Tonight, I watched "Presidential Character and Conduct 2008: Barack Obama" on Foxnews. They will be airing the McCain version tomorrow, which I anxiously await. The Obama episode tonight was so anti-Obama it was ridiculous. I can't wait to see the McCain version so we can draw contrasts in just how biased Foxnews is. Clearly, the Obama piece was framed to scare white America.

Has Obama proved he was never and isn't a Muslim yet? Because I think he needs to prove that, plus that he doesn't still use hard drugs and isn't selling them out of his Senate office. Obama needs to disprove every allegation ever made about him or he's just a liar.

McCain shouldn't have to prove anything because he was a POW and we should automatically believe everything he says, even if it contradicts what he said just a few hours ago. It would be unpatriotic to say anything negative about a War Hero, unless he's a liberal from Massachusetts who hates America.

So how much of "Obama Nation" did Fox quote in their piece? All of it?

Andrew

"The Obama episode tonight was so anti-Obama it was ridiculous."

I watched it, too. Quite the opposite, as a conservative, I found it pretty nicely balanced. They included many bites from pro-Obama people. Were we watching the same program?

It was typical Fox News talking points: He's black and not one of us, Reverend Wright, Rezko, he's a radical, Black Panther, he's black, and he's black. To be fair, they did have some good stuff about him, but it was so tabloid it put National Enquirer to shame. Like I said, I look forward to watching the show on McCain. We better see extensive coverage of the Keating 5, McCain's silver spoon upbringing, and the fact that he's a womanizing adulterer who married a millionaire 18 years younger than him after dumping his disfigured wife who waited for years for him to return from Vietnam.

We shall see, my friend. We shall see.

O'Reily is on vacation this week gearing/resting up the the conventions thus the specials...saw most of Monday's on Obama...informative.
It's still shocking how little political experience Obama has to be considered the nominee...

"Shocking"?

Hardly.

WPE being elected on his political experience and business credentials? Now THAT was "shocking".

I'd say that WPE was far more poorly equipped to be POTUS, and after 8 years, still is. He is not a smart man, and I'm "shocked" that the morons voted him in. I'd bet he will go down as the least intelligent president ever. He has set the bar to a new low. Ankle high, set in poop.

Obama has nothing to worry about, and he seems to have surrounded, and educated, himself with far better people than Cheney and Rove.

>>far more poorly equipped to be POTUS

respectfully disagree

WPE??? meaning...

>>new low. Ankle high, set in poop

where's the Honeybucket when we need it!

I'm not sure that Dubya was the most poorly equipped to be the POTUS, but he definitely did less with more than anyone I can think of.

Obama does have a lot less "credentials" than even Dubya did, but there's also a lot in Obama's corner. He's extremely bright, he has surrounded himself with bright and competent people, and I honestly believe he has the best intentions of the US and our world standing at heart.

The same certainly cannot be said for George W. Bush.

Or McCain.

>>best intentions

we all have that goal even if we run for president or not but I hope America will vote for their leader because of much higher ideals.

Obama's political career didn't start in 2004 - he worked in Illinois state politics as a legislator for eight years prior. I consider the fact that he hasn't been entrenched in Washington lobbyist politics for decades to be a net plus.

Bush had been governor of Texas for all of five years before he ran for president and had less national experience (zero) than Obama, who at least was in the US Senate for a couple of years. Broadway, did you find it "shocking" then how little political experience Bush had before taking office in 2001?

The fact that Obama has risen so high so quickly should also be considered a result of his great political skill and intelligence. Unlike Bush, whose political career was possible only because of his father's name and prior career (and fundraising rolodex), Obama rose on his own merits. No one would ever have heard of George W. Bush had his daddy not been president; he would have been just another failed businessman.

Andrew

"I hope America will vote for their leader because of much higher ideals."

Well said Broadway. That's why you should vote for Obama.

A full term+ Governor vs. a junior US Senator that has spent most of his term running for president...actually America will be making the call between a long time conservative leader/statesman over the junior Senator...no contest on experience comparison there.

OK. Someone is really going to have to convince me, beginning now, that experience is so important.

To that end, start listing out the kinds of experiences McCain has had that directly translate to being a better President. What? He knows what forms to fill out? He knows where the Presidential Wet Bar key is located? What? Name it.

Then take away all those things that Obama does actually share in the experience category. Let's look at what is left. What experience does McCain have that Obama does not?

Please.

I'm not asking for a record. I'm asking for someone to list out general and specific experiences that make McCain SO much better for our country right now.

Obama vs. a philandering jerk who called his wife a "C*NT" in public.

yeah, tough choice.

I'm looking at a new GM for our Utopia,USA cluster in an extremely competative market that's struggling to make budget...would you look at past track record and experience or intentions and vision?

Broadway, you contradicted yourself. First you mentioned "higher ideals", then you went into "experience".

Pick a lane. Then, give us specifics. What experiences? Or, what ideals?

Look at how experienced Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld were. They had by far the most impressive resumes in Washington when they took power in 2001. And look at how badly they screwed up (in my view). Could anyone have done a worse job at the Pentagon than Donald Rumsfeld? The guy was a disaster. And he had BEEN Secretary of Defense once before!!! Obviously decades of experience doesn't mean you are automatically a better choice than someone else with better judgment.

Broadway, do you remember that other Illinois state legislator who had even less national experience than Obama and wound up being surely America's greatest president? Surely in 1860 you would have been championing someone else with more experience, eh? Perhaps judgment and values are slightly more important than "experience?"

Andrew

>>Pick a lane. Then, give us specifics

sorry...its above my pay grade

Then, of course, "no contest" above doesn't mean anything right?

Broadway:

You continue to have the originality and intellectual depth of a gnat. I have no idea if you are like that IRL, but it doesn't reflect well on you here.

Again, Why don't/won't you TRY bringing something, anything, to the table here, and have an actual conversation instead of your vapid little unfunny un-"pithy" poorly-spelled one liners?

I'm tired of your lazy crap: avoiding any semblence of answering a real question and switching the topic. It's been done here so many times and usually ends badly. For you.

I think you're well on your way to being ignored/shunned. You definitely are not being taken seriously here. If you truly don't care, carry on, but don't expect any response, respect or serious consideration of your opinion here.

Bway:

You can start by answering CJ's response to your post and his question above.

Go ahead, Try.

>>Then, of course, "no contest"

"What's good for the goose is good for the gander".
Just quoting the words of a President and wanna be one.

>>poorly-spelled one liners

really trying hard but if thats all you've got, well that tells me points are getting through...but not for my glory.

They aren't.

Everyone here is actually interested in WHY you think experience, and McCain's experience in particular, will be better for us than what Obama brings to the table.

That means you gotta say some stuff!

It's not a self-evident thing. Sitting back, thinking it is, using "that's all you've got" as a rationalization for "points getting though" is a fallacy. It is a fallacy because you are operating under the assumption(s) that:

your points are valid and stand on their own merit

,and

they've not been properly rebutted.

Neither is true because:

your points are incomplete

,and

most people here are expressing their frustration over that

,not

trying to attack and devalue strong points as you imply.

Now, that's how you do it Broadway.

You've gotta say why. Bring the support to the table and let's talk about it. You opened the door, meaning the burden is on you to either open it all the way, or close it admitting it was a bad idea in the first place.

I watched the Fox special on McCain last night. And as I suspected, it was completely different than the Obama hit piece they ran. Fixed News used these two specials as yet another way for them to continue their narrative of each candidate.

Obama: Scary, Rezko, Rev Wright, black liberation, mysterious, exotic, inexperienced, not one of us, too young, lacks leadership.

McCain: POW, war hero, veteran, Navy guy, maverick, friend of Reagan, experienced, white guy you can trust.

I was quite disappointed in the disparity between how negative they painted Obama and how positve they painted McCain when discussing the issues of character. They barely touched on the fact that McCain committed adultery against his first wife and even made attempts to make McCain look like an innocent bystander regarding the Keating 5 scandal that cost American taxpayers hundreds of billions. Shame on Fox, but frankly, I expected no better.

I'm DVR'ing the CNN revealed series tonight on each candidate and it will be interesting to see how the two networks compare.

>>WHY you think experience, and McCain's experience in particular, will be better for us than what Obama brings to the table

we all know the life experiences of both candidates so I don't have to repeat them but a long life serving our country vs. an a rookie with the most of liberal ideals...easy to make a choice.

Won't cut it.

I'll translate that for you:

"He's a liberal, and liberals are not good."

So, let's go through the elements of your (lacking) position.

We have on the table from you:

Obama is a rookie,

Obama is a liberal,

Obama is really, really liberal,

McCain has experience,

McCain has served his country,

McCain has served his country a long time,

Obama has "higher ideals",

McCain does not have "higher ideals."

You compare track record and experience to intentions and vision and claim that:

is an easy choice,

imply that it's a valid comparison,

imply that they are mutually exclusive to the two candidates.

And I have to assume you are tagging McCain with "track record and experience" and Obama with "intentions and vision".

This is a freaking mess Broadway! We've got an ass load of trouble here! You gotta tell a story that links this stuff together somehow, or all you've really done is just say some crap and hope it sticks.

So, given those elements, how is liberal the lesser choice? Remember, you are currently living in the mess made by conservatives and a long period of effort to reach this level of power.

How is "higher ideals" bad for us? What? Too complex? Unrealistic? Also remember bumper sticker policy hasn't served us very well.

Please detail how having a long period of service helps us. What does that service bring to the table specifically that will help improve the state of things?

How does that differ from the "rookie"? And it's a good idea to quantify "rookie" and let us know how that impacts things.

And what kind of experience matters?

Does military service only matter? How about serving in the government -vs- having a lot of life experience doing public works? Are those two really all that different and if so, how?

Make a goddammed point will you?

So "higher ideals" for McCain includes serial affairs and dumping your wife after she gets in an accident for a younger rich girl?

Broadway, you're really compromising your stated morals and beliefs in supporting McCain.

" we all know the life experiences of both candidates so I don't have to repeat them but a long life serving our country vs. an a rookie with the most of liberal ideals...easy to make a choice."

Oohhh. You're SO close to answering the question. Yet so far.

Let's try it another way;

I assume you are voting for McCain.

Why?

I can answer why I am voting for Obama. But nobody has asked me yet. I can get REAL specific and explain how I reached my conclusion. I can even list things about Obama that makes him NOT " an easy choice to make." But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about what experiences McCain has had that translate to him being a better choice for President for our country right now. This is how I like to talk. It doesn't make me right or better or more knowledgeable or anything. It makes me feel like an adult who is thinking for myself. So yes, it's self-serving to a degree.

Others, so far, like to spark a debate and then quote "When I see a solar eclipse, like the one I went to last year in Hawaii, I think 'Oh no! Is the moon eating the sun?' I don't know. Because I'm a caveman -- that's the way I think...9/11...I rest my case."

...tap tap tap...

LMAO!

First a noun, then a verb, then 9/11.

Lather.

Rinse.

Repeat.

It's clear that both have made mistakes in the past and they both seem to have learned from them. Not unlike most of us. We screw up, we are human.

Obama's drug use and McCain's Divorce represent what many people have done. They have both apologized and said it was a mistake. Hindsight is a beautiful thing. So let's call that part a wash.

Think about when you started college or a new job. It's exciting, there is lots to learn and being young/green/naive you thought you understood, had a grasp on WTF was going on, so you climbed and were arrogant along the way.

Of course a few years latter with some experience behind you, you looked back and saw how dumb and naive you were. Perhaps it was when you went in and asked for or wanted a raise, you could rationalize it because of how much "value" you had and chalked it up to all that experience and know how. It was simply a bargaining chip. Sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't.

I think Oboma is naive. How much of a handicap that is who knows. McCain has experience (life and political) and knows who he can trust because of years of built up rapport. McCain is hardly a extreme right-wing conservative, he beat out a few of those in the primaries.

I like McCain because in a crises I think he will manage well and be strong. I like the optimism and energy the Obama expels but I don't know what is means. But as always it is the lesser of two evils. I think we vote against the things we DON'T believe in more than in what we DO.

Why is our system so screwed up that our turnout is always low. If McCain is not far enough to the right then a certain group of people wont vote for him, but others toward the center will. Same thing for Oboma on the Left.

This is why Bill Clinton is seen as such a great POTUS. He did not do much but he understood human nature. Take a poll then do what is says! You satisfy the most number of people at that point in time that way.

What was Clinton's agenda? What was Bush's(besides the war), what will be Oboma's or McCain's?

We all want what is best for this country but our approach for how to get there differs greatly. I feel we vote out of fear, instead of conviction.

There is no Bell Curve that represents America, it's more like a suspension bridge with a pendulum in the middle that is somewhere between the two towers.

With Oboma and McCain on either side of the bridge who is going to swing the pendulum in their direction?

If you always vote party line does any of this matter anyway?

OK, sorry for so many questions getting in here.

On the media side of things I think Oboma's campaign is brilliant with the text messaging Veep thing. Once they have this massive database of cell phone numbers they will really be able to "get out the vote" with constant bombardment come election time. So thumbs up to them for using technology and new approaches. Did they higher MTV networks and their Comedy Central owned channel for advisers on this? Brilliant, and suspenseful.

latest race results...McCain by a landslide!

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2008/08/22/saavedra.pink.hair.KYTV

The best thing that can happen for the Obama campaign is to have conservatives thinking it will be a landslide in their favor.

Broadway:

"Make a goddammed point will you?"

I'd like to see you respond to the above requests from MK and CJ, before you post one more word.

Can you do that? If not, what is wrong with you?

LOL!!!

Interesting case for sure. I think Broadway is a case study for inability to reason clearly being a manifestation of strong conviction in an inconsistent (does not hold water rationally) belief system.

He quite literally might not be able to answer due to the conviction, over time, hard wiring brain pathways that would otherwise be malleable. This is the kind of stuff that can happen when somebody confuses conviction for truth. Reasoning switches get flipped and with each one a growing state of willful dementia results.

(and I'm serious and not being mean --there are studies on this stuff swallowing too much dogma whole, without being rational about it can quite literally be harmful physically)

Vitalogy, absolutely true. I encourage it every chance I get.

>>quite literally be harmful physically

very much healthy in spirit, soul, and body tonight waiting for the Obama bomb...ah...VP choice...

Well, not to be that mean about it, but if my assertion above is true, then you really wouldn't know!

I love the fact that his supporters will know first, no pundits, nothing. Nice move that.