US General Election: McCain vs. Obama

Remove all ads!

It seems to be about the same with all politicians, unfortunately.

 

Technically, what the swiftboat veterans did wasn't legal. Had he sued for libel, Kerry would have won.

 

I had forgotten about that thread (and the article contained therein). I retract my statement - evidently my infant son CAN donate to a politician or political party. I still think that it shouldn't be allowed, and I agree that these type of shenanigans are not confined to a particular party.

 

That's a good point because MoveOn is sometimes turned down by the big networks for their ads, but the GOP is not. Corporate America: Go figure.

 

I thought that was called a bribe...

 

I'm all for Obama...simply because I want to see the boys and Girls save home again.
And I really think it's time for a new approach on the problems of old!

The policy of Bush and Co. stretched the States thin. Isolated the American people from the rest of the world. The US of A should not try to lead and dictate the direction of the world, instead it should try to lead by example!
And Obama knows that! The world is small and there are neighbors in every direction!
Time to realize this!

Bush and those who think alike should take a bow! And rest their case for a while!

 

Darion, McCain isn't Bush and any Obama (or 'independant') adds you see associating the two are bull. Yes, McCain voted for the war in Iraq, but beyond that there's little similarity. Remember, everyone, McCain is the 'Conservative Republican' who had trouble with a large portion of the conservative republican base.

On top of that, at this point I don't think Obama will be anything close to the breath of fresh air he started his campaign as. Obama is looking less like the Change Train and more like Politics as Usual.

 

I think it's fair to say, that every thing in the end boils down to Iraq!

Unlike the broken promises where taxes and insurance are concerned; Iraq is the only issue that is really lethal for the involved!

 

Of course. McCain, for example said he was against torture in all forms...and then he voted to legalize it. He took a principled stand against the ill-advised Bush tax-cuts...and now intends to make them permanent. His plan for Iraq and Bush's plan are one and the same*.

So, where do they differ? Why do so many ill-informed conservatives hate him so much? McCain sponsored a (toothless) campaign finance reform Bill along with Senator Russ Feingold (in large part to help live down the fact that he was one of the Keating 5) and he doesn't think Climate change is a myth.

It's kind of funny, really. A lot of democrats and independents still like him because they don't realize the John McCain of 2008 isn't the same John McCain that ran for president in 2000. Many conservatives, ironically, dislike him for the exact same reason.

* McCain may have argued early on that Bush's strategy was flawed, but Bush eventually corrected his strategy. Their plans in Iraq, as they stand today, are one in the same.

 

That's what the politicians call it, but the ordinary citizen can call it a bribe...

And you actually believe that will happen? Truth be told, I think the International forces should have come home after they accomplished the mission of toppling Hussein and saw to his execution. LEave them to their own problems and let the UN deal with anyone causing any trouble after that. Destroy and move on sends a much clearer message to the next nation that thumbs their nose at the US after someone else kicked them in the nuts...

Isn't that why the US got attacked on 9/11 in the first place? They made an example of Afghanistan and Iraq...

No matter who wins, they inherit that problem.

Bottom line, I don't believe a word either of them have to say. They'll promise anything to get elected, only to find out that it's not so easy to makwe good on them...

 

Obama has taken no money from PACs or lobbyists. That's the first time I can think of that a major politician has done so - I could be wrong - but this stands out in my mind as something that IS NOT politics as usual.

Taking power away from the lobbyists is the first step towards reform. That will mean changes in healthcare, energy policies, environmental policies and credit reform (rather than bail-outs); government hand-outs, in the way of coroprate welfare, could be sharply curtailed by an Obama admistration. That added to the end of the War - the ultimate government corporate hand-out - "could" mean a balanced budget again.

The War: He has stated that he will bring home all combat soldiers within 16 months, and that there will be no permanent bases in Iraq. But that he would defend our embassy and diplomatic corp. That's the best situation any reasonable person can ask for, given the huge American presence currently there.

Cynics have every right to be snide after the last 8 years, but it makes sense that there should be a cycle of reform, since we have hit rock bottom. If elected, Obama will have a huge mess on his hands, but he may be up to the task.

 

Daniel Pipes sez that if Obama Wins, Bush Will Attack Iran in November

-if McCain comes, Bush will ‘punt,’ and let McCain decide what to do, because he doesn't need to, because McCain will bomb Tehran.
-if Obama comes, Bush is determined to "do something", because Obama is one weak sister and an appeaser and has to be bound into a policy.
-apparently thrown in for no particular reason, he opines that Russia and China can prevent the bombing, if they only do what the US want them to do, which is to put pressure on Iran.
-and for good measure Pipes throws in that if the US don't bomb Iran, Israel will.

A cocktail of the madman theory and buy this magazine or we will shoot this puppy. I always find it difficult to figure to which extent what these people put out is their true belief and make-believe for a political end. It's just hysterical.

In any case, BE VERY AFRAID OF OBAMA! Even more so than of Bush. Because, you see, if Bush gives the order to bomb Iran, it's Obama's fault because Obama is such an appeaser. And if you think Bush's crazy, the Israelis are even crazier. If you vote for McCain you can delay the bombing of Iran.

 

Lol. Ragusa, that was great. Of course, the Israelis will probably bomb Iran no matter what, and probably within the next few years. I fully expect the Middle East to errupt in a whole new round of sectarian and semite-anti-semite violence, probably during the next presidency. Elect Obama, that way we can blame it on the democrats!

 

The funny part is that obviously Pipes thinks that bombing Iran is inevitable and a sensible policy option, because bombing Iran is to Pipes the only policy option anyway as he is a dyed in the wool hard-liner. But what he suggests by counting on Bush's options is that Bush can choose whether to bomb Iran, solely on grounds of who will succeed him.

But, and here is the joke, having the leway to bomb now or let McCain bomb later suggests nothing less than that, hysterical assertions to the contrary notwithstanding, the 'Iranian threat' is not imminent.

PS: What I am not clear about is whether he really believes it will work in reducing the threat, or that it would help inflame relations with Tehran so much that no appeaser could go there for a 'grand bargain'. I think the later is more probable. I think the deeper point there is that it is Israel's fear that Iran is a rival as the regional ally of the US whose rise has to be pre-empted. With the Iraq war and the elimination of Iraq as a threat, originally quite friendly Israeli attitudes towards Iran (at a time when the Mullah's ruled) shifted dramatically towards hostility. More on that can be found here.

 

That can be rather weird, but aren't Arabs a Semitic people?

 

Two of the big issues in America today are the war in Iraq and illegal immigration. The majority of Americans are (now) opposed to the war and the majority would also like to see immigration laws enforced.

Bush stands with the minority on both issues which has helped to push his approval ratings to nearly the lowest of any president in the history of approval surveys. The thing I can't figure with McCain is the man is exactly on the same side of both issues as Bush! How can McCain expect to win?

Frankly, who is a person supposed to vote for if they'd like to see immigration laws enforced and the border secured? Certainly not Obama or McCain.

 

I see McCain as more likely to secure the borders than Obama, but not by much. As for the War, yes most Americans are against it, but they are also against a complete and immediate withdrawl, which is what Obama seems to prefer. Of course, McCain's 100-year war isn't the prefered solution, either.

 

This whole "100 year war" fallacy is going to backfire on Obama.

No. That's what people who just want to pull out without regard for the consequences think is best. If there is any one thing on Obama's agenda that I find flawed is the 16 month pull out. He either has no clue what he talking about or he does not care what happens in the Middle East. I hope he gets better advisors ... quickly.

 

T2 - There are always other solutions to problems than just "sending the fleet." Regardless, do you think that it's America's role to be the world's policeman? Or to police a civil war? Nah, Iraq is sitting on all that oil. Why else would anyone "care what happens in the Middle East?" But please do expand upon those "consquences" of which you speak (and I don't mean that sarcastically either).