The media is in LOVE with Barack Obama

[DBruleU]

Personally, I'd go with the one on the left. :)

http://www.johnmccain.com/video/lovethank.htm

[cutthemdown]

LOL man I hope this guy isn't the Anti-Christ.

[cutthemdown]

No way McCain is going to beat this guy. I had originally thought it would be close but I'm starting to lean towards easy victory.

[DenverBrit]

No way McCain is going to beat this guy. I had originally thought it would be close but I'm starting to lean towards easy victory.

Bush has created the atmosphere that dooms almost any Republican running for the White House.
The only hope the Repubs had was Hillary getting the nomination and the right wingers turning out to vote against her.
I just can't see McCain getting close.

[Bronco Jamus]

I don't see McCain getting close either. I am thinking Mondale type of beating.

[Traveler]

I thought the same thing in 2004 about Kerry beating Bush. See how that turned out.

Voter irregularites haven't come into play yet. Don't give up hope yet! (Sarcasm)

[Traveler]

LOL man I hope this guy isn't the Anti-Christ.

No worry, Bush was the Anti-Christ.:thumbsup:

[cutthemdown]

No worry, Bush was the Anti-Christ.:thumbsup:

Obviously you haven't read the Bible. The anti-christ everyone will love and will bring peace to the world right? I'm not religious so someone correct me if I'm wrong.

[cutthemdown]

Even if he is the anti christ I still have time to get my boat in the water and learn Giant Steps by John Coltrane. Maybe......

[cutthemdown]

I thought the same thing in 2004 about Kerry beating Bush. See how that turned out.

Voter irregularites haven't come into play yet. Don't give up hope yet! (Sarcasm)

Yes but Kerry was about as fun to be around as Spider when he's punching people in the neck. Obama just makes people happy for some reason. I think anytime the President can make his own party swoon that is almost enough to win. Republicans just don't like McCain enough to fight for him IMO.

Dems better get ready to govern because repubs are handing over the controls. I'm looking forward to seeing if a change really does make things better. I'm open minded to see what Obama can do. Maybe I will even vote for him who knows. I'm in California so it never matters who I vote for anyways. We always go Dem for President. Last one who one this state was Reagan I think.

[Rohirrim]

Why don't I like Obama? Is something wrong with me? Have I just become a nasty old sceptic? ;D

[Crushaholic]

Bush has created the atmosphere that dooms almost any Republican running for the White House.
The only hope the Repubs had was Hillary getting the nomination and the right wingers turning out to vote against her.
I just can't see McCain getting close.

That's not necessarily true. If the Republicans had nominated someone who had the energy and vitality to keep up with Obama (instead of the "next in line" candidate), I would feel better about their chances. I still think that Obama could be in trouble once the public starts paying attention to how Obama wants to govern this country (health care, taxes, etc.). It's just nowhere near a "slam dunk" for the Republicans, anymore.

[alkemical]

Obviously you haven't read the Bible. The anti-christ everyone will love and will bring peace to the world right? I'm not religious so someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Sorta - but you need an anti-pope as well.

[TDmvp]

watching the media suck up to this guy makes me throw up a little ... Like he is even worthy of the office ... If he was white and he had the same career he wouldn't even be in the running cause he is as about as qualified as i am ...

[Bronco Jamus]

The only thing I can see that will help McCain and hurt Obama is running mate. If Obama picks John Edwards it hurts him, and if McCain picks Romney it helps him.

[TDmvp]

and Chris Matthews should just blow Obama and get it over with ... Dude makes me Fing sick ...

[Rigs11]

watching the media suck up to this guy makes me throw up a little ... Like he is even worthy of the office ... If he was white and he had the same career he wouldn't even be in the running cause he is as about as qualified as i am ...

worthy like who? Bush? you voted for that yahoo didn't you?didn't he bankrupt a baseball team and allow a bunch of executions?:rofl:

[Rigs11]

The only thing I can see that will help McCain and hurt Obama is running mate. If Obama picks John Edwards it hurts him, and if McCain picks Romney it helps him.

Obama is going to pick Biden who is gonna bitchslap McSame everytime he has an alzheimer's moment.

[TDmvp]

I'm for executions LOL ... and hate baseball so it all worked out ...

[Rigs11]

I'm for executions LOL ... and hate baseball so it all worked out ...

you should be proud of your vote then..america is certainly better off...:D

[BroncoInferno]

Obama is going to pick Biden who is gonna b****slap McSame everytime he has an alzheimer's moment.

Man, I hope you're right. Biden is a top notch debater who comes with the facts ready and doesn't let anyone get away with horse****ting him. He would destroy any of the top Republican VP candidates in an open forum.

[Bronco Jamus]

Man, I hope you're right. Biden is a top notch debater who comes with the facts ready and doesn't let anyone get away with horse****ting him. He would destroy any of the top Republican VP candidates in an open forum.

I don't think he's "destroy" Mitt Romney. Especially on Economics. But I think Biden would be a good choice for Obama. The bad choices would be Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Wes Clark, and I am iffy on Jim Webb

[Drek]

The only thing I can see that will help McCain and hurt Obama is running mate. If Obama picks John Edwards it hurts him, and if McCain picks Romney it helps him.

I don't think there is any real chance he'd take Edwards. If Edwards has any role on his senior staff it would probably be Attorney General.

Webb and Biden seem to be Obama's most likely of candidates, either one should be nothing but a help.

I also don't think Romney would help that much. He didn't do very well in the Republican primaries. The thought that his Michigan ties give a boost in the state, when he didn't even win it by double digits within the Republican primary, is rather tenuous. He's also not going to magically flip a died in the wool blue state like Massachusetts into voting republican, especially not following up after GWB. On the negative, him being a Mormon will do nothing to help mend fences with the mainstream Christian denominations who are already very disinterested in his campaign. That can really hurt because the Christian right turning out in droves carried Bush to his second term.

McCain could go with someone like Sarah Palin and really go on the offensive to pull away the Hillary Clinton constituency. He could also go with Leiberman in an attempt to gain ground with Jewish voters (though recent polls suggest that Obama has more pull with them than Leiberman at this point) and that would also show his bi-partisan reaching across the isle nature. Those to me are his best choices to boost his campaign and make this a tighter race than the current "don't vote for that guy!" strategy is doing.

[BroncoInferno]

I don't think he's "destroy" Mitt Romney. Especially on Economics.

Oh, he would. Romney has that slippery used-car salesmen routine down, but guys don't get away with that with Biden. Any sketchy use of a fact or poll etc. is immediately called out.

[TDmvp]

http://img368.imageshack.us/img368/1571/1wtmediazy9.jpg

http://img368.imageshack.us/img368/2847/9worldtourfv2.jpg

[BroncoInferno]

By the way, this thread is ridiculous. The press has fawned over McCain for years. Hell, there was a book written about it:

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/21pOHe5xoHL._SL500_AA180_.jpg

“The press loves McCain. We're his base.”
—Chris Matthews, MSNBC

“John McCain is clearly the Washington media's favorite Republican.” —Brit Hume, Fox News

“The media, of course, loves John McCain because it seems like he's back to the old John McCain.” —David Shuster, MSNBC

“I think every last one of them [reporters] would move to Massachusetts and marry John McCain if they could.”
—Joe Scarborough, MSNBC

[TDmvp]

If i have to hear one more person say stuff like Everyone should go back once in a while and listen to his race speech , and check in I'll Fing Throw up ... never has the media tried pushing a person in our face this much since Dane Cook ...

[Spider]

McCains free ride is just about over ...... of course the media loves Obama cause majority of the American people love Obama......... Most of us now this country nor we the people can continue on this road , that is a fact , We dont know much about obama , but we know we elect McCain we get at least 4 more years of this **** ......

[DenverBrit]

That's not necessarily true. If the Republicans had nominated someone who had the energy and vitality to keep up with Obama (instead of the "next in line" candidate), I would feel better about their chances. I still think that Obama could be in trouble once the public starts paying attention to how Obama wants to govern this country (health care, taxes, etc.). It's just nowhere near a "slam dunk" for the Republicans, anymore.

I did say 'almost' any Republican.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

By the way, this thread is ridiculous.

:yep:

Consider the source. ;)

[DBruleU]

:yep:

Consider the source. ;)

You should be the last person here to refute something only because of the source.

It's legit video showing the media slobbering all over Obama.

[Spider]

You should be the last person here to refute something only because of the source.

It's legit video showing the media slobbering all over Obama.

He is talking bout you genius

[DBruleU]

He is talking bout you genius

And? Same rule applies.

[Spider]

And? Same rule applies.

How so ? you are an Idiot . you cant deny that , this is story , but only in your simple little mind ..........

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

And? Same rule applies.

Not when you're the boy who cried wolf. :D

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

How so ? you are an Idiot . you cant deny that , this is story , but only in your simple little mind ..........

:yep:

In a simple mind that can't grasp the meaning of that old adage about people who live in glass houses throwing stones. ;D

[DBruleU]

How so ? you are an Idiot . you cant deny that , this is story , but only in your simple little mind ..........

I didn't make it up truck boy. I just posted the link.

Who cares if it came from me, or anyone else on this board? It's footage of the bias media going ape for this guy. He has literally turned into this massive love affair, without having to do a thing to deserve it.

[Spider]

I didn't make it up truck boy. I just posted the link.

Who cares if it came from me, or anyone else on this board? It's footage of the bias media going ape for this guy. He has literally turned into this massive love affair, without having to do a thing to deserve it.

truck boy ? wow what a zinger ........... Media Bias my ass , you are a fool ....

[DBruleU]

truck boy ? wow what a zinger ........... Media Bias my ass , you are a fool ....

You must be blind, and stupid, if you think the media isn't bias.

And you call me a fool. Hilarious.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

He has literally turned into this massive love affair, without having to do a thing to deserve it.I guess the right wingers and religious right have to have someone to blame for the fact that the best thing they could come up with in this race is basically an older Bush clone.

[DBruleU]

I guess the right wingers and religious right have to have someone to blame for the fact that the best thing they could come up with in this race is basically an older Bush clone.

McCain is crap IMO. This election has come to me picking the lesser of two evils, and who's views are the least radical. McCain gets my vote...reluctantly.

[Spider]

You must be blind, and stupid, if you think the media isn't bias.

And you call me a fool. Hilarious.

yes you are a fool and an Idiot ..Obama is making news , they cover it ..... get over it already you twit . and known to most people except for inbreds that struggle with reality ..Opinion news then there is news ......... why in the hell do stupid people like yourself insist on sharing your stupidity ?

[DBruleU]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/belief_growing_that_reporters_are_trying_to_help_o bama_win


Monday, July 21, 2008


The idea that reporters are trying to help Obama win in November has grown by five percentage points over the past month. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey, taken just before the new controversy involving the New York Times erupted, found that 49% of voters believe most reporters will try to help the Democrat with their coverage, up from 44% a month ago.

Just 14% believe most reporters will try to help McCain win, little changed from 13% a month ago. Just one voter in four (24%) believes that most reporters will try to offer unbiased coverage.

The New York Times’ refusal to run an op-ed piece by John McCain challenging an article in the paper less than a week ago by Barack Obama is sure to further fuel the belief that much of the major media is biased in favor of the Democratic candidate. At issue is McCain’s response to an article by Obama entitled, “My Plan for Iraq.” Obama was in Afghanistan over the weekend and in Iraq today attempting to build his foreign policy portfolio for the fall campaign.

A Rasmussen Reports survey earlier this year found that just 24% of American voters have a favorable opinion of the New York Times. The paper’s ratings divided sharply along partisan and ideological lines, with liberals far more supportive of the paper than conservatives.

At the time of that survey, the paper was being criticized for an article it had run about McCain’s ties to lobbyists. Sixty-six percent (66%) of those who were aware of the story in question believed it was an attempt by the New York Times to hurt the McCain campaign.

In the latest survey, a plurality of Democrats—37%-- say most reporters try to offer unbiased coverage of the campaign. Twenty-seven percent (27%) believe most reporters are trying to help Obama and 21% in Obama’s party think reporters are trying to help the Republican candidate.

Among Republicans, 78% believe reporters are trying to help Obama and 10% see most offering unbiased coverage.

As for unaffiliated voters, 50% see a pro-Obama bias and 21% see unbiased coverage. Just 12% of those not affiliated with either major party believe the reporters are trying to help McCain.

In a more general sense, 45% say that most reporters would hide information if it hurt the candidate they wanted to win. Just 30% disagree and 25% are not sure. Democrats are evenly divided as to whether a reporter would release such information while Republicans and unaffiliated voters have less confidence in the reporters.

Republicans and unaffiliated voters are more likely to trust campaign information from family and friends than from reporters. Democrats are evenly divided as to who they would trust more.

A separate survey released this morning also found that 50% of voters believe most reporters want to make the economy seem worse than it is. A plurality believes that the media has also tried to make the war in Iraq appear worse that it really is.

A survey conducted earlier this year found that 30% of voters believe having a friendly reporter is more valuable than raising a lot of campaign contributions.. Twenty-nine percent (29%) believe contributions are more important and 40% are not sure.

These results are consistent with earlier surveys finding that large segments of the population believe the media is biased It is also clear that voters select their news sources in a partisan manner. During Election 2004, CNN viewers heavily favored John Kerry while Fox Fans preferred George W. Bush.

[Spider]

Polls to prove a point............Ha!

[Bronco_Beerslug]

These results are consistent with earlier surveys finding that large segments of the population believe the media is biased It is also clear that voters select their news sources in a partisan manner. During Election 2004, CNN viewers heavily favored John Kerry while Fox Fans preferred George W. Bush.This is another one of those stats that most Republicans and Fox would rather not have exposed, especially when mentioning the supposed intelligence of it's viewers.

[Bob]

I don't see McCain getting close either. I am thinking Mondale type of beating.

Really? I hate McCain, I hate Obama more -- but I dont think that most objective folks see the "news" without seeing obvious media bias -- the more they work over-time without doing their job, I wonder if that back-fires on Obama.

Also, the TV ads have not even come out yet -- and Obama has Black Panther-like connections that will be easy to exploit. The last two elections made conservatives feel that they should have not gone out to vote -- and that is exactly what the intent is.

[Bob]

By the way, this thread is ridiculous. The press has fawned over McCain for years. Hell, there was a book written about it:

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/21pOHe5xoHL._SL500_AA180_.jpg

“The press loves McCain. We're his base.”
—Chris Matthews, MSNBC

“John McCain is clearly the Washington media's favorite Republican.” —Brit Hume, Fox News

“The media, of course, loves John McCain because it seems like he's back to the old John McCain.” —David Shuster, MSNBC

“I think every last one of them [reporters] would move to Massachusetts and marry John McCain if they could.”
—Joe Scarborough, MSNBC

But compaired to Lord Obama he does not hold up the communist flame, so they have turned on McCain. They liked McCain because he created turmoil in the R party -- but hell given the choice between an old white war hero, and the Lord Obama it is not a choice.

[Spider]

But compaired to Lord Obama he does not hold up the communist flame, so they have turned on McCain. They liked McCain because he created turmoil in the R party -- but hell given the choice between an old white war hero, and the Lord Obama it is not a choice.
talk about hiking your skirt up and selling out ........

[Rigs11]

I didn't make it up truck boy. I just posted the link.

Who cares if it came from me, or anyone else on this board? It's footage of the bias media going ape for this guy. He has literally turned into this massive love affair, without having to do a thing to deserve it.

same thing happened to the maverick during the primaries. He was the media darling. I didn't hear you coming in here with your whining then.

[Rigs11]

But compaired to Lord Obama he does not hold up the communist flame, so they have turned on McCain. They liked McCain because he created turmoil in the R party -- but hell given the choice between an old white war hero, and the Lord Obama it is not a choice.

turn off the sean hannity already.just because he was a war hero does not mean he gets a free pass.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

turn off the sean hannity already.just because he was a war hero does not mean he gets a free pass.

The rethugs can't play that card again after urinating all over Kerry's military service last time around.

[DBruleU]

The rethugs can't play that card again after urinating all over Kerry's military service last time around.

Kerry's service record doesn't even hold a candle to McCains.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Kerry's service record doesn't even hold a candle to McCains.

According to what measure?

Care to back that up with specifics?

(Although I thought folks like you were all about honoring military service no matter what the specifics.)

In any event, even if you were right, this still wouldn't excuse the GOP's urinating on Kerry's military service.

[Taco John]

I can't understand why the McCain team is spending money on this video effort. Why in the world would they spend a dime to add a log to the Obama hype fire? Makes absolutely no sense to me...

[Taco John]

Kerry's service record doesn't even hold a candle to McCains.

If there's one thing about McCain I have always respected, it's his service record. But I still can't understand why you'd make the statement that you made. How is McCain's service record such that it outshines Kerry's by such a drastic margin?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Kerry's service record doesn't even hold a candle to McCains.Stupid and ignorant. I can only assume you have never served in the military and never been in combat, risking your life for your country as both McCain and Kerry have.

[Traveler]

For as many so-called mis-statements that Mac-Cane has made, his campaign should be over.

If Obama had made the same mis-statements as Mac-Cane, the media would never let him ear the end of it.

So while there seems to be a bias for Obama, how can you explain this latest gaffe from Mac-Cane that "happened" to end up on the cutting room floor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDIAsS9VXiM

http://www.jedreport.com/2008/07/video-of-the-mc.html

Tue Jul 22, 8:01 PM Pacific
Video of the McCain Misstatement That CBS News Edited Out
Keith Olbermann led his broadcast tonight with Spencer Ackerman's report on John McCain's most recent gaffe: in an interview with Katie Couric, McCain claimed "the surge" was responsible for the "Anbar Awakening" -- which actually began in September, 2006, months before the surge was even announced.

The strange thing, as Keith notes, is that CBS edited the gaffe out of its broadcast. Fortunately, they posted a transcript -- and video -- online. Here are the key parts of Keith O.'s report, plus a side-by-side video of what CBS actually broadcast, and what they cut out.

Tue Jul 22, 8:01 PM Pacific
Video of the McCain Misstatement That CBS News Edited Out
Keith Olbermann led his broadcast tonight with Spencer Ackerman's report on John McCain's most recent gaffe: in an interview with Katie Couric, McCain claimed "the surge" was responsible for the "Anbar Awakening" -- which actually began in September, 2006, months before the surge was even announced.

The strange thing, as Keith notes, is that CBS edited the gaffe out of its broadcast. Fortunately, they posted a transcript -- and video -- online. Here are the key parts of Keith O.'s report, plus a side-by-side video of what CBS actually broadcast, and what they cut out.


Here's some more details on why McCain is wrong:

Bush formally announced the surge on January 10, 2007.
According to Colonel Sean MacFarland (the same Colonel referenced by McCain in his interview), the 'Anbar Awakening' "began in September 2006."
In the Weekly Standard's IRAQ REPORT, Kimberly Kagan wrote "The number of troops in Anbar province rose even before “the surge” began."
None of this is a criticism of U.S. forces -- they played an important role in Anbar. However, the surge did not cause the awakening, and McCain's false claim that it did is just the latest example that he is in way over his head. He's not intellectually qualified to be president.

[Rohirrim]

Kerry's service record doesn't even hold a candle to McCains.

Interesting take. Kerry led numerous successful missions directly against the enemy, was wounded three times, and received a bronze star and a silver star for courage under fire. He completed his tour of duty and went home.

McCain got shot down on his 23rd bombing mission over Hanoi and was a POW for the rest of the war. I could see where you could have the utmost respect for McCain's ability to survive his ordeal, but as far as service records go, I'd have to give the edge to Kerry.

I also have to agree with Wesley Clark's take on McCain's service having no bearing on his ability to lead. I could see where you could say some guy was a general (or some other officer) who led men in combat and managed his supply lines, etc. That would be experience that could impact a commander in chief. But a fighter/bomber pilot?

[Rohirrim]

For as many so-called mis-statements that Mac-Cane has made, his campaign should be over.

If Obama had made the same mis-statements as Mac-Cane, the media would never let him ear the end of it.

So while there seems to be a bias for Obama, how can you explain this latest gaffe from Mac-Cane that "happened" to end up on the cutting room floor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDIAsS9VXiM

http://www.jedreport.com/2008/07/video-of-the-mc.html

Tue Jul 22, 8:01 PM Pacific
Video of the McCain Misstatement That CBS News Edited Out
Keith Olbermann led his broadcast tonight with Spencer Ackerman's report on John McCain's most recent gaffe: in an interview with Katie Couric, McCain claimed "the surge" was responsible for the "Anbar Awakening" -- which actually began in September, 2006, months before the surge was even announced.

The strange thing, as Keith notes, is that CBS edited the gaffe out of its broadcast. Fortunately, they posted a transcript -- and video -- online. Here are the key parts of Keith O.'s report, plus a side-by-side video of what CBS actually broadcast, and what they cut out.

Tue Jul 22, 8:01 PM Pacific
Video of the McCain Misstatement That CBS News Edited Out
Keith Olbermann led his broadcast tonight with Spencer Ackerman's report on John McCain's most recent gaffe: in an interview with Katie Couric, McCain claimed "the surge" was responsible for the "Anbar Awakening" -- which actually began in September, 2006, months before the surge was even announced.

The strange thing, as Keith notes, is that CBS edited the gaffe out of its broadcast. Fortunately, they posted a transcript -- and video -- online. Here are the key parts of Keith O.'s report, plus a side-by-side video of what CBS actually broadcast, and what they cut out.


Here's some more details on why McCain is wrong:

Bush formally announced the surge on January 10, 2007.
According to Colonel Sean MacFarland (the same Colonel referenced by McCain in his interview), the 'Anbar Awakening' "began in September 2006."
In the Weekly Standard's IRAQ REPORT, Kimberly Kagan wrote "The number of troops in Anbar province rose even before “the surge” began."
None of this is a criticism of U.S. forces -- they played an important role in Anbar. However, the surge did not cause the awakening, and McCain's false claim that it did is just the latest example that he is in way over his head. He's not intellectually qualified to be president.

I don't know. It might be kind of fun to go from the village idiot in the White House to Mr. Magoo. ;)

[Bronco Jamus]

I also have to agree with Wesley Clark's take on McCain's service having no bearing on his ability to lead. I could see where you could say some guy was a general (or some other officer) who led men in combat and managed his supply lines, etc. That would be experience that could impact a commander in chief. But a fighter/bomber pilot?

I don't know if I could split hairs on Kerry and McCain with regard to military service, but both having beem in the military and serving in wars give thems great advantages to being commander-in-chief of the armed forces.

[jhat01]

Being a POW and they way he handled himself during that time deserves great credit. But I agree 100% about Clarke's take.

[DBruleU]

Stupid and ignorant. I can only assume you have never served in the military and never been in combat, risking your life for your country as both McCain and Kerry have.

Nope, never have, and probably never will unless there is a draft. So what?

The fact that Kerry came back from Nam and basically trampled all over his fellow service men shows me hes a man of no loyalty. McCain hasn't thrown his fellow service men under the bus like Kerry did.

[alkemical]

Nope, never have, and probably never will unless there is a draft. So what?

The fact that Kerry came back from Nam and basically trampled all over his fellow service men shows me hes a man of no loyalty. McCain hasn't thrown his fellow service men under the bus like Kerry did.

No, he just threw the American citizens under the bus.

[Rigs11]

No, he just threw the American citizens under the bus.
And he voted against the GI bill.

[Rohirrim]

Nope, never have, and probably never will unless there is a draft. So what?

The fact that Kerry came back from Nam and basically trampled all over his fellow service men shows me hes a man of no loyalty. McCain hasn't thrown his fellow service men under the bus like Kerry did.

Or, you could accept what he said which was that it was the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time, for the wrong reason and not one more American should die for it. Of course, now we know that he was right on.

Vietnam was a mistake. An enormous, tragic mistake. Some knew it back then and acted on that understanding. They tried to stop it. They tried to stop the needless waste of American lives. And yet there are many still who refuse to accept that reality, for their own reasons. There are many definitions of loyalty. George Bush believes in one form. Kerry believes in another kind.

[ScottXray]

Nope, never have, and probably never will unless there is a draft. So what?

The fact that Kerry came back from Nam and basically trampled all over his fellow service men shows me hes a man of no loyalty. McCain hasn't thrown his fellow service men under the bus like Kerry did.

You need to check McCains record in the senate regarding POW MIA hearings
that occurred in the 80s before saying he didn't step all over his fellow vets. Also his voting record on Veterans benefits and VA funding is abysmal. Then check his statements (coerced or not ) regarding the US WHILE a prisoner, and the special status he was held in. Also the fact that other prisoners who did much less in the form of cooperating with their captors, were given less than honorable discharges after being repatriated , while McCain, the son of a four star admiral, and grandson of a four star admiral was given medals.
Not to mention the 4 other jets he crashed prior to being shot down, and the last one prior, that ended up killing 134 sailors on the US Forrestal and almost destroying the carrier. The records are sealed but the facts are not in question, and it is likely that he caused that.

Surviving his captivity is about the ONLY thing he could be said to have distinguished himself in during his military service. Other than that McCain was a "****up" that would have been drilled out of the Navy if he hadn't had the connections he did.

Just Google McCain + miltary record + crashes if you want an idea of what HE is going to face in terms of swift boating. Of course the media outlets that are so MEAN to him have made no mention of this as yet.

His similarity to GW in terms of miltary service is eerie, except GW didn't actually show UP for his service.

I will give him credit for staying in the Hanoi Hilton until earlier captives were released....that took some guts. But his military "accomplishments " are so overblown its not funny.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Nope, never have, and probably never will unless there is a draft. So what?


So you're another Iraq war cheerleader/chickenhawk who is saying, essentially, that you would serve - but only if drafted.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Interesting take. Kerry led numerous successful missions directly against the enemy, was wounded three times, and received a bronze star and a silver star for courage under fire. He completed his tour of duty and went home.

McCain got shot down on his 23rd bombing mission over Hanoi and was a POW for the rest of the war. I could see where you could have the utmost respect for McCain's ability to survive his ordeal, but as far as service records go, I'd have to give the edge to Kerry.

I also have to agree with Wesley Clark's take on McCain's service having no bearing on his ability to lead. I could see where you could say some guy was a general (or some other officer) who led men in combat and managed his supply lines, etc. That would be experience that could impact a commander in chief. But a fighter/bomber pilot?

Confusing DBruleU with facts and logic is a full-time gig, it would seem. :thumbs:

[DBruleU]

So you're another Iraq war cheerleader/chickenhawk who is saying, essentially, that you would serve - but only if drafted.

Yeah, I also support the Denver Broncos...is that a no-no if I don't play football?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Yeah, I also support the Denver Broncos...is that a no-no if I don't play football?

Thanks for confirming my suspicion that armchair warriors like you view war in the same terms as a football game.

[Spider]

Thanks for confirming my suspicion that armchair warriors like you view war in the same terms as a football game. Yeah it is all a game to him , might as well be his punk as is sitting home safe ......the only danger he has to face is his own cooking ..... PB&J with a butter knife can be dangerous in an idiots hands

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Yeah it is all a game to him , might as well be his punk as is sitting home safe ......the only danger he has to face is his own cooking ..... PB&J with a butter knife can be dangerous in an idiots hands

:yep: :laugh:

[DBruleU]

Thanks for confirming my suspicion that armchair warriors like you view war in the same terms as a football game.

Why does it matter than I support something, but don't take part in it? So what? What kind of simple reasoning is that?

[Spider]

Why does it matter than I support something, but don't take part in it? So what? What kind of simple reasoning is that?

LOL what a pussy .......

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Nope, never have, and probably never will unless there is a draft. So what? Ah, so you know sh*t about serving your country in the military, thought so.

The fact that Kerry came back from Nam and basically trampled all over his fellow service men shows me hes a man of no loyalty. McCain hasn't thrown his fellow service men under the bus like Kerry did.Your revision of history that many of us here lived through would be laughable if it weren't so ignorant and pathetic.

[Spider]

Ah, so you know sh*t about serving your country in the military, thought so.
Your revision of history that many of us here lived through would be laughable if it weren't so ignorant and pathetic.

LOL . I am telling him how pathetic he is with neg reps ....... this ****er is a clown

[Bronco_Beerslug]

LOL . I am telling him how pathetic he is with neg reps ....... this ****er is a clownIt's just hard for me to understand people calling down people who put their life on the line (literally) for this country because of political party. Both McCain and Kerry faced death day after day after day serving the United States and to try and put down either one's service is just plain ignorant and asinine.

[Spider]

It's just hard for me to understand people calling down people who put their life on the line (literally) for this country because of political party. Both McCain and Kerry faced death day after day after day serving the United States and to try and put down either one's service is just plain ignorant and asinine.

Yeah it is , I like McCain ....just dont think he can run this country .......

[ak1971]

there is always the impaler

http://www.myspace.com/impalerthemovie

[Spider]

there is always the impaler

http://www.myspace.com/impalerthemovie

dont want no part of that bastard .......

[ak1971]

dont want no part of that bastard .......

join me, The Dave and The Impaler!

[Spider]

join me, The Dave and The Impaler!

LOL no way ....... for some reason I see that guy and think of W*GS

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Why does it matter than I support something, but don't take part in it? So what? What kind of simple reasoning is that?

Nice dodge.

The subject wasn't support for the war - it was military service.

This is what you said:

Nope, never have, and probably never will (serve in the military) unless there is a draft. So what?

In other words, you would serve in the military - but only if drafted.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

It's just hard for me to understand people calling down people who put their life on the line (literally) for this country because of political party. Both McCain and Kerry faced death day after day after day serving the United States and to try and put down either one's service is just plain ignorant and asinine.

It's the republican way.

Remember how they were passing out these "purple band-aids" at the 2004 GOP convention?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/04/169_bandaid.jpg

It's always party before principles or country for these handjobs.

[Pseudofool]

What's great is that obviously conservative people are only lukewarm on McCain. Here's hoping it's snowing or raining or whatever on election day, so these types will end up staying.

[Pseudofool]

Let's not mistake unbalance for biases. Clearly Obama is making a ton of NEWS--don't think that if Obama gaffes during the trip, the media would shine it's bright light very hotly on it.

The notion of a liberal bias is absurd. Mass media are corporative enterprises, and as corporative enterprises have an ideological agenda that pushes them right and authoritarian. Some rouge news shows and radio shows find a money-niche in liberalism. But any supposed "objective" news show, always, just by the nature of the industry, it's funding, what it takes to advance in a corporate enterprise, leans right.

[cutthemdown]

What's great is that obviously conservative people are only lukewarm on McCain. Here's hoping it's snowing or raining or whatever on election day, so these types will end up staying.

I'm surprised Obama only up by 6 points. I was thinking it would be at least 10 points by now. I think the longer it stays close the better it is for McCain. Maybe republicans will still get fired up if it remains close. If it widens to double digits I think many Republicans may save there money and wait for 4 yrs. McCain just not getting the type of donations most Repubs get.

[Drek]

I'm surprised Obama only up by 6 points. I was thinking it would be at least 10 points by now. I think the longer it stays close the better it is for McCain. Maybe republicans will still get fired up if it remains close. If it widens to double digits I think many Republicans may save there money and wait for 4 yrs. McCain just not getting the type of donations most Repubs get.
If you actually run a 4 candidate poll (including Nader and Barr) Obama is ahead by 13.

Showing that most people who currently support McCain do so not because they like him, but because they don't like Obama.

When Barr and Paul are both on the ticket that'll only take more of the conservative base away from McCain too.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

....Showing that most people who currently support McCain do so not because they like him, but because they don't like Obama.


And we have a pretty good idea who those people are...

http://outhouserag.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/redneck.JPG

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

http://www.bartcop.com/terror-shake.jpg

[Rohirrim]

It's the republican way.

Remember how they were passing out these "purple band-aids" at the 2004 GOP convention?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/04/169_bandaid.jpg

It's always party before principles or country for these handjobs.

Man, I forgot about that. Making fun of Purple Hearts. Well, this is the same party that thinks that outing covert agents in the name of party is no big deal and then questions other Americans' loyalty. How can we be surprised?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Man, I forgot about that. Making fun of Purple Hearts. Well, this is the same party that thinks that outing covert agents in the name of party is no big deal and then questions other Americans' loyalty. How can we be surprised?

This is true.

When you can defend outing a covert CIA operative for political payback, disrespecting a decorated vet's service is penny ante stuff.

[alkemical]

And we have a pretty good idea who those people are...

http://outhouserag.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/redneck.JPG

Some one hit it.....

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Interesting (and sobering) read for Obama skeptics:

Life In the Post Political Age

by Joe Bageant | July 23, 2008 - 7:11pm


Every now and then I am fortunate enough to communicate with someone who has near complete insight into our political process, why things happen and where it seems likely to be headed. Recently I received this analysis from a high powered political consultant whose name is withheld for obvious reasons. He/she has to live and work in the political world and for either party. In any case, I found it breathtaking in its fundamental analysis and its clarity -- clarity being no easy thing to accomplish is the swamp of media-consumerism-politics. Here it is:
-- Joe Bageant

Much has been written by political pundits in their attempt to explain the unexpected victory of Senator Barack Obama over Senator Hillary Clinton in this year's Democratic Presidential Primary. When looking at the results of this race, none of the conventional political math that would help one handicap the outcome would make one conclude that Senator Obama would win this contest.

Inside a Democratic Party primary there is no demographic or political reason that a male first term African American senator from Illinois with an unorthodox name should come any where close to beating a white female senator, who happens to be the wife of the last Democratic President whose approval ratings are still above 70% with Democratic voters and who also happened to earn the endorsements of the substantial parts of the Democratic Party establishment.

The conventional analysis focused on the poor quality of the campaign run by Senator Clinton, her vote in support of the Iraq war and her advocacy of the cynical center-right triangulation policies of her husband, which soured her campaign to many primary voters and especially to Democratic Party activists. Senator Obama's on the other hand was credited with running an innovative and inspiring campaign that excited primary voters and brought many new and especially younger voters into the electoral process.

There is some truth to this analysis, but as a whole it misses the underlying social change in society that had already laid the groundwork for a possible Obama victory. To get a clearer understanding of the results, we must better understand what this social change is and how its impact is far more significant than the dynamics of the two respective campaigns.

The underlying social change that led to the Obama victory is the unprecedented extent to which the narrative of popular consumer culture, and the media that drives it, has become the dominant influence on how Americans think, formulate their ideas and understand the world around them.

The most important result of this process has been the steady and consistent depoliticization of American society, to an extent that we can make the case that we are living at the dawn of the post political age.

The two primary features of the post political age are a politics completely drained of all its contents and ability or willingness to be used as an agent of change in social or economic policy, and its full integrations into the world of American popular, consumer and entertainment culture. To such an extent that there exists today a seamless web between our political, economic, media and consumer cultures wherein the modes and values of one are completely integrated and compatible with the others.

It should not come as a surprise that the dominant ideas and mores of popular culture have become the dominant ideas of our society. Popular culture is the breaker of customs, prejudice, tradition and relevant historical knowledge.

It is a result of this dynamic that the two consistent winners in American politics over the last 30 years have been the cultural left and the economic right. Despite the massive organizing drive of the religious right over the past three decades, they are further away from reversing the cultural liberalization of American society than when they started. On others side of the ledger, organized labor outside of a few urban pockets and industries is no longer a relevant force in American life. The ever greater electoral activism of both of these groups is generally misunderstood as a show of strength; in fact, it is the exact opposite. It is the desperate fight of the losing side of the American economic, cultural and political scene.

In essence the same forces that make it possible for the rapid acceptance of ideas such as gay marriage are the same force which can create a society that will accept massive social inequalities.

In the post political world the candidates who can best thrive in it have tremendous appeal to the economic elites; these candidates thrive in a system that does not dwell on issues and will never ask the question, "who has power and why", but simultaneously creates a social and media environment of stupefying distractions while destroying traditional social mores (under-credited as a source of much social solidarity). This can only benefit their continued rule of that society.

In such a setting our political choices like our consumer choices, regardless of the product, are primarily about what makes us more fulfilled and feel better about ourselves.

Senator Obama's campaign understood much better the impact of these changes on our electoral system than any of his opponents' campaigns. In the post political world, the campaign that is less political and less issue-based but is savvier in using new modes of communication technology will be the campaign to win the greatest market share of the electorate. The candidate in this case, Obama, was not a political entity but, in essence a product, an ornament that made his supporters feel better about themselves.

One of the most telling facts about the Obama's constituency outside of African Americans (whose support needs no explanation) is that it is a coalition of people who need or demand the least amount of social benefit from our government. They are the under politicized younger voters and upper middle class whites. The two groups, coincidently, are the ones most influenced by trends in consumer popular culture and have the greatest of ease using the latest technologies.

In commercial advertising it is the poor commercial that lists the seventeen functions of the product being marketed. The best commercials are based on image associations entirely unrelated to the functions of the actual product. In the post political world, when the same principle is applied to the political realm, it makes complete sense how Barack Obama no longer is a black man with a strange name but the iPod to Hillary Clinton's cell phone. In the world of toys it is the one that stands out the most is the most marketable.

The reality of the post political period is best highlighted in the failed themes and ideas of Barack Obama's two primary opponents. The Clinton campaign was based on pushing two concurrent ideas: the inevitability factor of her candidacy and the other was her supposed experience. The only thing inevitable in the post political period is ceaseless change, which she could hardly offer while running against the candidate of "Change". How valuable of an asset can experience be in a culture where knowledge, wisdom and history are frowned upon?

John Edwards campaign on the other hand was dead on arrival. His theme and emphasis was America's ever widening class differences, a platform as truthful as it was irrelevant. The use of the word "class" will end any political career in America. That truth violates the primary narrative that our elite use to justify their legitimacy, which is the supposed meritocratic nature of America society. While the post political constituencies have absolutely no interest in class, whose very acknowledgment are the bases of all real politics and whose acknowledgement would only lead to an existential crisis in its ranks. In the post political period the only differences allowed can be in style and modes of consumption.

Given all this as the background, what are we to make of the campaign of the candidate of hope, audacity and change? The answer lies in understanding Senator Obama's appeal to the brighter sections of the economic and political elite, and more importantly in the lack of any organized opposition against him, of the kind that within a matter of days destroyed Howard Dean's campaign in 2004.

At the precise moment that the intellectual underpinnings of conservative free market ideas that have dominated politics for the past 30 years are crumbling across the globe. Obama calls for a post ideological and partisan world.

At the time when the American military industrial complex is despised around the world, he is a front man out of central casting which will buy it more goodwill and new room to maneuver in the first 15 minutes after being sworn in that John McCain could in the next 100 years.

His very presence, the color of his skin, the very strangeness of his name is the best guarantee of his betrayal of the expectations of the constituencies that will vote to elect him. Barack Obama is in short order a far more reassuring prospect for the continued dominance of the financial elite than another four years of neo-conservative rule which in an almost historically unique combination of greed, ill will, incompetence and stupidity have brought the country to the edge of disaster.

Audacity yes, change hardly.

http://www.joebageant.com/

[Rohirrim]

Well, that's bloody chilling. The argument has some bones to it, no doubt about it.

In the post political period the only differences allowed can be in style and modes of consumption.
Ugh!

[Rigs11]

It's the republican way.

Remember how they were passing out these "purple band-aids" at the 2004 GOP convention?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/04/169_bandaid.jpg

It's always party before principles or country for these handjobs.

What a fat sow. the only time this betch's life is ever in danger is when she runs out of chocolate cake and diet coke.

[Bronco Jamus]

What a fat sow. the only time this betch's life is ever in danger is when she runs out of chocolate cake and diet coke.

What a nice thing to say about someone.

[BroncoInferno]

What a nice thing to say about someone.

Well, it was nice of her to denegrade the service of a man injured while defending his country.

[Spider]

What a fat sow. the only time this betch's life is ever in danger is when she runs out of chocolate cake and diet coke.
LOL ..........

[Spider]

Well, it was nice of her to denegrade the service of a man injured while defending his country.

But thats different ....... ;D
this Bitch should be so ashamed ..she is a scuzz bucket

[Bronco Jamus]

Well, it was nice of her to denegrade the service of a man injured while defending his country.

I don't think so.

[Traveler]

Back on topic somewhat; thought I'd highlight this little back and forth between Obama and Major Garrett at Faux Noise:

*** Blog fodder: Also, don’t miss this little shot Obama took at Fox News when talking at his avail about the information/news the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan are getting.

“Sure, they are well informed, especially because you know [Major] Garrett’s on their home channel. How is it that Fox News has such an impact with Armed Forces television?”

Garrett, also on the plane, answered: “Choice.” Then Obama replied: “Is that the commander-in-chief’s choice?” Over to you, Mr. O'Reilly!

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/

[Rigs11]

Back on topic somewhat; thought I'd highlight this little back and forth between Obama and Major Garrett at Faux Noise:

*** Blog fodder: Also, don’t miss this little shot Obama took at Fox News when talking at his avail about the information/news the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan are getting.

“Sure, they are well informed, especially because you know [Major] Garrett’s on their home channel. How is it that Fox News has such an impact with Armed Forces television?”

Garrett, also on the plane, answered: “Choice.” Then Obama replied: “Is that the commander-in-chief’s choice?” Over to you, Mr. O'Reilly!

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/

man i'd love to see obama come on their shows and bitchslap O'reilley and that punk hannity

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

man i'd love to see obama come on their shows and b****slap O'reilley and that punk hannity

O'Liely would just cut his mic everytime he started picking up steam.

[Rigs11]

O'Liely would just cut his mic everytime he started picking up steam.

or call Fox securityHilarious!