Has Obama peaked?

[Kaylore]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13357.html

Isn't looking good. He's losing ground. The problem with flashy newcomers is they don't hold up under the lights. See: Michael Dukakis. Anyway I think Obama could still win it, but he needs to start getting specific. I think as more and more people get skeptical at his nebulous "change" answer to every question he will continue to be viewed as a lightweight.

[Rigs11]

It depends on if the american people fall for the smears again instead of the issues.I am still hoping out for the debates. We will see how great palin does in the vp one, as she is being coached by the Bushies.

[BroncoInferno]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13357.html

Isn't looking good. He's losing ground. The problem with flashy newcomers is they don't hold up under the lights. See: Michael Dukakis. Anyway I think Obama could still win it, but he needs to start getting specific. I think as more and more people get skeptical at his nebulous "change" answer to every question he will continue to be viewed as a lightweight.

He has been as specific as he can be in a 20 minute speech. You can easily find the nuts and bolts of his platform on his website. Seriously, someone says "Obama is a socialist" or "Obama has no substance" or "he isn't being specific" and people repeat it into reality, even though McCain has not been anymore specific in his speeches than Obama has. Probably less so.

[BroncoInferno]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13357.html

Isn't looking good. He's losing ground. The problem with flashy newcomers is they don't hold up under the lights. See: Michael Dukakis. Anyway I think Obama could still win it, but he needs to start getting specific. I think as more and more people get skeptical at his nebulous "change" answer to every question he will continue to be viewed as a lightweight.

As far as "has he peaked," I don't know. The polls are pretty close, but since the post-convention bounce is the biggest a candidate gets and usually subsides, I think it is actually bad for McCain that he did not take a bigger lead. But we shall see.

[Drek]

No.

The polls have been vacillating over the same 2 or 3 point difference for months, tweaking and shifting numbers to change perception.

Now the right wing moral zealots have found a home with Palin, and so McCain's leads in already red states have widened.

Doesn't change that Obama is leading significantly in electoral votes, and that states like North Dakota, Florida, and Ohio are tightening while he's putting Michigan and Pennsylvania away.

McCain can win 95% of the votes in Alabama, Texas, etc., the traditional GOP base, and Obama can take just 51% of the states he currently leads and walk away with a nice margin of victory.

This "panic" is the same thing that happened in the primaries when everyone thought Hillary was going to catch Obama. They'd done the math and knew as long as they didn't totally **** up it was over. Same here. Obama isn't going to do anything too controversial and he'll continue to have this election iced for a solid win.

[frerottenextelway]

As far as "has he peaked," I don't know. The polls are pretty close, but since the post-convention bounce is the biggest a candidate gets and usually subsides, I think it is actually bad for McCain that he did not take a bigger lead. But we shall see.

Obama is significantly more specific in both his policy speeches and his policies layed out online.

Kaylore has a good point in his first couple lines, except he applies it to the wrong candidate. McCain got a nice bump from his convention and his base support coming out from Palin, but the Palin experiment has already begun imploding. The narrative and polling has already begun shifting surrounding her.

It's like when Mondale picked Ferraro, there was about a 2 week stretch around the announcement and the DNCC time where they were polling slightly ahead and thought they had a chance. Then ..... history ....

[Bronco X]

The same thing can be applied to Palin. This is supposed to be an election between Obama and McCain, but the GOP is clearly trying to make this Obama vs. Palin. And so far the move has looked good for them. We'll see if that holds up by November.

I'd like to think eventually more Americans would place their vote on the presidential candidates, but I really didn't expect the Palin strategy to work as well as as it has so far...

But if people are going to vote for the GOP ticket because of Palin, she's should have to stand up and answer in an honest and direct way all the issues surrounding her governorship and mayoral duties in Alaska. My suspicion is the GOP will try and stall the issues as much as they can and continue to shield her and make her speak only under circumstances where they have absolute control (like the upcoming Gibson interview). The GOP base will of course accept that... they'll accept everything the GOP does. But I don't think it'll fly with independents.

[BroncoBuff]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13357.html

Isn't looking good. He's losing ground. The problem with flashy newcomers is they don't hold up under the lights. See: Michael Dukakis. Anyway I think Obama could still win it, but he needs to start getting specific. I think as more and more people get skeptical at his nebulous "change" answer to every question he will continue to be viewed as a lightweight.
Lightweight? He's given more specifics than McCain, and he's 10 times smarter than McCain. And he has 100 times more an open mind. The Obama' "phenomenon" might've peaked in April ... but your boy McCain peaked in 2000. So there.

[TheDave]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13357.html

Isn't looking good. He's losing ground. The problem with flashy newcomers is they don't hold up under the lights. See: Michael Dukakis. Anyway I think Obama could still win it, but he needs to start getting specific. I think as more and more people get skeptical at his nebulous "change" answer to every question he will continue to be viewed as a lightweight.

Sorry boss, but your bias is showing.

The dems aren't the ones lacking specifics.

[Crushaholic]

It depends on if the american people fall for the smears again instead of the issues.I am still hoping out for the debates. We will see how great palin does in the vp one, as she is being coached by the Bushies.

Smears? The only smears I see are the ones directed at Palin...

[TheDave]

Smears? The only smears I see are the ones directed at Palin...

Yeah 'cause the "lipstick" and "Sex Ed" ads were above board... ::)

[Traveler]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13357.html

Isn't looking good. He's losing ground. The problem with flashy newcomers is they don't hold up under the lights. See: Michael Dukakis. Anyway I think Obama could still win it, but he needs to start getting specific. I think as more and more people get skeptical at his nebulous "change" answer to every question he will continue to be viewed as a lightweight.

I stopped watching the polls and paid more attention the electoral vote estimates.

My question is why it that folks always want Obama to provide more specifics and not Mac-Cane? All Mac-Cane does is vaguely say what he isn't going to do.

He never addresses what his plans are for "middle" America other than "drill here, drill now." What are his short/long term plans for the country to include the specifics on how he will pay for them?

If Obama is consistently asked for specifics, same should apply to Mac-Cane.

[Play2win]

The debates should be pretty fun, we are going to see two simpletons get waxed by two pretty keen men.

[Kaylore]

but your boy McCain peaked in 2000. So there.

My boy McCain? I hate Mccain.

[Drek]

Smears? The only smears I see are the ones directed at Palin...

That is because you're a moron with party blinders on.

Who's smeared Palin? Bloggers. Obama? McCain's own campaign ads.

See the difference?

[Kaylore]

I stopped watching the polls and paid more attention the electoral vote estimates.

My question is why it that folks always want Obama to provide more specifics and not Mac-Cane?

Because McCain has years of a voting record to track. He's sponsored legislation, been in the military and visited with foreign dignitaries. We know what we're getting no matter what crap comes flying out of his crinkled yap.

[mhgaffney]

McCain is an idiot on foreign policy and probably every other issue. If you don't believe it check out this short video on Youtube -- which needs no commentary:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEtZlR3zp4c&feature=related

[Traveler]

Because McCain has years of a voting record to track. He's sponsored legislation, been in the military and visited with foreign dignitaries. We know what we're getting no matter what crap comes flying out of his crinkled yap.

I'd actually have to disagree with you on that. He's done a complete 180 on most of what he's done earlier in his career. I'm not sure if he even knows what he's done before or even who he is.

This isn't a pot shot at you Kaylore, but I believe he's banking on folks to assume he's still the same so-called fighter for the little people that he may have been before his turn to the dark side.

[Bronco X]

Because McCain has years of a voting record to track. He's sponsored legislation, been in the military and visited with foreign dignitaries. We know what we're getting no matter what crap comes flying out of his crinkled yap.

It's kind of like choosing to shoot yourself using a revolver with six bullets or a revolver that could have anywhere from zero to six bullets. I guess choosing the one with six bullets makes sense because you know what you're gonna get.

[Traveler]

It's kind of like choosing to shoot yourself using a revolver with six bullets or a revolver that could have anywhere from zero to six bullets. I guess choosing the one with six bullets makes sense because you know what you're gonna get.

So, if I follow your analogy, you'd rather kill yourself, than play the odds, correct?

[Kaylore]

I'd actually have to disagree with you on that. He's done a complete 180 on most of what he's done earlier in his career. I'm not sure if he even knows what he's done before or even who he is.

This isn't a pot shot at you Kaylore, but I believe he's banking on folks to assume he's still the same so-called fighter for the little people that he may have been before his turn to the dark side.

McCain is the same guy he's always been. McCain will do whatever will make him look good.

[Rohirrim]

I must be living in Bizarro World. So far it seems to me that Obama is the only one who is being specific and trying to stay on the issues. The McCain camp is desperately flailing and attacking in an effort to distract voters. Just like the McCain camp keeps shouting that Palin is under constant attack and I'm going, "From who?" The media is crawling up her leg like a horny dog. I'm tellin' ya folks, it's Bizarro World. ;D

[Rohirrim]

McCain is the same guy he's always been. McCain will do whatever will make him look good.

Compare his positions when he ran in 2000 compared to now. Some of them (like his opinion on fundamentalists in the Republican Party) are complete 180s.

[The Lone Bolt]

Not saying that I agree with it, but I suspect that McCain's message that he's more experienced and better qualified is gaining traction with the public.

Also, the choice of Palin as running mate was admittedly a shrewd political move. She's been received well by the repub base and has stolen a substantial percentage of the white female vote from Obama according to some recent polls.

[Bronco X]

So, if I follow your analogy, you'd rather kill yourself, than play the odds, correct?

That wouldn't be my choice, but it does seem to be a popular choice... at least according to the latest polls.

[SonOfLe-loLang]

Compare his positions when he ran in 2000 compared to now. Some of them (like his opinion on fundamentalists in the Republican Party) are complete 180s.

I think he agrees with that, he said he'll do whatever will make him look good. But yeah, i don't get why people think Obama's "change" plan is nebulous. He's been forthcoming in his speeches and his website clearly lists many policy changes.

The republicans keep talking about changing washington, yet none of their policies reflect that...arent they the ones being nebulous?

Also, Obama probably did peak in april, but for the same reasons you suggest, i bet people will be on Palin overload by november. My guess is McCain's popularity will never be higher than it is right now

[peacepipe]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13357.html

Isn't looking good. He's losing ground. The problem with flashy newcomers is they don't hold up under the lights. See: Michael Dukakis. Anyway I think Obama could still win it, but he needs to start getting specific. I think as more and more people get skeptical at his nebulous "change" answer to every question he will continue to be viewed as a lightweight.

The same can be said about Palin,News orgs. are already starting to pick her claims apart.

McCain needs to start getting specific, Cause outside of his BS claims about Obama he hasn't stated anything he would do if elected president.

***statement intended in a civil manner**

[Kaylore]

Compare his positions when he ran in 2000 compared to now. Some of them (like his opinion on fundamentalists in the Republican Party) are complete 180s.

Right. And that proves my point.

[BroncoBuff]

Because McCain has sponsored legislation, been in the military and visited with foreign dignitaries. We know what we're getting no matter what crap comes flying out of his crinkled yap.
But none of that actually means anything, Khan. Hundreds of d!ckhedz have done all those things. I'm a million times more impressed with intelligence, open-mindedness and judgment, especially after the last eight years. The days of close-minded cowboys running this country should be over once and for all. In some ways, the retirement of that John Wayne "have a beer with me" candidate will mark a step forward in societal evolution. Disliking the smart kid is really really dumb.

[SonOfLe-loLang]

But none of that actually means anything, Khan. Hundreds of d!ckhedz have done all those things. I'm a million times more impressed with intelligence, open-mindedness and judgment, especially after the last eight years. The days of close-minded cowboys running this country should be over once and for all. In some ways, the retirement of that John Wayne "have a beer with me" candidate will mark a step forward in societal evolution. Disliking the smart kid is really really dumb.

I agree. its time for an intellectual back in the white house

[Rohirrim]

Not saying that I agree with it, but I suspect that McCain's message that he's more experienced and better qualified is gaining traction with the public.

Also, the choice of Palin as running mate was admittedly a shrewd political move. She's been received well by the repub base and has stolen a substantial percentage of the white female vote from Obama according to some recent polls.

Read the Atlantic article I posted in the McCain and war thread. McCain has plenty of experience. Unfortunately, it's the wrong kind of experience. The 21st Century requires people who can think beyond the constrictions of the Cold War. McCain is locked into Cold War thinking. Us and them, black and white, good and evil. Just like Bush. If there is one thing the fight against terrorism should teach us, it's that the world is far more complex than it was during all those years that McCain was gathering his "experience."

[Bronco Yoda]

Because McCain has years of a voting record to track. He's sponsored legislation, been in the military and visited with foreign dignitaries. We know what we're getting no matter what crap comes flying out of his crinkled yap.

A couple years ago I would have agreed with you on this one...

[defenseman]

I agree. its time for an intellectual back in the white house

You mean a lawyer, not necessarily an intellectual. He's not very good at reading the writing on the wall now is he. He should have picked hillary, he's backpedaling for a reason..dman

[Drek]

Because McCain has years of a voting record to track. He's sponsored legislation, been in the military and visited with foreign dignitaries. We know what we're getting no matter what crap comes flying out of his crinkled yap.

Obama has written and passed more sterling, positive legislation in four years than McCain has in the last 10.

Obama worked in the trenches of civil reform as a young 20-something, growing a small civil organization by 5x in just a few years.

Obama has dealt with foreign dignitaries as well and more often than not they actually like his ideas.

He's been very clear on his stances and policies, more clear than any politician in recent history. Those policies are entirely centered around helping the middle 90% of this country.

There is no peak for Obama, unless you mean leaving office as a two term POTUS who saved this nation from a depression.

[Bronco Bob]

You mean a lawyer, not necessarily an intellectual. He's not very good at reading the writing on the wall now is he. He should have picked hillary, he's backpedaling for a reason..dman

Who says a lawyer can't be intellectually gifted? Some of our greatest
presidents started out as lawyers. Remember a man named Abraham Lincoln?

[defenseman]

Who says a lawyer can't be intellectually gifted? Some of our greatest
presidents started out as lawyers. Remember a man named Abraham Lincoln?

He CANNOT and DID NOT read the writing on the wall. He should have picked HILLARY.......sorry, he quite simply does not and did not pass the most basic of litmus tests...and you know that is true.....dman

[SonOfLe-loLang]

You mean a lawyer, not necessarily an intellectual. He's not very good at reading the writing on the wall now is he. He should have picked hillary, he's backpedaling for a reason..dman

What a dumb statement this is. You can honestly sit here and say Obama is not an intellectual? And then qualify it by saying he's a lawyer...a harvard lawyer mind you.

[Rigs11]

Smears? The only smears I see are the ones directed at Palin...

You're not paying attention then. turn on the tv. Have you not seen the celebrity ads by mccane,? How about the new one that states that obama wants to teach sex ed to kindergartners?What smears have been pointed at Palin besides the lipstick? Any that don't question here morals or her "governing"?

[Drek]

He CANNOT and DID NOT read the writing on the wall. He should have picked HILLARY.......sorry, he quite simply does not and did not pass the most basic of litmus tests...and you know that is true.....dman

Really?

Where was that written on the wall? Because leading up to the VP selection about a half dozen polls, some ran by women's organizations specifically focused on women, found that over twice as many people would be turned away from an Obama/Hillary ticket as the number of people energized to vote for it.

Him picking Hillary would've energized the extreme right wing base as much as Palin has now. McCain could've then chosen a VP who actually knows our national policies.

[Rohirrim]

You mean a lawyer, not necessarily an intellectual. He's not very good at reading the writing on the wall now is he. He should have picked hillary, he's backpedaling for a reason..dman

Have we really sunk this low? Are we now the kind of country that demeans the intellectual accomplishments of people instead of applauding them? We extol the virtues of C student Bush and McCain's FTA attitude that put him at the bottom five of the academy and then we deride the guy who gets the Harvard JD and teaches Constitutional law at the University of Chicago (one of the most rigorous and prestigious schools on Earth) for ten years? Is that it? You want to take a moment to imagine the future of a nation that not only derides intellectual accomplishment, but prefers to elect those who have none? Close your eyes and picture "medieval."

[defenseman]

What a dumb statement this is. You can honestly sit here and say Obama is not an intellectual? And then qualify it by saying he's a lawyer...a harvard lawyer mind you.

He quite simply, can't see beyond the blinders hooked to his big ears. Can I make it any clearer for you? Hopefully, you too aren't struck with " Can't see the trees for the forest" syndrome, damn, guess you got it too, sorry bout that..dman

[TheDave]

He quite simply, can't see beyond the blinders hooked to his big ears. Can I make it any clearer for you? Hopefully, you too aren't struck with " Can't see the trees for the forest" syndrome, damn, guess you got it too, sorry bout that..dman

Wow... another republican that mocks education. Sad...

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

He quite simply, can't see beyond the blinders hooked to his big ears. Can I make it any clearer for you?

Make it any clearer that you are completely clueless?

Doubtful.

[defenseman]

Have we really sunk this low? Are we now the kind of country that demeans the intellectual accomplishments of people instead of applauding them? We extol the virtues of C student Bush and McCain's FTA attitude that put him at the bottom five of the academy and then we deride the guy who gets the Harvard JD and teaches Constitutional law at the University of Chicago (one of the most rigorous and prestigious schools on Earth) for ten years? Is that it? You want to take a moment to imagine the future of a nation that not only derides intellectual accomplishment, but prefers to elect those who have none? Close your eyes and picture "medieval."

It's not the education, it's what you do with it.....dman

*I personally could care less where he graduated from. Deeds are the measuring stick in this case, and quite honestly, the few he has are quite derisive and unqualifying at the minumum.

[Rohirrim]

It's not the education, it's what you do with it.....dman

*I personally could care less where he graduated from. Deeds are the measuring stick in this case, and quite honestly, the few he has are quite derisive and unqualifying at the minumum.

Well, my point is made. My work here is done. :wave:

[frerottenextelway]

* Palin's major gaffe tonight.

* McCain losing on the Service Forum to Obama tonight.

* Obama's appearing on SNL on saturday.

If I was rethug, I'd be getting gitters. You're running out of gimmicks.

[Drek]

It's not the education, it's what you do with it.....dman

*I personally could care less where he graduated from. Deeds are the measuring stick in this case, and quite honestly, the few he has are quite derisive and unqualifying at the minumum.

Like what?

Taking that stellar undergraduate education and putting it to work to help with job retraining and educational programs in Chicago before going to law school?

Teaching civil rights and constitutional law at a preeminent educational institution?

Fighting in the court room for voter's rights?

Raising the minimum wage in Illinois?

Passing the "gold standard" for ethics reform?

Getting greater benefits for service men and women and better medical care for veterans?

Man, he hasn't done **** huh? Only more than nearly any other senator in the last four years.

[W*GS]

The Obama worship is getting sickening.

Remember, folks, he's a politician. What do politicians do? Lie. Cheat. Steal.

Politics is the art of war by other means. Don't forget that.

[TheDave]

The Obama worship is getting sickening.

Remember, folks, he's a politician. What do politicians do? Lie. Cheat. Steal.

Politics is the art of war by other means. Don't forget that.

Actually i agree with you... and if elected, he does not live up what he has promised, i will probably become as bitter as you are.:thumbsup:

[W*GS]

Of course Obama cannot and will not deliver on what he's promised.

I'm not bitter - just a realist and a skeptic.

[Spider]

The Obama worship is getting sickening.

Remember, folks, he's a politician. What do politicians do? Lie. Cheat. Steal.

Politics is the art of war by other means. Don't forget that.

we will see .......

[TheDave]

Of course Obama cannot and will not deliver on what he's promised.

I'm not bitter - just a realist and a skeptic.

We will see... I don't expect him to be 100%, but with a dem senate and house he should be able to pass most of what he wants.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

we will see .......

Funny how Mr. "I'm not a Republican or a right-winger" sees some sort of cult of personality when he looks at Obama but remains curiously silent re: McCain's VP pick.

[Spider]

Funny how Mr. "I'm not a Republican or a right-winger" sees some sort of cult of personality when he looks at Obama but remains curiously silent re: McCain's VP pick.

Hilarious!

[W*GS]

Funny how Mr. "I'm not a Republican or a right-winger" sees some sort of cult of personality when he looks at Obama but remains curiously silent re: McCain's VP pick.

Lack of comment doesn't imply agreement, asshole.

I don't see you commenting on the apparent ill health of Kim Jong-Il either; you suck his cock too?

[W*GS]

We will see... I don't expect him to be 100%, but with a dem senate and house he should be able to pass most of what he wants.

What Obama wants and what this country needs are two different things. Very different.

Put simply, if you believe Obama, you're a ****ing moron.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

My!

Looks like I really struck a nerve with Mr. "I'm not a Republican." :D

[epicSocialism4tw]

The Obama campaign has done this to themselves. The hits keep coming with these people.

They continue to put Obama in so many situations that he fails miserably in, and it seems as though the dude cant do anything right.

He's failing miserably at campaigning, and this is supposed to be his biggest responsibility. From the shockingly inept attempt at debate at Rick Warren's church to his inability to say anything at all without looking like a bumbling idiot to his intentional shots at Palin (who is a VP...not a presidential candidate)...this guy is looking less capable than the repub VP candidate.

Its no wonder he's behind in the polls now. Who ever would have thought that the repubs would be ahead in the polls this early?

[W*GS]

My!

Looks like I really struck a nerve with Mr. "I'm not a Republican." :D

I am not a Republican - never have been, never will be, have never supported and will never support any Republican candidate.

Brian Moore is the SPUSA candidate for President. Go suck him off for a while, Ms. "I'm not a socialist" dickhead.

[TheDave]

What Obama wants and what this country needs are two different things. Very different.

Put simply, if you believe Obama, you're a ****ing moron.

Yeah your not bitter or anything...::)

[BroncoBuff]

You mean a lawyer, not necessarily an intellectual. He's not very good at reading the writing on the wall now is he.
Trust me, you're not qualified to judge who is and who is not intellectual. He was editor of the Harvard Law Review. Case closed.

I'm not sure the general public understands very well what a landmark honor being named editor of the Harvard Law Review is, it hasn't been well reported in the media, but you must understand: law review is not some "club" you can join. You're only eligible if you're in the top 5% of your freshman class, and there's only 10 or 15 new members a year at Harvard. Which incidentally is one of the elite law schools in the world. Duh.

And ... what do we have on the other end? John McCain graduated 292nd out of 295 at Annapolis? And he lied to his first wife about being called up for military obligations while he went and lived in a bachelor pad for months at a time? And he's a closed-minded, ill-informed, back-slapping, warmongering cowboy? You Republicans make me ill, disliking the smart kid the way you do. Read Rohirrim's post above, and get with the 21st century, guys, because your post is dumb, dman, and you're a partisan fool.

[MO<1>]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13357.html

Isn't looking good. He's losing ground. The problem with flashy newcomers is they don't hold up under the lights. See: Michael Dukakis. Anyway I think Obama could still win it, but he needs to start getting specific. I think as more and more people get skeptical at his nebulous "change" answer to every question he will continue to be viewed as a lightweight.

He has some very firm believers- even fanatical. Aanalysis from Karl Rove:

It's a matchup he'll lose. If Mr. Obama wants to win, he needs to remember he's running against John McCain for president, not Mrs. Palin for vice president.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122108935141721343.html?mod=fpa_mostpop

[DBruleU]

Trust me, you're not qualified to judge who is and who is not intellectual. He was editor of the Harvard Law Review. Case closed.

I'm not sure the general public understands very well what a landmark honor being named editor of the Harvard Law Review is, it hasn't been well reported in the media, but you must understand: law review is not some "club" you can join. You're only eligible if you're in the top 5% of your freshman class, and there's only 10 or 15 new members a year at Harvard. Which incidentally is one of the elite law schools in the world. Duh.

And ... what do we have on the other end? John McCain graduated 292nd out of 295 at Annapolis? And he lied to his first wife about being called up for military obligations while he went and lived in a bachelor pad for months at a time? And he's a closed-minded, ill-informed, back-slapping, warmongering cowboy? You Republicans make me ill, disliking the smart kid the way you do. Read Rohirrim's post above, and get with the 21st century, guys, because your post is dumb, dman, and you're a partisan fool.


LOL

Need the definition of an arrogant elitist left-winger?

Well there ya go.

[BroncoBuff]

That is because you're a moron with party blinders on.

Who's smeared Palin? Bloggers. Obama? McCain's own campaign ads.

See the difference?
True. I think anybody who believes Obama was referencing Palin with the lipstick coment is either, a) not paying attention, or b) stupid. Besides, Einsteins, as Obama pointed out on Letterman last night, they didn't even parse the metaphor correctly. If he was in fact referencing her, then she would be the lipstick, and McCain would be the pig. Duh. They can't even get their smear ads right. Too bad the voters aen't smart enogh to understand that. We have a serious brain shortage in both our body politic and electorate.

[BroncoBuff]

My boy McCain? I hate Mccain.
Sorry, I didn't realize that. Your hatred for Obama blinded me ;D

[TDmvp]

Me? No sir, I merely pointed out that Obama is a bonafide intellectual, and of that fact there can be no debate. Knothead called him "a lawyer, not an intellectual," and that was both insulting and wrong, so I told him so.

I'm no elitist, no way ... I was lucky to make Moot Court (top 20% of freshman class) at middle-of-the-road ranked Southwestern Law School in Los Angeles. Downhill from there ... graduated in the middle of my class. I fancy myself an intellectual I suppose, but I am definitely NOT an elitist :nono:

just look at that Elitist looking Av ... You can tell just by looking at that guy that you are a Elitist ... it is so obvious , and Seattle !! it even sounds Elitist just saying it . I mean come on Buff you don't have to BS us hehe ROFL!
...:poke: :poke: :poke: :poke:

[BroncoBuff]

Need the definition of an arrogant elitist left-winger?
Well there ya go.
Me? No sir, there's nothing arrogant about stating facts. I merely pointed out Obama is a bonafide intellectual, and of that fact there can be no debate. Knothead called him "a lawyer, not an intellectual," and that was both insulting and wrong, so I told him so.

And I stated facts about McCain. You're just not comfortable that he graduated in the bottom 1% of his class. He wasn't even born in the United States, and he cheated on his first wife. As Ronald Reagan liked to say, facts are stubborn things. And apparently you're not entirely comfortable with them. I wish you courage on your journey.

And for your information, sir, I'm not an elitist by a long shot. I was lucky to make Moot Court (top 20% of freshman class) at middle-of-the-road ranked Southwestern Law School in Los Angeles. Downhill from there ... graduated in the middle of my class. I fancy myself an intellectual I suppose, but I am definitely NOT an elitist :nono:

[BroncoBuff]

just look at that Elitist looking Av ... You can tell just by looking at that guy that you are a Elitist ... it is so obvious , and Seattle !! it even sounds Elitist just saying it . I mean come on Buff you don't have to BS us hehe ROFL!
...:poke: :poke: :poke: :poke:
Well, the avatar is sarcasm of course (sarcasm at its very finest, I might add ;D).

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

LOL

Need the definition of an arrogant elitist left-winger?

Well there ya go.

For people like you, anyone who finished the fifth grade is an "elitist."

No wonder you're swooning over Caribou Barbie. Ha!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Well, the avatar is sarcasm of course (sarcasm at its very finest, I might add ;D).

Right-wingers don't get the whole political satire thing unless you include something about a stained dress or a cigar.

[MO<1>]

Right-wingers don't get the whole political satire thing unless you include something about a stained dress or a cigar.

That's pretty good! What is the difference between the Democratic party and Mussolini's Fascist party?

[TDmvp]

Right-wingers don't get the whole political satire thing unless you include something about a stained dress or a cigar.

I was teasing Buff you dip $hit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I was teasing Buff you dip $hit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm

Was I talking to you, jackoff?

[TDmvp]

Was I talking to you, jackoff?

well you quoted Buffs reply to me ... so i guess you was talking about me more then to me ... jack@$$ ...

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

well you quoted Buffs reply to me ... so i guess you was talking about me more then to me ... jack@$$ ...

Paranoid much?

Oh - that's right.... :puff:

[TDmvp]

Paranoid much?

Oh - that's right.... :puff:

LOL ... what i want to know is how you can listen to Blue Jay Way and not smoke weed ... that song was hard to listen to high even ...

[Drek]

What Obama wants and what this country needs are two different things. Very different.

Put simply, if you believe Obama, you're a ****ing moron.

How so?

You say Obama is a liar and cheat like every other politician when he wrote legislation for ethics reform and governmental transparency.

You say what he wants for this country and what it needs are two different things, but don't actually delve into either.

I am not a Republican - never have been, never will be, have never supported and will never support any Republican candidate.

No, you're part of the libertarian sheep flock that votes wallet first, foremost, and always while your civil liberties are stripped away year after year.

That's pretty good! What is the difference between the Democratic party and Mussolini's Fascist party?
Do you know anything at all about politics?

Fascism is the creation of a single party state, running the government through old regime methods but without any checks and balances.

The Democratic party hasn't held a fascist stance in its existence, and the only time they held anything close to that level of power was during FDR's four terms.

Russia, where 80% of the government is the same party lead by Putin and Medvedev is bordering on fascism.

Nazi Germany was more fascist than socialist, despite the moronic misinterpretations many try to apply as socialist = everything bad.

The George W. Bush presidency from 2000-2006 is the closest the U.S. has come to a fascist state in it's entire history.

But you keep thinking the other side are the "bad guys".

[Spider]

Do you know anything at all about politics?



LOL anyone that has read any 2 of mo's post know the answer to this one

[NaptownChief]

Obama is significantly more specific in both his policy speeches and his policies layed out online.





Yes but the problem is that he has no conviciton in most of his specifics as he will flip flop daily on the specifics if he thinks he can get more votes by changing.

If was specific that he wanted to pound business with taxes during his DNC speech but now say he "might hold off on that" if the economy is struggling. So he is admitting his strategy is bad for the economy. That looks foolish at best.

He was specific about not drilling....then decided a little bit would be ok.

It is "specifics" like that is why he looks worse and worse every day.

[NaptownChief]

The George W. Bush presidency from 2000-2006 is the closest the U.S. has come to a fascist state in it's entire history.

.


Why is that? because even the people in the Democratic party were questioning their existence? ie Lieberman.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Yes but the problem is that he has no conviciton in most of his specifics as he will flip flop daily on the specifics if he thinks he can get more votes by changing.


Too bad the guy you've been backing for the last eight years didn't change course on any number of occasions when to do so would have been prudent.

This country might not be in such deep sh*t right now.

[W*GS]

How so?

Your God is a politician. Pick someone more honorable, say, a used-car salesman.

You say Obama is a liar and cheat like every other politician when he wrote legislation for ethics reform and governmental transparency.

BFD.

You say what he wants for this country and what it needs are two different things, but don't actually delve into either.

What this country needs is a Constitutional government and a President who obeys his oath of office. What Obama wants is strongly divergent from those two non-negotiable principles.

No, you're part of the libertarian sheep flock that votes wallet first, foremost, and always while your civil liberties are stripped away year after year.

Kill that strawman! Libertarians are about the only ones who give a **** about our civil rights - it's Democrats and Republicans who race each other to see how quickly they can deprive us of them.

No wonder your handle is "Drek". It fits. Well.

[MO<1>]

Was I talking to you, jackoff?

What is the value of you posting? Sounds like intelligent debate in a alternate reality where civility is gone future that supports censorship. Nice arguement from the leftist intellectual. How far left is fascism?