s health insurance, education, research and technology, improving our country’s crumbling infrastructure, disaster relief, etc. etc. etc. Obama could have easily pounced on this misstep by McCain and it would be all over the media. If Obama knows what’s good for him, his campaign will press this issue in the days to come and at the next debate.

After the debate, during the follow ups and satellite interviews, after Biden was interview, they went to Giuliani (because Palin was being hidden/protected from the media) and he looked doped up drunk or stoned off his ASS during the interview. He hade big shit-eating grin on his face while being introduced, and stumbled through the republican talking points. He even admitted that he didn't see the entire debate - something to the effect of "I watched the first part when they talked about the economy" (paraphrasing). What a joke. Biden was on all the major network and cable shows, where was Palin?

bullfrog @ 3:

obama did look very presidential.

mccain was coherent, which was an improvement over the last couple weeks, but ultimately came off as a snickering, neurotic used car salesman, with yellow teeth.

So How do you REALLY feel?
:<[)

McCain blew his Pakistan response....

Obama pointed out that we had backed a dictator in Pakistan and over a ten year period paid him $10 Billion dollars... all of which has alienated the Pakistani people from America and our interests in the region.

McCain countered with Obama was wrong and that Pakistan was a failed state...

Wrong answer Johnny Wrinkles!

The Military Coup in Pakistan: Implications for Nuclear Stability in South Asia

Gaurav Kampani, CNS Research Associate, October 1999.

On 12 October 1999, the Pakistani army led by General Pervez Musharraf ousted the civilian government headed by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in a coup.(1) The overthrow of a legitimately constituted civilian government by the army for the fourth time in Pakistan's 52-year history has underscored the question of political stability and viability of democracy in the country.

http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/reports/gaurav.htm

McP

CandleintheWind @ 11:
go back to bed.

BigTallMatt @ 6:
it's a draw if you omit the content.

Did Obama really describe Venezuela as a "rogue state"? And did he state that a pre-emptive military strike into Pakistan to take out Bin Laden would be justified if the Pakistan government did do so? Well, well, well . . . sounding a little Bush-like, no?

It was pretty awesome, especially with the split screen setup...watching Johnny McCain bob and weave as the hits pelted him.

You said it McCain. Most of the NeoCons and Republicans were out front saying it. Time for you to catch up to history.

This election will be a dogfight, and will come down to the wire. but once the entire country hears about Obama's associations with terrorists and criminals, and realizes that a preident needs experience, not just charisma, then McCain will win out.

Yes. And how McCain personally blew Khadafy.

MCCAIN: "Senator Obama…Senator Obama…Senator Obama doesn’t"

Let me Guess...he doesnt understand??

That was the only bullet Mccain had in his chamber..

Sorry Mccain...we need more than that!!

Meat @ 21:

I hate to say it, I really do, but tonight I realized that the difference in Barack Obama of the 2004 Democratic National Convention and the 2008 of the US Presidential election was indeed a palpable one. But when someone else has said it better, I think it's good to simply let them do the talking:

Canadian rocker and political activist Matthew Good wrote:

If change is what this election is all about then tonight’s debate proved one thing – the sort of change that Americans can expect is equitable to removing dirty socks and putting on a new pair only slightly less so. There was absolutely no electricity or urgency emanating from Barack Obama, who played into McCain’s set pieces from the onset. It was the old Republican warhorse blowing his own horn and the champion of change, promoted as such primarily because of who currently inhabits the White House, who seemed more an obliging centrist than anything else.

This evening’s debate proved one thing - that the American political landscape is no less a quagmire than those foreign wars that the nation is currently embroiled in. The willingness to truly take chances, to risk, and through impassioned resolve ignite the imaginations of the people has fled, replaced by placation’s ever promising embrace of success. No, democracy is not alive and well in America, only the corporate branding of two political parties and their struggle to dominate the market. In fact, it’s a trait that is almost universal in the Western world.

Leading a nation requires, above all else, true vision, and neither man that stood on that stage this evening possesses it. True, they maintain beliefs, but in the end what occurred tonight was a tangle of rhetoric devoid of vision. Words were spoken, jabs were traded, experience and temperament were questioned, but a visionary leader was not in that building.

I took notes throughout the debate, but looking at them now it seems pointless to comment. Victory in Iraq? Defeat has already occurred, but like a car crash victim drowning in shock it simply hasn’t sunk in yet, just as it hadn’t in 1971. Venezuela claimed a rogue state, the linguistic misinterpretation of ‘wipe Israel off the face of the map’ presented as fact, the Russians chastised for their actions while the Georgian government is showered with praise, and the unbelievable assertion that al-Qaeda will claim a foothold in Iraq if the US fails in its mission employed as the fear card. The Shia would eat them alive were the US to leave the country, but let’s not let reality get in the way.

No, tonight was a lesson in the exhaustive inanity of American politics. The Muses, it seems, have cast their euphoric haze and wait with anticipation to see what dead loss is born.

This is what it has come to.

I hope Matthew Good can play a mean guitar but it's obvious that he does not understand democracy. Democracy is not about leadership/vision/solutions/management but about those who accept the responsibility to carry out the wishes of the citizenry who are the sole source of legitimacy. Those who accept this responsibility are disposable as it is their office and with what they are charged that lives on.

CoIntelPro for Pronktastic Victory Over SCLM, DIEBOLD, ESS and SEQUOIA! @ 25:

Jay Severin Has A Small Pen1s @ 22:

This election will be a dogfight, and will come down to the wire. but once the entire country hears about Obama's associations with terrorists and criminals, and realizes that a preident needs experience, not just charisma, then McCain will win out.

Yes. And how McCain personally blew Khadafy.

*juice spit*
*"dammit! I gotta clean this up."*

And there's the lib argument!

Jack Cafferty: If Sarah Palin Being One Heartbeat Away "Doesn't Scare The Hell Out Of You, It Should"
He warned the viewers:

"If John McCain wins this woman will be one 72-year-old's heartbeat away from being President of the United States. And if that doesn't scare the hell out of you, it should."

If Sara can't convince you to vote for Obama, she should convince you to vote against mcKeatingFive.

I watched the entire debate, and didn’t keep count, but McCain must have mention Ronald Reagan at least 7 times. I guess it’s carry over from the republican debates - mention Reagan as many times as you can, as if it will get you more votes down the road. Throughout the debate, McCain stuck to his old, tired talking points - reduce spending, cut spending, eliminate wasteful spending - with absolutely no mention of what to do to solve the economic crisis, the healthcare crisis, improving education, etc.

And despite what the pundits on the TV might say, Obama did an excellent job of tieing McCain to the failed economic and foreign policies of George W. Bush. He tied McCain to Bush every chance he got, and even though Obama started some of his points/counterpoints off by agreeing with McCain, he quickly made it perfectly clear where the agreement ended, and the difference in opinion/policies started. Everyone agrees on the basics, but how we get there is the fundamental difference. Obama spelled out his ideals, while McCain hid behind his mundane, repetitive talking points.

CandleintheWind @ 11:

It was Obama's to lose, and he lost it by not winning. No one expected much from McCain, and he went on the attack. He had Obama on the ropes constantly, and Obama refused to punch back.

That's not good.

This county is in a mess. Our economic foundation is crumbling around us. We are in two wars. Corruption and subverting of the Constitution no longer surprises us.

And Obama is engaged in a Gentleman's Debate.

McCain was the one who was full of righteous indignation.

What kind of looking glass have we slipped through?

Actually you have it backwards. It is general conventional wisdom that McCain does better in debates and Obama does better in speeches. Further, at McCain's request, the subject of this debate was foreign policy, which is supposedly McCain's strong suit.

McCain did not come close to meeting expectations and that's reflected in the audience responses. The flash polls during the debate were stunningly against McCain. The comments after the fact said that McCain looked cranky, was rude, refused to make eye contact whereas Obama looked in control and rose above petty personal attacks.

Look, while it happened, I was chomping at the bit because I saw multiple areas where Obama could have had McCain back on his heels and he refused to refute out and out lies that McCain told. I thought for sure the pundits would call this one for McCain and I am very happy to have been wrong.

Even Charles "PNAC" Krauthammer thought Obama won this one.

I just reviewed a bunch of instant polls and all except Drudge and one media outlet in TX have Obama winning, usually by comfortable-to-huge margins.

To be truthful, not watching the debate, (I'll watch it tomorrow), I score McCain +1 on the surge and Obama +1 on the issue of getting into the war in the first place. Since the war has cost north of $550B - I score the war in favor of Obama, because of the damage to the economy.

From what I hear, the actual confrontation happening in Iraq is Shiite versus Kurd lately. We'll see how that turns out. But, in the end, we need to shut off the cash spigot that McCain wouldn't mind if it was kept turned on for 100 years.

Hey moran, please use spell check before posting your neocon rantings...thanks
whigworld @ 15:

Were you guys watching the same debate the rest of the country was? Most post-debate polls show that 70-85% of the nation thought McCain wiped the floor with that mobster Obama.

Sure...Obama was polished. but when you spend all of your prep time memorizing your lines, you should look good.

It was very obvious that McCain got under his skin many times. In fact, on 8 occassions, Barack Hussein Obama started a sentence with "You're right, Senator McCain."

This election will be a dogfight, and will come down to the wire. but once the entire country hears about Obama's associations with terrorists and criminals, and realizes that a preident needs experience, not just charisma, then McCain will win out.

CoIntelPro for Pronktastic Victory Over SCLM, DIEBOLD, ESS and SEQUOIA! @ 30:

Cenk at TYT says Palin ain't working out in the mock debates and mock press conferences:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJp3_6eiMJA - Disastrous.

I dont' think they're going to have a VP debate this time.

Obama's strategy was to play it *smart* (not merely safe) and prove to the fence-sitters and leaners that he has the grace, the intellect, the equilibrium to be President:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/27/01636/2654/149/612087

And the strategy succeeded brilliantly. McCain is now in a deep, deep hole and I don't expect him to climb out.

Neo-classical Secular Humanist @ 26:

Meat @ 21:

I hate to say it, I really do, but tonight I realized that the difference in Barack Obama of the 2004 Democratic National Convention and the 2008 of the US Presidential election was indeed a palpable one. But when someone else has said it better, I think it's good to simply let them do the talking:

Canadian rocker and political activist Matthew Good wrote:

If change is what this election is all about then tonight’s debate proved one thing – the sort of change that Americans can expect is equitable to removing dirty socks and putting on a new pair only slightly less so. There was absolutely no electricity or urgency emanating from Barack Obama, who played into McCain’s set pieces from the onset. It was the old Republican warhorse blowing his own horn and the champion of change, promoted as such primarily because of who currently inhabits the White House, who seemed more an obliging centrist than anything else.

This evening’s debate proved one thing - that the American political landscape is no less a quagmire than those foreign wars that the nation is currently embroiled in. The willingness to truly take chances, to risk, and through impassioned resolve ignite the imaginations of the people has fled, replaced by placation’s ever promising embrace of success. No, democracy is not alive and well in America, only the corporate branding of two political parties and their struggle to dominate the market. In fact, it’s a trait that is almost universal in the Western world.

Leading a nation requires, above all else, true vision, and neither man that stood on that stage this evening possesses it. True, they maintain beliefs, but in the end what occurred tonight was a tangle of rhetoric devoid of vision. Words were spoken, jabs were traded, experience and temperament were questioned, but a visionary leader was not in that building.

I took notes throughout the debate, but looking at them now it seems pointless to comment. Victory in Iraq? Defeat has already occurred, but like a car crash victim drowning in shock it simply hasn’t sunk in yet, just as it hadn’t in 1971. Venezuela claimed a rogue state, the linguistic misinterpretation of ‘wipe Israel off the face of the map’ presented as fact, the Russians chastised for their actions while the Georgian government is showered with praise, and the unbelievable assertion that al-Qaeda will claim a foothold in Iraq if the US fails in its mission employed as the fear card. The Shia would eat them alive were the US to leave the country, but let’s not let reality get in the way.

No, tonight was a lesson in the exhaustive inanity of American politics. The Muses, it seems, have cast their euphoric haze and wait with anticipation to see what dead loss is born.

This is what it has come to.

I hope Matthew Good can play a mean guitar but it's obvious that he does not understand democracy. Democracy is not about leadership/vision/solutions/management but about those who accept the responsibility to carry out the wishes of the citizenry who are the sole source of legitimacy. Those who accept this responsibility are disposable as it is their office and with what they are charged that lives on.

That is a terribly cynical and ultimately complacent attitude and approach to a democratic nation. Your nation, realistically, could be on the verge of what will be historically regarded as its rapid decline and eventual collapse, and you are arguing semantics, saying, 'It's not fair to expect a leader to have leadership capabilities, or to have vision, or to offer any solutions, or to be able to manage - well, anything!'

A little perspective is important in this instance. While certainly, anyone can theoretically be elected (see: Palin, Sarah), Americans ought to set their sights a little damn higher if they want to keep their nation alive for a few more years. And when someone as intelligent, charismatic, and motivated as Barack Obama appears on the scene, espousing progressive and grounded ideas that America's youth can believe in, yes, it's a terrible thing when he forgets to be that person.

Obama panders to the religious, panders to the military-industrial complex and its effect on the American psyche, the subsequent quasi-xenophobic paranoia and culture of fear, ad infinitum. Obama is trying to prove that, don't worry, he's not really all that liberal or anything. And don't worry, he's tough and he'll use force to defend nations like Israel, outright repeat lies about places like Russia and Iran, ad nauseam.

Maybe this is what he thinks he has to do to win. And maybe he's right.

But that doesn't make what he's doing right.

This is a very cynical approach to democracy, as well as a simplistic one. Someone in Barack Obama's position has a tremendous opportunity to inspire and to truly fight for a more progressive, more tolerant America. But he instead panders to the religious, he panders to the military-industrial complex and general xenophobic fears, and he surrenders to the fear of truly attacking McCain because McCain is a 'war hero.'

My impression is that both candidates came across as a little weak and "off-game" - but that can be explained by the fact that both of these guys were in Washington earlier trying to work on the pending Wall Street fiasco. We should all give them a small pass based on that because few of us would be on our best game after flying to DC, spending endless hours in meetings, and then flying to Mississippi for a debate.

That said, I think the debate itself was a very nearly perfect draw. Both candidates gave specifics, neither made a gaffe. Both articulated a similar position on most issues, with maybe a slight shift left for Obama and a slight shift right for McCain.

Obama scores a few points for style. The guy is good at speaking sincerely.

McCain scores a few points for understanding the complexity of international affairs. He does know the subtleties of how this stuff works.

Verdict: A tie.

whigworld @ 15:
Is this your family? --> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Wroj0FLvzs
You think Obama is an "Ay-rab? "

I like the casual way the trolls throw out "facts" like whigworld's spew about "Most post-debate polls show that 70-85% of the nation thought McCain wiped the floor with that mobster Obama". Let's break down the spin here. First they cover their ass with a vague 'most' so if we find 100 polls that show the other thing they can continue to rant that there are more the other way. It doesn't need to be true but it is how they play the game. Then they throw out some 'hard numbers' oooh, 70-85% wow, that looks scientific. Never mind that only polls near 70% are places like Sludge -- and even there the last time I checked it was 68/30 for McLame. Next they go for the hyperbole -- here we have the classic image of the tough crime fighter battling the evil foe -- McLame (who can't physically lift his hands over his head) wiping the floor with the 'mobster' (got to throw in the demonizing element) Obama.

Wow, totally scripted tripe! I wonder how many lessons at "Karl Roves School of Insulting Typing" it took this troglodyte to learn it all?

"The dead have risen and they're voting Republican!" -- Bart Simpson

note to whigworld @ 15:

Both hands on the keyboard and please keep your head out of your ass. Thank you.

Meat @ 46:
why can't Obama genuinely feel that way?
he just seems way more genuine than a 26-year pee oh fucking dubya!!!!

ontheleftcoast @ 52:

Obama is gaining.

a $5,000 dollar make-up job, and they still couldn't figure out how to give his face more saturation than his teeth?

Oh, and one more thing. The entire Obama campaign has to begin to: STOP USING McCAIN's NAME! Stop advertising the slob. Use "my Republican opponent", "the Republican candidate" or just "that other guy". Every time his name or his running mate's is used that's advertising FOR THEM. Cut it out! NEVER mention the other company's product! Gee, that's like Advertising 101!

tonight and in the past few weeks, mccain has shown himself to be nothing more than a cheap, lazy, run of the mill politician... these tricks, ducking in and out of the debate to make himself seem important, the snide "what senator obama fails to understand..." pretense of superior knowledge and understanding, the cheap grandstanding while the economy hangs in the balance, the cheap, sickeningly insulting, base, dishonest ads, the choice of what amounts to a skirt instead of a suit for a v.p., all of these things and more show that he is the same wizard of oz character that bush was, which is to say, in character and depth, just a real zero.

in obama we really do have an unusual opportunity here, because it's rare for a man with so much ability and character to make it this far in politics, these things seem to be near mutually exclusive. so, america, including you dumb jackass trolls who bumble about this board with nothing better to do, here's the message, get mom to explain it you...

don't f up your country. vote obama.

jakflorida32169 @ 62:

Oh, and one more thing. The entire Obama campaign has to begin to: STOP USING McCAIN's NAME! Stop advertising the slob. Use "my Republican opponent", "the Republican candidate" or just "that other guy". Every time his name or his running mate's is used that's advertising FOR THEM. Cut it out! NEVER mention the other company's product! Gee, that's like Advertising 101!

let the surrogates and commercials mercilessly blast mcKKKeatin5

What the FOX news website was showing immediately after the debate: Pew Pew Pew. McSaint fires his POW wrist-blaster at the most liberal senator.

Meat @ 46:

Neo-classical Secular Humanist @ 26:

Meat @ 21:

I hate to say it, I really do, but tonight I realized that the difference in Barack Obama of the 2004 Democratic National Convention and the 2008 of the US Presidential election was indeed a palpable one. But when someone else has said it better, I think it's good to simply let them do the talking:

Canadian rocker and political activist Matthew Good wrote:

This is what it has come to.

I hope Matthew Good can play a mean guitar but it's obvious that he does not understand democracy. Democracy is not about leadership/vision/solutions/management but about those who accept the responsibility to carry out the wishes of the citizenry who are the sole source of legitimacy. Those who accept this responsibility are disposable as it is their office and with what they are charged that lives on.

That is a terribly cynical and ultimately complacent attitude and approach to a democratic nation. Your nation, realistically, could be on the verge of what will be historically regarded as its rapid decline and eventual collapse, and you are arguing semantics, saying, 'It's not fair to expect a leader to have leadership capabilities, or to have vision, or to offer any solutions, or to be able to manage - well, anything!'

A little perspective is important in this instance. While certainly, anyone can theoretically be elected (see: Palin, Sarah), Americans ought to set their sights a little damn higher if they want to keep their nation alive for a few more years. And when someone as intelligent, charismatic, and motivated as Barack Obama appears on the scene, espousing progressive and grounded ideas that America's youth can believe in, yes, it's a terrible thing when he forgets to be that person.

Obama panders to the religious, panders to the military-industrial complex and its effect on the American psyche, the subsequent quasi-xenophobic paranoia and culture of fear, ad infinitum. Obama is trying to prove that, don't worry, he's not really all that liberal or anything. And don't worry, he's tough and he'll use force to defend nations like Israel, outright repeat lies about places like Russia and Iran, ad nauseam.

Maybe this is what he thinks he has to do to win. And maybe he's right.

But that doesn't make what he's doing right.

This is a very cynical approach to democracy, as well as a simplistic one. Someone in Barack Obama's position has a tremendous opportunity to inspire and to truly fight for a more progressive, more tolerant America. But he instead panders to the religious, he panders to the military-industrial complex and general xenophobic fears, and he surrenders to the fear of truly attacking McCain because McCain is a 'war hero.'

You can call it cynical. I call it reality. Reality bites. The passion and fire of real progressives don't translate well to the national stage. That is why progressive voices like Kucinich can win legislative seats but not the Whitehouse. Occasionally times are right or circumstances will let someone slip thru the cracks and change things. FDR wasn't a real progressive to start with but he saw the mess the country was in and launched some great programs that truly improved the way Americans lived (and yes, some of the things he did were wrong -- like trying to pack the Supreme Court) But I think it is true that "The times make the man" as much as the "The man makes the times". So if Obama has greatness in him (and I think he does) then the times that are ahead will give him a chance to shine and make things happen for the better in this country. Just as surely as I know that Johnny-boy and Moose-girl will send us straight on the road to Hell (after they steal everything we have).

constituent @ 67:

jakflorida32169 @ 62:

Oh, and one more thing. The entire Obama campaign has to begin to: STOP USING McCAIN's NAME! Stop advertising the slob. Use "my Republican opponent", "the Republican candidate" or just "that other guy". Every time his name or his running mate's is used that's advertising FOR THEM. Cut it out! NEVER mention the other company's product! Gee, that's like Advertising 101!

yes i've thinking the same thing....not sure why they're
not doing that.

smile as you kick their asses.

jakflorida32169 @ 51:

From many of you, the consensus appears to be that Obama was too much a gentleman in tonight's debate and that he should go on the attack. Partially I agree. I feel your frustration. I get angry, too. I've spent many a night walking my deck, railing at the moon and wanting to grab that lying piece of crap McCain by the throat and finish what the North Vietnamese didn't.

But then I calm down and think. (A little thing we liberals often do!) And it occurs to me that that is exactly what the McCain camp would want. Anything to paint Obama as wild and reactionary. Plus, it would waste Obama's time correcting McCain's slanders instead of spreading his own message. So... do we play their game or create our own rules?

McCain has amassed a long list of lies that can be and have been debunked by many news orgs and fact check groups. Let them do their job. Obama's campaign can flood the airways with replay after replay of McCains lies in commercial after commercial. Let them do their job. And Obama? He can be "above the fray", delivering clear and compelling statements and, as more and more people are beginning to see, projecting the image of a leader and President.

So the pressure and focus needs to be on McCain. And he can be as slippery as an eel. Rather than attack, I would like to see Obama learn to deflect. In football, when a linebacker is trying to get to the quarterback, he doesn't tackle everyone in his way. He pushes them off, he deflects them. That's what Obama needs to do as we approach 11/4.

Example:

McCain: Obama is the most liberal Senator in Congress.

Obama: John, I'm far from the most liberal Senator and you know that. So let's return to the subject of the discussion....

See? Toss off the bullshit. It'll make McCain look petty and frustrate the hell out of him! (That's the fun part.) You don't always have to be a bastard equal to the bastard you're dealing with.

Excellent point.

I was VERY pissed at first that he didn't seem to hit harder, and he probably still does need to, but you are correct in your methodology. Keep the focus on the topic! Lehrer opened the door early for McCain to step on him and subsequently, Obama. Obama needed to relax a little more (should be doable) and use his oratory skills to his advantage.

I'd love to hear him say, "John, can you honestly look me in the eye and say______". Just watch McCain explode!

CoIntelPro for Pronktastic Victory Over SCLM, DIEBOLD, ESS and SEQUOIA! @ 72:

constituent @ 67:

jakflorida32169 @ 62:

Oh, and one more thing. The entire Obama campaign has to begin to: STOP USING McCAIN's NAME! Stop advertising the slob. Use "my Republican opponent", "the Republican candidate" or just "that other guy". Every time his name or his running mate's is used that's advertising FOR THEM. Cut it out! NEVER mention the other company's product! Gee, that's like Advertising 101!

yes i've thinking the same thing....not sure why they're
not doing that.

smile as you kick their asses.

exactly.......i'm frustrated because it's being framed
like that ....maybe to attract indies....i don't know

How can u approve an ads you never seen

But I have to admit, I did saw this one coming

bullfrog @ 60:

a $5,000 dollar make-up job, and they still couldn't figure out how to give his face more saturation than his teeth?

you'd think the dumb fuck would get caps, or a good bleaching.
but if you only have shit coming out of your mouth, it's hard to get out the stains.
It's organic, you know, like grape juice.

constituent @ 76:

CoIntelPro for Pronktastic Victory Over SCLM, DIEBOLD, ESS and SEQUOIA! @ 72:

constituent @ 67:

jakflorida32169 @ 62:
yes i've thinking the same thing....not sure why they're
not doing that.

smile as you kick their asses.

exactly.......i'm frustrated because it's being framed
like that ....maybe to attract indies....i don't know

I think it's more fact - mcCain needs no help looking pedantic, immature, reckless, foolish, locked in his nightmarish fear of losing a war and willing to risk the future of this country to fulfill a personal ambition.

incidentally, the five thousand that's supposed to make everyone shut up about their health care needs, does that do anything about the fact that insurance companies still "vet" their clients with all kinds of preexisting conditions disclaimers etc., i knew a man who had a daughter and wife with asthma and they had one hell of a time getting anyone to carry them... would giving him some money really help his problem? it sounds like he thinks he's giving them alms to the poor or something, here take this and now quit complaining.

it would not fix anything. there are no people here who deserve health care more than any other people here. thinking so, that's extremely "elitist" isn't it.

Lotta trolls tonight...

The first Debate O did fine, better than I expected. The moderated sucked big time. In fact I think he was working for McLooneytune (I killed you brother JUST LIKE T-H-I-S!!!) with all the finger pointing Sleepy got all fired up and his eye righted itself.

With all the Bullshit lies McSayAnything Maverick, if I forgot to mentioin I was a POW and didn't have a table or chair-(this is where Benntet gets a 36hr Hard-On) Everytime McWacko would spew BS Bennet, King or Castellos would light up their score cards.
Yeah, thats the kind of quick thinking, shoot from the hip, gonna smokem out, dead or alive gime what I want er were all gonna DIE approach that got us into the mess-a-shit we're all sitting in.

NoBuddy @ 81:

I think World War III has been launched, .

World War III being fiscal....

O
B
A
M
A

MENTION

B
I
D
E
N

OVER AND OVER.

MCCAIN WILL NEVER MENTION PALIN.

David Rain @ 92:

O
B
A
M
A

MENTION

B
I
D
E
N

OVER AND OVER.

MCCAIN WILL NEVER MENTION PALIN.

If Obama will do this at the next two debates, the media and everyone will have to take note. If I were Obama, I would try to mention Biden's name about 10-20 times in the next debate, to make the point crystal clear.

David Rain @ 93/94:

ABSOLUTELY!!!!!

ABSOLUTELY!!!!!

McCain is full of shit. He could not look Obama in the eye. He is affraid and he is lying.

In fact quite often blinking and swallowing while Obama responded to his lies.
Very disturbing behavior.

A complete WHITE wash

Cas @ 97:

The Very Bitter Ceci Hussein @ 77:

upchuck @ 73:

#1 SDI had nothing to do with the econmic meltdown that took place in the former Soviet Union.
#2 Putin is no longer in charge of Russia.
#3 The KGB has not existed for almost 20 years.
#4 Sevastapol is in the Ukraine not the Soviet Union.
#5 Henry Kissinger did in fact call for an unconditional dialog between Iran and the United States. It was in the paper a few days ago.
#6 My favorite part was when he started talking about not letting us win in Vietnam. A line from the first Rambo movie.

I think McCain understands a lot about the Cold War; but, little or nothing about the Post Cold War Era.

Three words sum it up

OUT OF TOUCH

Thanks for mentioning that. Putin is Prime Minister, but he's not the leader. Dmitry Medvedev is the President of Russia. Which means both Palin and McCain are blowing smoke.

The rest, I agree with.

You agree with #4 as well?

Why not? First of all the USSR is long gone (not that McSame has noticed) and secondly, yes Sevastopol is a Ukrainian city. From Wikipedia:

Sevastopol (English pronunciation, IPA: /ˌsɛvəˈstoʊpəl/ or /səˈvæstəpoʊl/) (Ukrainian and Russian: Севастополь; Crimean Tatar: Aqyar,Turkish: Sivastopol,Greek: Σεβαστούπολις Sebastoupolis), formerly known as Sebastopol, is a port city in Ukraine, located on the Black Sea coast of the Crimea peninsula. It has a population of 342,451 (2001).[1] The city, formerly the home of the Soviet Black Sea Fleet, is now a Ukrainian naval base mutually used by the Ukrainian Navy and Russian Navy.

Lothar @ 93:

I was dissapointed in Obama. I thought he looked lame and I hardly aggreed with any of his positions, which shocked the hell out of me. I don't care about Georgia, I'm not afraid of the Russians or the Chinese or Iran, and I don't want to give wallstreet 700 Billion dollars. Oh, and I can't stand Isreal, although I expected his sucking up to it.
I'm gonna have to write in Ron Paul aren't I?

so you would like it if the next president stuck his head deep in a hole and forgot all about what this current administration has done

who cares if you cant stand israel...you live in america

fucking jew hater

ontheleftcoast @ 100:

Cas @ 97:

The Very Bitter Ceci Hussein @ 77:

upchuck @ 73:

Thanks for mentioning that. Putin is Prime Minister, but he's not the leader. Dmitry Medvedev is the President of Russia. Which means both Palin and McCain are blowing smoke.

The rest, I agree with.

You agree with #4 as well?

Why not? First of all the USSR is long gone (not that McSame has noticed) and secondly, yes Sevastopol is a Ukrainian city. From Wikipedia:

Sevastopol (English pronunciation, IPA: /ˌsɛvəˈstoʊpəl/ or /səˈvæstəpoʊl/) (Ukrainian and Russian: Севастополь; Crimean Tatar: Aqyar,Turkish: Sivastopol,Greek: Σεβαστούπολις Sebastoupolis), formerly known as Sebastopol, is a port city in Ukraine, located on the Black Sea coast of the Crimea peninsula. It has a population of 342,451 (2001).[1] The city, formerly the home of the Soviet Black Sea Fleet, is now a Ukrainian naval base mutually used by the Ukrainian Navy and Russian Navy.

So what is correct is:
# Sevastapol is in the Ukraine not Rusia.
# Sevastapol was in the Soviet Union.
Not:
# Sevastapol is in the Ukraine not the Soviet Union.

I listened to the debate on the radio and thus did not pick up a lot of the non-vocals that seem to be a big part of the post debate analysis. While pulling for Obama, it seemed to me that McCain came out more-or-less even on debating points, especially since I think expectations were lower for him. Assuming the VP debates are done with a similar format, with both candidates able to address each other, I simply do not see Palin being even competitive on the issues (even though expectations for her will be even lower than they were for McCain). As long as Biden doesn't come off as too patronizing or calls her "little missy," I expect the VEEP debate to be a clear win for Obama/Biden.

Impeach cheney and bush @ 9:

As I watched I kept telling Obama to hit back, call McCain for his flip-flopping, lies, and erratic behavior. How about the fact that he voted against raising the minimum wage 19 times but can't remember how many homes he has? How about how McCain wants the rich to get permanent tax breaks, none for the middle class, and voted against equal pay for women? How about privitizing social security? Why did he vote against the GI Bill if he cares about the military? I just hopes he gets him on the next debates.

There will plenty of time for that in the upcoming debates which will focus on domestic policy...this one was the foreign policy debate that McCain was supposed to be the expert on. It's a pretty bad sign for him when the debate he should had in the bag against a n00b like Obama is at best a draw for him.

To debate Obama to draw in foreign policy == loss for McCain. This was supposed to be his strength. The next debates are going to be brutal for Mr. "I was a POW"

Cas @ 104:

ontheleftcoast @ 100:

Cas @ 97:

The Very Bitter Ceci Hussein @ 77:

You agree with #4 as well?

Why not? First of all the USSR is long gone (not that McSame has noticed) and secondly, yes Sevastopol is a Ukrainian city. From Wikipedia:

Sevastopol (English pronunciation, IPA: /ˌsɛvəˈstoʊpəl/ or /səˈvæstəpoʊl/) (Ukrainian and Russian: Севастополь; Crimean Tatar: Aqyar,Turkish: Sivastopol,Greek: Σεβαστούπολις Sebastoupolis), formerly known as Sebastopol, is a port city in Ukraine, located on the Black Sea coast of the Crimea peninsula. It has a population of 342,451 (2001).[1] The city, formerly the home of the Soviet Black Sea Fleet, is now a Ukrainian naval base mutually used by the Ukrainian Navy and Russian Navy.

So what is correct is:
# Sevastapol is in the Ukraine not Rusia.
# Sevastapol was in the Soviet Union.
Not:
# Sevastapol is in the Ukraine not the Soviet Union.

You missed the point -- McLame doesn't realize the Soviet Union is gone. He repeatedly makes this mistake. Most days he doesn't know there is a country called Russia -- his brain is frozen somewhere in 1989.

I despise McCain.

He didn't give Barack the courtesy of eye contact. He looked cranky and contemptuous and disrespectful. He has this haughty sense of entitlement, as if he's owed the presidency.

That said, Obama was much too diplomatic. He's up again up a liar and a killer. He needs to go for the jugular. Enough of this "I agree with you, John" bullshit. At times he seemed like the house you-know-what. He doesn't need to be told "you don't understand" a hundred times. He need to slap that old coot down, and good. Maybe next time.

McGramps did much better than I thought he would. And Obama slightly disappointed me. But a lot of polls indicate that he either held his own or won outright. So that's good.

whigworld @ 15:

Were you guys watching the same debate the rest of the country was? Most post-debate polls show that 70-85% of the nation thought McCain wiped the floor with that mobster Obama.

Sure...Obama was polished. but when you spend all of your prep time memorizing your lines, you should look good.

It was very obvious that McCain got under his skin many times. In fact, on 8 occassions, Barack Hussein Obama started a sentence with "You're right, Senator McCain."

This election will be a dogfight, and will come down to the wire. but once the entire country hears about Obama's associations with terrorists and criminals, and realizes that a preident needs experience, not just charisma, then McCain will win out.

Go back to freeperville, you freak.

Some trails are happy ones,
Others are blue.
It's the way you ride the trail that counts,
Here's a happy one for you. -- From Happy Trails

GNA!

bullfrog @ 109:

Uncle Joe Mccarthy @ 102:

Lothar @ 93:

I was dissapointed in Obama. I thought he looked lame and I hardly aggreed with any of his positions, which shocked the hell out of me. I don't care about Georgia, I'm not afraid of the Russians or the Chinese or Iran, and I don't want to give wallstreet 700 Billion dollars. Oh, and I can't stand Isreal, although I expected his sucking up to it.
I'm gonna have to write in Ron Paul aren't I?

so you would like it if the next president stuck his head deep in a hole and forgot all about what this current administration has done

who cares if you cant stand israel...you live in america

fucking jew hater

people need to understand israel is mostly made up of good jews, they just sort of have the same problem we have here in america, in that the lunatics have overrun the asylum.

i think it will change soon for both countries...

no...what no one is aware of, is that israeli forces stop at least one terrorist attack per day, coming from either gaza or the west bank

think about if we had to stop daily attacks coming from canada and mexico...think we would stand for it? think we would want to immediatly give back texas and cali to mexico?

the idea that israel is solely responsible for everything that has occured in the middle east is absurd

for that lies on the backs of the brits, who cut up the entire region and handed it over to warlords in order to better control the area and its oil

but the worst thing for israel, would be to have a mccain/palin administration....just as a bush administration has been terrible for them

before bush, iran was never a real threat...now, in order to make the radicals in that country feel good, you have an ahmadinijad rattling his saber, and a country hellbent on building nukes...they werent doing either as long as sadaam was around

and if we had anyone but bush as prez, the lebanon war never would have happened...for another prez wouldve sat down with the israelis before they went in

but mccain/palin says we can never second guess them....and that is just nuts

and i really wish they would stop with "we will not allow a second holocaust"...are they not aware that not only is israel well armed, but have their own nukes and can take care of themselves? what is occuring now in no way resembles a holocaust and to use that term, even in regards to war, lessens what occured in ww2 against innocent human beings

[The topic of this thread is 'Presidential Debate: Obama Calls Out McCain’s Judgment.' Move this to an open thread. I'll be deleting any more of this discussion here-Sitemonitor]

Let's be real. McCain won this debate. Not by much, but he won it. He was more aggressive, more assertive, more confident, and more knowledgeable. Obama did very well, but McCain did better, especially to the gut-level reactionary electorate that will decide this election. It was a good fight, and it went the distance; but McCain gets the decision.

Uncle Joe @ 111:

Steve Doocy. What a piece of work! I used to live in D.C. and when I was younger (10 maybe 15 years now) Stevie was a "local" reporter on one of our local stations doing those "cutsey" human interest stories stations like to do, y'know, poodle fashion shows, woman finds potato that looks like Elvis, stuff like that. His was an unbearably self-assured ass back then and from what I've seen and heard his reputation has not improved! For that clown to imagine he has any intelligent opinion is the height of hubris!

McCain started off in the muck: he invoked Ted Kennedy in the most egregious and blatantly canny attempt to drag the viewers by the heart into his camp.

McCain went on like a kicked dog through the rest of the debate, fearful of ever looking Obama in the face, even as Obama directed his comments straight at him. Never once did McCain direct a comment at Obama.

In every question, McCain seemed to get more flustered, and was even making sniffing sounds like he was ill near the end of the debate. Obama's demeanor was always prim, calm, and intelligent. McCain's was confused, ill-equipped, and angry.

The Dial Response Group ratings fell well below the mid-line every time McCain spoke, particularly that of the line which represented Independents, and typically rose well above the mid-line in response to Obama. In sheer mathematical scoring, the data will show Obama the clear winner.

Barack Obama won this first debate handily.

What Obama did, was show good manners class and restraint. In the South that still means something.
The next debate... Fagetaboutit..

Don't listen to the MSM pundit-so-called experts. You watched it. I watched it. Obama called him on every line of BULLSHIT.

another thing about the debate:

i thought jim lehrer was excellent, as usual.

he was even-handed and non-partisan, and encouraged mccain and obama to duke it out a little... which is what a DEBATE is supposed to be.

Hi, folks --

I put together a Top 10 Presidential Debate Highlights list, for anyone who missed the main event. Hope you like, and it's here - on my blog, Mojopost. It is safe for work, if you are employed.

Thanks for reading!

Your Pal,
Mojopo

bullfrog @ 128:

another thing about the debate:

i thought jim lehrer was excellent, as usual.

he was even-handed and non-partisan, and encouraged mccain and obama to duke it out a little... which is what a DEBATE is supposed to be.

i pretty much agree. i'm a news hour fan when i have the time. i will say this i thought jim interfered when obama was trying to poke mccain with the 'economy
is fundamentally strong' no big deal but i think it got diluted.

constituent @ 131:

bullfrog @ 128:

another thing about the debate:

i thought jim lehrer was excellent, as usual.

he was even-handed and non-partisan, and encouraged mccain and obama to duke it out a little... which is what a DEBATE is supposed to be.

i pretty much agree. i'm a news hour fan when i have the time. i will say this i thought jim interfered when obama was trying to poke mccain with the 'economy
is fundamentally strong' no big deal but i think it got diluted.

Jim Lehrer... It's hard to even imagine a debate without him. Stellar work.

Scott @ 132:

constituent @ 130:

Scott @ 120:

Let's be real. McCain won this debate. Not by much, but he won it. He was more aggressive, more assertive, more confident, and more knowledgeable. Obama did very well, but McCain did better, especially to the gut-level reactionary electorate that will decide this election. It was a good fight, and it went the distance; but McCain gets the decision.

it's subjective.......the spin may persuade people
maybe like yourself. mccain provided the same chant
nothing really new beyond the brand. for demographics
that mccain routinely telling us what obama doesn't
understand isn't convincing to me. for me the debate
didn't change my mind that obama is the future. under the bush administration we are in a whole in many
issues. a couple issues to come to mind quickly mccain
is NOT supportive of veterans and mccain is NOT offering the truth about taxation. there has been a
continuation of deception in the mccain campaign. one
last thing sarah palin is a catastrophy.

Let me be clear. I didn't say McCain won the ARGUEMENTS; I say he won the DEBATE. True, his "knowledge" was often wrong, and his conclusions flawed. But he was tough, confident, and assertive. I'm speaking form the gut, because gut is what decides elections. Bush lost all of his arguements in the debates, but he believed his own bullsh*t, so came across as confident and sincere, and got the votes to win. That's what I mean that McCain won. Watch the polls; McCain will go up.

we're different i'm not speaking from the gut. the perceived toughness means next to nothing to me.
i just finished watching charlie rose...i recommend it.
he had at least 8 major media/writers. again what
appealed to you didn't appeal to me i understand. i will
add this the toughness theme is a cover for age and
potential health risk at his age. there both confident
and assertive let's be real. i'm boring i like content
many people are looking for a soundbite. i'll bet you
obama is much smarter and capable. mccain is spoon
feed more so.

MEMO

Tonight Obama threw softballs in round one. McCain didn't drop dead, Couldn't look O in the eye.

What's it gonna look like when O brings the heat in round two.

Or could McCain Lie some more and have the MSM play those lies like, they're only white lies. They could be true because it's half lie Friday. And he's under scocial stresses that would not make him normally lie.

rsp
J.Crow

Obama has GOT to stop saying "John" and "I agree" ...

From now on, McGramps is "my opponent," OK, Barack? No more deferential comments. No more civil acquiescence.

Remember, he and Palin will never accord you any respect -- either by polite salutation or eye contact. You're just an "uppity" upstart to them -- even though you're spectacularly better than they are.

Is there a place we can e-mail our concerns and advice to Obama's campaign?

this nonsense of trying to frame obama as inferior to
mccain is nothing less than ridiculous.there are people providing a count of how many times obama said he agreed with mccain.so what. obama is realistic and bipartisan. people don't get it. they're so into trying to find something to better/spin their opponent.
obama is intelligent enough to agree with someone. this
is a stretch to say the glass is half full when it's filled to the top. a lot of score keepers keeping the wrong score.
wow we don't have anything on obama so let's create something.....a perception...so we can stay with our culture
club....not face real issues. mccain with 26 yrs. in congress
didn't convince me that he much better/qualified to do anything
better than obama. mccain doesn't even recognize his party.
it's common knowledge that Ahmadinejad is NOT the most
powerful person/leader of Iran.

mccain/palin lovers please explain this.

http://bravenewfilms.org/blog/54487-the-witch-hunter-anoints-sarah-palin

palin lovers please explain this for me. short video
palin taking a question. NOW remember mccain said
palin is a leading energy expert in the united states

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvUsdmqGYV8&eurl=http://thinkprogress.org/

constituent @ 135:

Scott @ 132:

constituent @ 130:

Scott @ 120:
it's subjective.......the spin may persuade people
maybe like yourself. mccain provided the same chant
nothing really new beyond the brand. for demographics
that mccain routinely telling us what obama doesn't
understand isn't convincing to me. for me the debate
didn't change my mind that obama is the future. under the bush administration we are in a whole in many
issues. a couple issues to come to mind quickly mccain
is NOT supportive of veterans and mccain is NOT offering the truth about taxation. there has been a
continuation of deception in the mccain campaign. one
last thing sarah palin is a catastrophy.

Let me be clear. I didn't say McCain won the ARGUEMENTS; I say he won the DEBATE. True, his "knowledge" was often wrong, and his conclusions flawed. But he was tough, confident, and assertive. I'm speaking form the gut, because gut is what decides elections. Bush lost all of his arguements in the debates, but he believed his own bullsh*t, so came across as confident and sincere, and got the votes to win. That's what I mean that McCain won. Watch the polls; McCain will go up.

we're different i'm not speaking from the gut. the perceived toughness means next to nothing to me.
i just finished watching charlie rose...i recommend it.
he had at least 8 major media/writers. again what
appealed to you didn't appeal to me i understand. i will
add this the toughness theme is a cover for age and
potential health risk at his age. there both confident
and assertive let's be real. i'm boring i like content
many people are looking for a soundbite. i'll bet you
obama is much smarter and capable. mccain is spoon
feed more so.

Let me clarify: When I talk about who wins or loses, I am talking purely about who got closer to winning the election. Obama had better answers. He had more intelligent content. But this is not what wins elections. Sincerely wrong consistantly beats stuffy, uptight, thoughtful right. Americans react to strength of character and simple, emotional impulses. They vote for who they're "comfortable" with. McCain won that appeal today. It's why George Bush got two terms in the white house after losing the debates on content.

brokenarrow @ 144:

Round one done. How anyone can say McDinosaur won with out looking the man in the eye is just ignorant.

That's not suprising...it's the ugly McCain that everyone in the DC establishment already knows. The guy's one of the biggest assholes in the Senate.