2008 Presidental Election: Obama v McCain
Comments
-
"It's not sexy, It's aaanimal."
"Would you like an espresso? I can make it with a nice little twist of lemon."
- Serge -
Sergé to you
-
Leggo my aigu.
-
3 data points hardly make a trend, but it's worthy of noting that Gallup finally indicates a break from recent polling ranges:
Of course, for all anyone knows, it could be back at statistical dead heat tomorrow, d'oh. -
Hopefully people are finally starting to realize that 8 years of a retarded guy didn't work so well, and maybe 4 more years of a demented old guy might not be so great either.
-
The 'Surge' is McCain's political Viagra.
-
witch-king wrote: The 'Surge' is McCain's political Viagra.
except its not working for him.
UP THE DOSAGE! -
Boygabriel wrote: [quote=witch-king]The 'Surge' is McCain's political Viagra.
except its not working for him.
UP THE DOSAGE!
Notice, however, that McCain is working up a "surge" substitute: drilling in ANWR. Drilling and surging: these ideas now keep Conservatives politically aroused. -
Oh John McCain, why do you demand that the world take you seriously, when your campaign is clearly a joke?
(this is taken from this Carpetbagger post.)
One month ago, Obama says he'd put Bin Laden on trial saying,“I think what would be important would be for us to deal with him in a way that allows the entire world to understand the murderous acts that he’s engaged in and not to make him into a martyr.”
Senator McCain disagreed at the time:“Let me be clear: Under my administration Osama bin Laden will either be killed on the battlefield or executed. Sen. Obama’s failure to comprehend the implication of the Supreme Court decision he embraced and the historical precedent of Nuremberg raise serious questions about judgment and experience and whether Sen. Obama is ready to assume the awesome responsibilities of commander in chief.”
A month has passed, so naturally McCain has adopted a completely new stance:
When asked what you do with a captured Bin Laden:
Oh Republican Party, why are you such a joke?
“Of course you put him on trial,” McCain said. “I mean, there are ample precedents of — for that. And it might be a good thing to reveal to the world the enormity of this guy’s crimes and his intentions, which are still there and he’s working night and day to destroy everything we stand for and believe in. ” -
More from Carpetbagger:
Just for fun, let’s not lose sight of the fact that McCain held all four of these competing and contradictory positions over the course of a single week...
* McCain said the surge started in 2007, after the Anbar Awakening that began in 2006.
* On Wednesday, McCain shifted gears and said the surge started in 2006, before the Anbar Awakening.
* On Thursday, McCain shifted gears again and said everyone except him is confused about what the surge is, and defined it as “a counterinsurgency strategy” that was launched before the troop escalation and the Anbar Awakening.
* And on Friday, McCain shifted gears again and re-embraced the original meaning of the word “surge,” which he now believes was launched shortly after the “birth” of the Anbar Awakening.
...And McCain is nevertheless basing his entire presidential campaign on his unrivaled expertise on, and support for, Bush’s Iraq policy. -
Up next, from Open Left, a great post which basically points out the following:
McCain said Obama's trip to Iraq would change Obama's views on Iraq, but what has actually happened is that McCain has changed HIS views to match Obama's. -
Boygabriel wrote: Oh John McCain, why do you demand that the world take you seriously, when your campaign is clearly a joke?
Hold up, if you are going to nail McCain for the new stances on this one, then you need to give Obama some credit as well.
(this is taken from this Carpetbagger post.)
One month ago, Obama says he'd put Bin Laden on trial saying,“I think what would be important would be for us to deal with him in a way that allows the entire world to understand the murderous acts that he’s engaged in and not to make him into a martyr.”
Senator McCain disagreed at the time:“Let me be clear: Under my administration Osama bin Laden will either be killed on the battlefield or executed. Sen. Obama’s failure to comprehend the implication of the Supreme Court decision he embraced and the historical precedent of Nuremberg raise serious questions about judgment and experience and whether Sen. Obama is ready to assume the awesome responsibilities of commander in chief.”
A month has passed, so naturally McCain has adopted a completely new stance:
When asked what you do with a captured Bin Laden:
Oh Republican Party, why are you such a joke?
“Of course you put him on trial,” McCain said. “I mean, there are ample precedents of — for that. And it might be a good thing to reveal to the world the enormity of this guy’s crimes and his intentions, which are still there and he’s working night and day to destroy everything we stand for and believe in. ”
Obama July 11, CNN interview:If he was captured alive, then we would make a decision to bring the full weight of not only US justice but world justice down on him. And, uh, I think that I’ve said this before, that I am not a cheerleader for the death penalty … I think it has to be reserved for only the most heinous crimes, but I certainly think that plotting and engineering the death of 3,000 Americans justifies such an approach.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/11/obama-death-penalty-for-bin-laden/
Here he is in the one you posted, June 18th, 2008:“What would be important would be for us to do it in a way that allows the entire world to understand the murderous acts that he’s engaged in and not to make him into a martyr, and to assure that the United States government is abiding by basic conventions that would strengthen our hand in the broader battle against terrorism,” Obama said.
And add a dose of The State off Obama's site:Obama, who has expressed reservations about capital punishment but does not oppose it, said he would support the death penalty for Osama bin Laden, the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks.
http://www.barackobama.com/2007/07/20/obama_dont_stay_in_iraq_over_g.php
"The first thing I’d support is his capture, which is something this administration has proved incapable of achieving,” Obama said. “I would then, as president, order a trial that observed international standards of due process. At that point, do I think that somebody who killed 3,000 Americans qualifies as someone who has perpetrated heinous crimes, and would qualify for the death penalty. Then yes."
You seem to have Obama and McCain in agreement pretty much here, try Bin Laden and execute him. McCain adds his little bluster about Bin Laden getting killed on the battlefield, which is certainly a possibility given that my understanding is that most of the "search" for him has consisted of blowing up caves where they think he might be. Obama blows smoke about making him a martyr, but goes back on what the quote seems to imply both before and after it chronologically, making me think that it isn't being interpreted as intended. Dunno. -
You are playing loose with the term “try Bin Laden”.
McCain supports Bush’s illegal detention and military tribunals (as illustrated by McCain’s reference to the recent Supreme Court decision). Obama does not, and that’s what McCain was getting at when he said, “Sen. Obama’s failure to comprehend the implication of the Supreme Court decision he embraced and the historical precedent of Nuremberg raise serious questions about judgment and experience and whether Sen. Obama is ready to assume the awesome responsibilities of commander in chief.”
So let’s not sit here and say their positions are similar.
Obama might be obfuscating about the death penalty, but to liken their stances is pretty misleading. -
Boygabriel wrote: You are playing loose with the term “try Bin Laden”.
They both want a trial and execution, no? With a side of death. The Supreme Court decision referenced is one that Obama supported. You seem to be taking the position that McCain's reference to Nuremburg and that decision is in support of military lynching parties rather than an actual trial of some sort. It could be that he is rather referencing Nuremburg as the foundation upon which the whole concept of internation criminal law was built, and that he thinks Obama is a bonehead with regard to it. At which point you would be able to argue that McCain is wrong about Obama's judgment and experience with regard to utilization of the ICC or similar. *shrug* McCain's quote was, "I don't think we would have any difficulty devising an internationally-supported mechanism that would mete out justice."
McCain supports Bush’s illegal detention and military tribunals (as illustrated by McCain’s reference to the recent Supreme Court decision). Obama does not, and that’s what McCain was getting at when he said, “Sen. Obama’s failure to comprehend the implication of the Supreme Court decision he embraced and the historical precedent of Nuremberg raise serious questions about judgment and experience and whether Sen. Obama is ready to assume the awesome responsibilities of commander in chief.”
So let’s not sit here and say their positions are similar.
Obama might be obfuscating about the death penalty, but to liken their stances is pretty misleading. -
Think Progress wrote: It’s transparent spin for McCain to present the surge (however he’s defining it this week), rather than the invasion itself, as “the crucial point” upon which to judge his national security record. This is like a gambler protesting that he shouldn’t be criticized for having lost a thousand dollars at the craps table, because “the crucial point” is that he just won back twenty dollars at blackjack. The wise choice, of course, would have been not to gamble in the first place.
link
Now, the Surge might be worth more than "$20 at the blackjack table", but the point stands.
Strongly. -
I was going to write a big ol long thing here, but I got distracted clicking around and closed the window. So I'll keep it brief.
#1, I like the Think Progress quote above, it is a nice analogy.
#2 I'm less than pleased with Obama regarding "da surge." I don't like the way he removed earlier references to it on his website, and I don't like the way that he has contradicted his 2007 statements on it while trying to spin that he is still saying the same thing. -
daver wrote: #2 I'm less than pleased with Obama regarding "da surge." I don't like the way he removed earlier references to it on his website, and I don't like the way that he has contradicted his 2007 statements on it while trying to spin that he is still saying the same thing.
the larger context renders this a non-issue to me. Obama was right about the whole entire idea for war, from the beginning. And Obama remains right about the war now (we need to wind down our role ASAP). McCain is largely wrong on both counts.
Furthermore, in light of the fact that the Surge hasn't led to any significant political progress or benchmarks by Bush/McCain standards that would allow us to withdraw troops, I don't care whether he did or didn't predict the reduction in violence.
"Obama was wrong about the surge" is a misleading meme being trumpeted by the media over and over again because it fits their long-ago discredited theory that McCain is clearly strong on national defense, and Obama is clearly inexperienced. -
I understand what you are saying, and I agree with you that Obama's position is favorable. Having said that, the way it is being handled with references removed and whatnot still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I wouldn't call it a non-issue, but it fer shure isn't anything to vote for McCain over. Nose, face, spite, ya know.
-
Boygabriel wrote: Furthermore, in light of the fact that the Surge hasn't led to any significant political progress or benchmarks by Bush/McCain standards that would allow us to withdraw troops, I don't care whether he did or didn't predict the reduction in violence.
Your comments echo the Obama change up. Although allow to add that I agree that the change up doesn't support the theory in your final sentence. To whit:
"Obama was wrong about the surge" is a misleading meme being trumpeted by the media over and over again because it fits their long-ago discredited theory that McCain is clearly strong on national defense, and Obama is clearly inexperienced.
Obama, MSNBC, Jan 10 2007:I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse.
Please note that he didn't say "significant political progress or benchmarks," he said it would increase sectarian violence.
Here is Obama's current comment from his NY Times Op Ed, Jul 14 2008:In the 18 months since President Bush announced the surge, our troops have performed heroically in bringing down the level of violence. New tactics have protected the Iraqi population, and the Sunni tribes have rejected Al Qaeda — greatly weakening its effectiveness.
Here he acknowledged a reduction of violence, in direct contradiction to his earlier statement, and yet follows it up with a statement that he is still against the surge for the same reasons that remain true. Huh?
But the same factors that led me to oppose the surge still hold true. The strain on our military has grown, the situation in Afghanistan has deteriorated and we’ve spent nearly $200 billion more in Iraq than we had budgeted. Iraq’s leaders have failed to invest tens of billions of dollars in oil revenues in rebuilding their own country, and they have not reached the political accommodation that was the stated purpose of the surge.
Not that I'm not more fond his his policy than McCain's, and not that I think the "success" is anything but blind luck. But still. C'mon Obama. Just sayin'. -
daver wrote:
I'm not sure it's fair to take one line of dialogue from a tv appearance and take it as a comprehensive policy statement.I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse.
Also, without paying off Sunni extremists with hundreds of millions of US dollars, Obama is right, the Surge wouldn't have solved sectarian violence. And rest assured, when that money stops, the violence will return. -
Boygabriel wrote: I'm not sure it's fair to take one line of dialogue from a tv appearance and take it as a comprehensive policy statement.
Well, there are more where that came from. Not only as far as quotes, but also policy statements that were removed from his website a few weeks back. Which is kinda the issue, ya know?Boygabriel wrote: Also, without paying off Sunni extremists with hundreds of millions of US dollars, Obama is right, the Surge wouldn't have solved sectarian violence. And rest assured, when that money stops, the violence will return.
Er, then why did Obama say that "our troops have performed heroically in bringing down the level of violence" instead of saying something more like, "our tax dollars going to Sunni extremists have performed heroically in bringing down the level of violence?" -
daver wrote: Er, then why did Obama say that "our troops have performed heroically in bringing down the level of violence" instead of saying something more like, "our tax dollars going to Sunni extremists have performed heroically in bringing down the level of violence?"
gee, I have no idea why a presidential candidate would give credit to US troops, not would-be-murderous Iraqis. -
Boygabriel wrote: [quote=daver]Er, then why did Obama say that "our troops have performed heroically in bringing down the level of violence" instead of saying something more like, "our tax dollars going to Sunni extremists have performed heroically in bringing down the level of violence?"
gee, I have no idea why a presidential candidate would give credit to US troops, not would-be-murderous Iraqis.
I find your accusation that Obama is lying just to get votes astonishing and reprehensible! Really! I expect better of you!
That is _not_ the kind of campaign that Obama is running, dontchaknow?!?!
Remember, qouth Obama:He's practicing the politics of the past. John McCain.
John McCain. Same old politics.
That's change we can believe in.
I'm Barack Obama and I approve this message. -
jeffrey wrote: 3 data points hardly make a trend, but it's worthy of noting that Gallup finally indicates a break from recent polling ranges:
Whee! Britney/Paris Celeb-Obama is just what the public needed!
Of course, for all anyone knows, it could be back at statistical dead heat tomorrow, d'oh.
Excuse me while I go shoot myself. -
jeffrey wrote: Whee! Britney/Paris Celeb-Obama is just what the public needed!
Mebbe that isn't it, mebbe it is new concentration on McCain rather than on himself. Dunno. Examples from yesterday:
-snip-
Excuse me while I go shoot myself.So nobody really thinks that Bush or McCain have a real answer for the challenges we face, so what they're going to try to do is make you scared of me. You know, he's not patriotic enough. He's got a funny name. You know, he doesn't look like all those other Presidents on those dollar bills, you know. He's risky. That's essentially the argument they're making
Barack Obama, Remarks, Springfield, MO, 7/30/08That's not the debate we're getting out of John McCain right now. He's spending an awful lot of time talking about me. You notice that? I haven't seen an ad yet where he talks about what he's gonna do. And the reason is because those folks know they don't have any good answers, they know they've had their turn over the last eight years and made a mess of things. They know that you're not real happy with them. And so the only way they figure they're going to win this election is if they make you scared of me. So what they're saying is, 'Well, we know we're not very good but you can't risk electing Obama. You know, he's new, he doesn't look like the other presidents on the currency. He's got a funny name.' I mean, that's basically the argument -- he's too risky.
Barack Obama, Remarks, Rolla, MO, 7/30/08John McCain and the Republicans, they don't have any new ideas, that's why they're spending all their time talking about me. I mean, you haven't heard a positive thing out of that campaign in a month. All they do is try to run me down, and you know, you know this in your own life, right? If somebody doesn't have anything nice to say about anybody, that means they've got some problems of their own. So they know they've got no new ideas, they know they're dredging up all the stale, old stuff they've been peddling for the last eight, ten years. But since they don't have any new ideas the only strategy they've got in this election is to try to scare you about me. They're going to try to say that I'm a risky guy, they're going to try to say, 'Well, you know, he's got a funny name, and he doesn't look like all the presidents on the dollar bills and the five dollar bills,' and they're going to send out nasty e -mails. And the latest one they got me in an ad with Paris Hilton. You know, never met the woman. But, you know, what they're going to try to argue is that somehow I'm too risky. You know, basically what they're saying to you is we know we didn't do a real good job, but he's too risky.
Barack Obama, Remarks, Union, MO, 7/30/08
Dollar bills, y'all! Risky! Funny name! -
McCain is hitting him hard for drawing the race card on that.
And he's right.
And guess what. *That* is a winning strategy for McCain, provoking Obama into whining and "Boo hoo, I'm telling on you" episodes and taking him off his current mission of earning policy competence points.
It's totally fair game IMO if McCain slings garbage at Obama for Obama to call it out as "same old politics," especially since McCain and McCougar both vowed they were above sleazy, cheap character assault tactics (breaking their word within mere weeks, and fully embracing that approach in desperate attempts to appear relevant again).
But Obama will hang himself if he comes out yelling fire in a crowded theater every time the heat turns up. Kills his credibility, fuels doubts about him being just as opportunist and low as anybody.
He should focus on McCain's weaknesses and continue to find ways to demonstrate (and have others vouch for) his strengths.
Crying foul does not become anybody, much less a presidential candidate.
Especially when there's nothing there. -
GET OUT OF MY HEAD JEFFREY!!!
Er, I agree with you. -
He's practically doing Limbaugh's and Hannity's (and, by extension McCain's) jobs for them.
Marvelous jedi mind trick, that. "These aren't the votes you are looking for."
Oops.
Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 40K All Categories
- 27.1K Neighborhoods
- 5.1K Crown Heights/Prospect Lefferts Gardens
- 7.1K Prospect Heights
- 2.3K Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy
- 8K Park Slope
- 549 Williamsburg, Greenpoint, Bushwick
- 442 Flatbush/Midwood/Ditmas Park
- 657 BoCoCa (Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens)
- 151 Red Hook
- 104 Gowanus
- 304 Bay Ridge/Bensonhurst
- 130 Coney Island, Brighton Beach, Sheepshead Bay
- 270 Brooklyn Heights, DUMBO and Downtown
- 598 Windsor Terrace / Kensington
- 673 Greenwood Heights and Sunset Park
- 749 Brooklyn and Beyond
- 6.3K Stuff
- 86 Brooklyn Back When
- 1.2K Brooklyn Pets
- 257 Brooklyn Kids
- 241 Brooklyn Eats
- 51 Brooklyn Booze
- 3.6K The Lounge / Random Stuff
- 611 Brooklyn Politics
- 122 Brooklyn Sports and Fitness
- 111 Brooklyn Photos
- 339 Site Issues
- 8 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
- 6.2K Listings
- 1.1K APARTMENTS and REAL ESTATE
- 1.3K Sales Openings Events
- 2.3K The Classifieds