OT: Presidential Debate - Who Won?
Voltronicus
liar.
Can't wait to see Biden tear Palin a new one in the VP debate!
Peter
That was not my impression. I thought there were some points to award
to each. Even so, foreign policy and defense were the stated primary
emphases of this debate and should be Senator McCain's strong points.
He is slightly behind in the polls. He has stated that he is not
proficient in economics. One has to wonder what could happen in
subsequent debates (not primarily on foreign policy or defense) that
would cause him to pull ahead. If I were to guess, I guess that he
will lose.
Voltronicus
> On Sep 27, 2:58 pm, Voltronicus <fwdi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Obamalamadingdong made McCain look like a doddering old crackpot and a
> > liar.
> > Can't wait to see Biden tear Palin a new one in the VP debate!
>
> That was not my impression. I thought there were some points to award
> to each.
Points to McCain for having the chutzpah to tell lies about
Obamalamadingdong to his face.
Double points to Obama for calling McCain a liar.
tony cooper
wrote:
>On Sep 27, 2:58 pm, Voltronicus <fwdi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Obamalamadingdong made McCain look like a doddering old crackpot and a
>> liar.
>That was not my impression.
I agree. I was an Obama backer before the debate, I watched all of
the debate, and I paid close attention. There was no clear-cut winner
or loser. Both came across as informed and proficient in debate.
You can score small points to each here and there, but - overall - it
was a tie.
Both were losers in one sense in that there was nothing about the
debate that would push an undecided voter either way. The November
winner will be the candidate who does find a way to win over the
undecided voters.
>> Can't wait to see Biden tear Palin a new one in the VP debate!
I don't think we'll see that, either. The Democrats will claim
victory, and the Republicans will claim victory, but unless Biden is
coached to go for the jugular, it will be a small victory.
The weakness of both Obama and Biden is their inability to press their
greatest advantage: they represent the party that was *not* in charge
during the greatest series of disasters this country has seen in
decades.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Voltronicus
> The weakness of both Obama and Biden is their inability to press their
> greatest advantage: they represent the party that was *not* in charge
> during the greatest series of disasters this country has seen in
> decades.
Wrong. Obamalama brought up that point several times in the debate
last night. It has also been one of the themes of his campaign.
mazorj
"Voltronicus" <fwd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:52c662ac-da70-41ab...@r66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
I may have missed it, but I don't recall McCain ever taking that on
directly enough to make it go away. For all his differences with his
party's dogma, he's not "maverick enough" to disassociate himself from
that inescapable fact. Nominating Palin was a good strategy in terms
of attempting to separate the ticket from the image and players of the
Bush regime; but most voters who want a real change are going to see
past the lipstick. They'll have a hard time pulling the lever for the
same party that inflicted 8 years of ruinous policies.
KingPin
cunninglinguist.
In article <lntDk.279$Dk4...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>, maz...@verizon.net
says...
tony cooper
Yes, he brought it up. You don't knock a man down hitting him with a
fluffy pillow, though. Obama and the Democrats should hammer this
point, and they don't.
Chas Edwards
*************
Always pleasant to hear from our resident political troll.
I quite agree with voltronicus that the Biden-Palin debate will be
interesting. One has to wonder just which speech by a British Labor
leader will be given at the debate by Biden.
Chas. Edw.
Aladdin Sane
"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:acjsd4dh8v9nlq9vh...@4ax.com...
My wife is an Australian, looking to gain citizenship. This election year
is one she is watching very closely. So she watched the debate and the
commentary while I attended to other matters. After the debate she came out
and asked if I wanted to hear her opinion. Sure I said. "McCain is an
idiot" she said.
A little later, as she was listening to the commentary afterwards, she came
out and asked the same question. I answered affirmatively. "Guilianni is
an idiot."
After some more time she repeated this activity, again I said yes. "Biden
is brilliant"
There you have it.
--
*
/?\
/___\
-O=O-
^
AS & His Magic Hat
A conclusion is simply the place
where you decided to stop thinking.
Jerry Dennis
To answer the subject question, I wasn't home to watch the debate,
so... I WON!
If ever there was the need, this year we need the choice, "None of the
above."
Jerry
KingPin
was a master orator. If you think an inexperienced community organizer
can lead the USA better than a seasoned Vietnam Veteran with leadership
experience you are sadly mistaken. Obama as the leader of the armed
forces is a scary thought. Just as many wars in the past started due to
the US indiffernces to world affairs drudged us into major wars that we
were ill prepared for. At least when a Republican led us into war for
the first time (Gulf War) we were prepared to win. Keep an eye on the
Russian/Georgian situation because if Obama wins he sure won't. World
affairs affect the US and the Dems just don't get it, then it's too
late. Obama will cut military spending as soon as he gets in office,
and when you are weak thats when other countries will strike
(somewhere). So go ahead and vote for your pie in the sky idealist who
speaks well and makes you feel good. BTW, open your wallets because he
will be coming after your money to pay for all the free stuff he is
promising everyone to get votes.
In article <79GdnaTAzfP3cEPV...@comcast.com>, jmazza14
@comcast.net says...
PC
"KingPin" <peng...@comcast.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.23497b8a9...@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> The better orator is often times not the best choice for leader. Hitler
> was a master orator. If you think an inexperienced community organizer
> can lead the USA better than a seasoned Vietnam Veteran with leadership
> experience you are sadly mistaken.
Welcome to the kool-aid factory...
sgt23
> "KingPin" <pengui...@comcast.com> wrote in message
Damn I though this was the Kibbler tree house.
mazorj
"KingPin" <peng...@comcast.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.23497b8a9...@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> The better orator is often times not the best choice for leader.
> Hitler was a master orator.
It cuts both ways. Bush can't string three sentences together without
committing a howler, and we all know how great a president he has
been.
Since you played the Hitler card, for the sake of argument only, let's
follow your lead. Hitler was a "community organizer" with no
appreciable experience in office before he assumed the mantle of
Fuhrer. He went on to become one of the most effective national
leaders in history. He mobilized his country's citizens and economy
for more than a decade to prosecute foreign and domestic policies that
knocked out a long string of rivals through diplomatic and military
means, even though he never rose above the rank of trench-rat corporal
and had no domestic or foreign policy experience. He also squelched
practically all internal threats to Germany's security. In terms of
effectiveness as a leader, he far surpassed most others in history,
including all the ones with extensive experience.
The fact that his goals and methods were the epitome of evil is
irrelevant for making this point. You're right, oratory skills don't
predict a leaders effectiveness in office - but all other things being
equal, a leader who can articulate his views and move people to
support them is going to be more effective. Compare "Silent Cal"
Coolidge to FDR, or Dukakis to Reagan. And then there's Churchill.
True, he was as experienced as his feckless predecesors, but it's hard
to imagine England hanging on and making their comeback as well as
they did without Sir Winston's public oratory stiffening the upper
lips and spines of its citizenry.
> If you think an inexperienced community organizer
> can lead the USA better than a seasoned Vietnam Veteran with
> leadership
> experience you are sadly mistaken.
See above.
> Obama as the leader of the armed
> forces is a scary thought. Just as many wars in the past started
> due to
> the US indiffernces to world affairs drudged us into major wars that
> we
> were ill prepared for. At least when a Republican led us into war
> for
> the first time (Gulf War) we were prepared to win.
And the second and third times after that?
> Keep an eye on the
> Russian/Georgian situation because if Obama wins he sure won't.
> World
> affairs affect the US and the Dems just don't get it, then it's too
> late.
What has the current administration done to deter the Russian Bear,
let alone stop it in its tracks? What would McCain do to
*effectively* respond? Should we invade Georgia if the Russians do?
Drop a few nukes? Oh! ...maybe he can threaten to send Palin over in
a helicopter with a scoped rifle.
> Obama will cut military spending as soon as he gets in office,
> and when you are weak thats when other countries will strike
> (somewhere).
Bush already has accomplished that. Our military is so extended and
expended that our enemies have been emboldened to an extent that we
haven't seen since WW2. The terrorists know it, the Russians know it,
Iran and North Korea know it, China knows it, even tin-pot dictators
and two-bit political ideologues like Hugo Chavez know it.
> So go ahead and vote for your pie in the sky idealist who
> speaks well and makes you feel good. BTW, open your wallets because
> he
> will be coming after your money to pay for all the free stuff he is
> promising everyone to get votes.
Not unless you make more than ~$250,000. Those of us who don't would
have our income taxes cut. I'm more concerned about the taxes we will
have to pay to cover the corporate bail-outs and the off-budget costs
of an unwinnable war in Iraq, which will be our burden no matter who
is president. The Iraq tab already exceeds $550 billion. In a year
it will surpass the $700 billion blank check for Paulson to dispense
in corporate welfare, which we already know was a WAG that could
easily be exceeded.
Scott Stevenson
<jmaz...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>After some more time she repeated this activity, again I said yes. "Biden
>is brilliant"
Wow. That's a term that is, shall we say, not often applied to the
Senator...
tony cooper
wrote:
>The better orator is often times not the best choice for leader. Hitler
>was a master orator. If you think an inexperienced community organizer
>can lead the USA better than a seasoned Vietnam Veteran with leadership
>experience you are sadly mistaken.
Exactly what leadership experience did McCain gain in Vietnam? He was
a Navy pilot based on an aircraft carrier. He was not in a command
position. He graduated near the bottom of his class at the U.S. Naval
Academy. (4th from the bottom, I think)
Whatever experience Obama gained as a community organizer involved
more actual leadership experience than McCain gained in Vietnam.
Voltronicus
> Exactly what leadership experience did McCain gain in Vietnam? He was
> a Navy pilot based on an aircraft carrier. He was not in a command
> position. He graduated near the bottom of his class at the U.S. Naval
> Academy. (4th from the bottom, I think)
Although McCain's bravery during his captivity must be admired,
getting captured by the enemy hardly qualifies a person to be POTUS.
Military experience as a qualification for presidency is over-rated
anyhow.
Voltronicus
> > Welcome to the kool-aid factory...
>
> Damn I though this was the Kibbler tree house.
Sarge, you are so remarkably clueless that reading your posts has
become a comedy highlight of this group.
tony cooper
Dwight Eisenhower's military experience meant something. His was a
command position, he had direct experience in leadership, he had
experience in diplomacy in his relationship with other Allied
commanders, and he had experience in running a massive operation.
Harry Truman's military experience as a Captain in the Field Artillery
in WWI did not mean much as far as his qualifications for President.
But he didn't claim it did, either. His experience as a Senator
during WWII on the war investigation committee counted for more.
I'm not minimizing McCain's contribution as a Naval pilot, but I don't
see how it gives him any credibility as a presidential candidate.
Voltronicus
> I'm not minimizing McCain's contribution as a Naval pilot, but I don't
> see how it gives him any credibility as a presidential candidate.
Me either.
Charles Cooper
Voltronicus
> Hitler was a misunderstood genius.
AND he fucked up wearing a toothbrush mustache for the rest of time.
Chaplin's little tramp wore the toothbrush, Oliver Hardy wore the
toothbrush but wear one today and everyone thinks you're Hitler!
Michael G. Koerner
that that the debates were won by the lefty. If you are a conservative, your
guy was a crumudity loser and you the candidates are to be endlessly ridiculed
and belittled by the Chosen Ones.
KEWL!
:-D
--
___________________________________________ ____ _______________
Regards, | |\ ____
| | | | |\
Michael G. Koerner May they | | | | | | rise again!
Appleton, Wisconsin USA | | | | | |
___________________________________________ | | | | | | _______________
Chas Edwards
Exactly what leadership experience did McCain gain in Vietnam? He
was
a Navy pilot based on an aircraft carrier. He was not in a command
position. He graduated near the bottom of his class at the U.S.
Naval
Academy. (4th from the bottom, I think)
Whatever experience Obama gained as a community organizer involved
more actual leadership experience than McCain gained in Vietnam.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
***********
I quite agree with you. After all, he had Bill Avery at his side
giving helpful
suggestions; what more could anyone want?
Chas. Edw.
Bruce Remick
> Obamalamadingdong made McCain look like a doddering old crackpot and a
> liar.
> Can't wait to see Biden tear Palin a new one in the VP debate!
I didn't hear a thing that I haven't already heard ad nauseum from both
sides in campaign speeches and commercials. Same tired old sound bites and
rehearsed phrases. McCain supporters are sure he won handily and Obama's
supporters are patting themselves on the back. I'm not sure I could sit
through another presidential "debate" with those two. Biden and Palin
should provide some comic relief though. I shudder to think that some of
these folks actually will be in the White House next year, and running the
country, so to speak.
"Roßert G. Schaffrath"
> Obamalamadingdong made McCain look like a doddering old crackpot and a
> liar.
> Can't wait to see Biden tear Palin a new one in the VP debate!
I am not voting for either one but I would have to give the nod to Obama
on this first debate. McCain just did not seem to have it all together.
It sort of reminded me of Reagan's first debate in the 1984 election
cycle. Everyone seems to have forgotten that debate and focuses on his
second debate when he vowed not to hold Mondale's youth and inexperience
against him.
Bruce Remick
> was a master orator. If you think an inexperienced community organizer
> can lead the USA better than a seasoned Vietnam Veteran with leadership
> experience you are sadly mistaken.
There were several hundred thousand Vietnam vets with leadership experience.
Thirty some years ago. Neither a community organizer or a Vietnam vet
impress me much as presidential material. It takes a lot of other stuff.
> Obama as the leader of the armed forces is a scary thought.
Scares me a little bit, too. Lotsa new presidents don't seem to fill that
bill at first blush. Or second. This time I see reluctance and caution vs
impulsiveness and cockiness as the choice. Each has its supporters.
> Just as many wars in the past started due to
> the US indiffernces to world affairs drudged us into major wars that we
> were ill prepared for. At least when a Republican led us into war for
> the first time (Gulf War) we were prepared to win.
But then we quit before we won, according to the typical war scenarios. As
for the second Iraq war,
> Keep an eye on the
> Russian/Georgian situation because if Obama wins he sure won't. World
> affairs affect the US and the Dems just don't get it, then it's too
> late.
I believe it was Bush II who felt it necesssary to announce the countries on
his "Axis of Evil" list to the world. So much for the possibility of
negotiating with any of these countries. And his annual formal State Dept
list of countries that support terrorism includes several which haven't
rated that badge for years, while others are omitted for apparent political
reasons. I really don't expect Obama or McCain to change anything, although
I might be surprised by Obama before McCain.
> Obama will cut military spending as soon as he gets in office,
> and when you are weak thats when other countries will strike
> (somewhere).
Some of our biggest expenditures have been for weapons we will (hopefully)
never use. Updated SSBN's, ICBM's, warheads for both, etc. Billions wasted
on thirty years of strategic ABM development, supported by both GOP and Dems
over the years. Thank goodness Reagan's "Star Wars" quietly disappeared
when he left office. Now, will either candidate dare to scrap the missile
defense system being proposed for eastern Europe. The one that rattles the
Russians? While Bush claims it is needed to protect (somebody) from a
missile attack by a rogue country like Iran, he's already stated that it
would be "unacceptible" for Iran to develop a nuclear warhead. No need for
such a controversial program in reaction to a likely self-destructive attack
involving a conventional warhead.
> So go ahead and vote for your pie in the sky idealist who
> speaks well and makes you feel good. BTW, open your wallets because he
> will be coming after your money to pay for all the free stuff he is
> promising everyone to get votes.
I agree that Obama scares me more than McCain with his grandiose plans to
solve everyone's problems and lifestyle shortcomings with public money. But
I'm still trying to figure out how that $700 billion bailout will directly
affect me as a "taxpayer", as the pundits are warning. Neither candidate
has backed off his "reduced taxes for the average family" promise? Is this
still posible or advisable? If the bailout strategy actually results in a
profit for the taxpayer one day, will these profits be distributed to us?
Wish I wasn't so stupid about these things, but I haven't heard any straight
talk yet from either candidate that someone like me could take aboard.
Bruce Remick
Me either.
*****
I totally agree as well. But it's apparently not PC to say so in a public
forum because of the suffering McCain experienced as a captive-- as have
thousands of others who would not necessarily be considered qualified to be
president. I don't believe that what McCain (or Obama) did or experienced
some thirty years ago has much bearing on what kind of president either
would make today.
tony cooper
wrote:
>
>"Voltronicus" <fwd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:bfba0ebc-972f-4ca4...@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>On Sep 28, 6:13 pm, tony cooper <tony_cooper...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> I'm not minimizing McCain's contribution as a Naval pilot, but I don't
>> see how it gives him any credibility as a presidential candidate.
>
>Me either.
>*****
>
>I totally agree as well. But it's apparently not PC to say so in a public
>forum because of the suffering McCain experienced as a captive
Reminds me of the arguments between my father (a FDR supporter) and my
grandfather (who thought FDR was the devil incarnate). My father once
mentioned how FDR had battled the difficulties of polio. My
grandfather replied "That's *his* problem, and now he's *our*
problem". No sympathy from my grandfather.
PC
"Bruce Remick" <rem...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:4eXDk.3089$aV4...@newsfe10.iad...
>
> "Voltronicus" <fwd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:bfba0ebc-972f-4ca4...@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 28, 6:13 pm, tony cooper <tony_cooper...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> I'm not minimizing McCain's contribution as a Naval pilot, but I don't
>> see how it gives him any credibility as a presidential candidate.
>
> Me either.
> *****
>
> I totally agree as well. But it's apparently not PC to say so in a public
> forum because of the suffering McCain experienced as a captive--
Is that why no one talks about the odd growth on this face either?
Voltronicus
> Is that why no one talks about the odd growth on this face either?
We just figured that was your nose, Bozo!
mazorj
"PC" <P...@Minneapolis.mn.us> wrote in message
news:y_KdnRwFOLaOfn3V...@comcast.com...
Must be a doubled die or die clash error.
PC
"mazorj" <maz...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:QM8Ek.765$kI6...@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
>
>>
>> Is that why no one talks about the odd growth on this face either?
>
> Must be a doubled die or die clash error.
>
*rim shot*
:-)
Terry
> On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 22:40:00 -0400, "Bruce Remick" <rem...@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Voltronicus" <fwd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:bfba0ebc-972f-4ca4...@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>On Sep 28, 6:13 pm, tony cooper <tony_cooper...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not minimizing McCain's contribution as a Naval pilot, but I don't
>>> see how it gives him any credibility as a presidential candidate.
>>
>>Me either.
>>*****
>>
>>I totally agree as well. But it's apparently not PC to say so in a public
>>forum because of the suffering McCain experienced as a captive
Well, at least McCain went, and Obama has never gone.
Voltronicus
> Well, at least McCain went, and Obama has never gone.
So what?
PC
On Sep 29, 10:28 pm, "Terry" <ster...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Well, at least McCain went, and Obama has never gone.
So what?
>>>
That did not seem to matter when it came to our current POTUS. He ducked
out of the war and landed a cushy gig with the National Guard and then
skipped out on that too!\
Why did anyone ever vote for that idiot?