McCain's trend

[ocnblu]

A generalization, and unfair. A nutcase will grab whatever is at his or her disposal to do their heinous deed.

EDIT: and your edit uses hyperbole to get your flawed point across.

Edited September 7, 2008 by ocnblu

[A Horse With No Name]

[iCan we get anymore superficial?

No, we really can't. You and I won't ever agree on politics...however we agree on this.

I have been going door to door for the Obama campaign, and I hear comments like "I'm not voting for that F###### G#### D### N####.

Positive comments are usually something like "he seems like a nice man, I hope he wins."

Very few people have put ANY thought into which candidate they would like for any real reasons that matter. What is scary is that I live in Ohio, which is a "swing" state.

Chris

[Robert Hall]

A generalization, and unfair. A nutcase will grab whatever is at his or her disposal to do their heinous deed.

Maybe, but I suspect 9/10 nutcases are conservatives...they are the most tightly wound and most likely to freak out at modern, secular society.

[A Horse With No Name]

I don't hunt, it's a disgusting hobby IMHO.

Actually I know lots of guys who do hunt...we need to come together in this nation. These guys want to preserve the environment just as much as the liberals on the left. We need common sense and to realize common goals.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

Maybe, but I suspect 9/10 nutcases are conservatives...they are the most tightly wound and most likely to freak out at modern, secular society.

When one of the guys from my 18 Y.O. daughters church heard that I was voting for Obama, his response was "Why don't you just go out and personally kill 40 million unborn babies? That's what Obama really wants!"

He'd be in even more shock if he knew my daughter also will be voting for Obama.

Chris

[ocnblu]

Most nutcases, I suspect, just need to get laid, regardless of their leanings.

[Oracle of Delphi]

As Statesman Elmer J. Fudd is apt to say - "Shhhhhhhh, be vewwwy, vewwwy quiet; I'm hunting wabbits, heheheheheheh". All he used was a shotgun.

[ocnblu]

I suspect the majority of Americans historically pick their candidate based too much on emotion. And nobody's going to change them.

[A Horse With No Name]

The only thing that will change with a McCain administration is the stationary.

Quoted for truth, although I think McCain is much smarter than W and much more his own man.

I like the "inclusive value" of a female VP, but not impressed by Ms. Sarah as a candidate.

Chris

[Robert Hall]

When one of the guys from my 18 Y.O. daughters church heard that I was voting for Obama, his response was "Why don't you just go out and personally kill 40 million unborn babies? That's what Obama really wants!"

Chris

Hopefully you told the narrow-minded retard to go please go f*ck himself..

[A Horse With No Name]

Most nutcases, I suspect, just need to use permanant birth control, regardless of their leanings.

Fixed.

Chris

[ocnblu]

He's already said he'll choose a bipartisan cabinet, which tells me he will choose who he considers the best people for the job, and not be held to party lines.

[ocnblu]

Yes... BIRTH CONTROL prior to conception. Abortion is being used as birth control in this country, and that is a sad, sad thing. It takes two to tango... both partners should be responsible.

[A Horse With No Name]

Yes... BIRTH CONTROL prior to conception. Abortion is being used as birth control in this country, and that is a sad, sad thing. It takes two to tango... both partners should be responsible.

I would agree...but also disagree with abstinence only sex education.

Chris

[ocnblu]

Abstinence will never work (unless the person decides for themselves it is what they want). Rubbers almost always do. Edited September 7, 2008 by ocnblu

[Oracle of Delphi]

I received this e-mail today.

According to The Book of Revelations the anti-Christ is:

The anti-Christ will be a man, in his 40s, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal.... the prophecy says that people will flock to him and he will promise false hope and world peace, and when he is in power, will destroy everything. Is it OBAMA??

I wrote this back to the sender.

First off, it's the Book of Revelation, not Revelations, and it does not provide a list of signs for identifying the appearance of the anti-Christ. It doesn't even use the term anti-Christ nor does it describe such a figure. In chapter 13 of that book it merely recounts the appearance of the "beasts", who are described in animalistic terms.

Secondly, Thousands of years ago when this book was written, there were no Muslims at that time, so how can you even believe this!!!! LOL!

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Obama supports nuclear power right?

[vonVeezelsnider]

lol that "Obama is the Anti-Christ" thing is the stupidest $h!e I've heard in a long time.

[Satty]

Obama supports nuclear power right?

McCain does although he doesn't address the fact that a lot of people oppose nuclear plants near their homes. Obama has said its worth looking into, but its not going to solve everything.

[loki]

Actually I know lots of guys who do hunt...we need to come together in this nation. These guys want to preserve the environment just as much as the liberals on the left. We need common sense and to realize common goals.

Chris

example, ted nugent. he was citing that a university has a class go to his property cause he actually keeps deer and other wildlife in check enough for some rare species to propagate on his property, i don't remember what species it was.

Abstinence will never work (unless the person decides for themselves it is what they want). Rubbers almost always do.

rubbers usually work....but they're not always used in haste, as far as i've heard. that's why there's a company making rubbers that you crack the packaging and just roll down, taking less than ..oh, 5 seconds...?

...inflicted abortion, do people not realize that the beginning of one's life is the embryo? ok so it doesn't have a "heart, brain, anything", but if you kill the embryo, the person never grows that heart, brain, ...life. that's why christians are against abortion, or should be. not pushing this on anyone, just ....knowledge.

[Satty]

Ok, so if you want to count a fetus as a person under the 14th Amendment (as has been suggested by some) does that mean that a woman who has an abortion and the doctor that performs it are both criminals and can be punished with death? If I pay someone $20 to kill my neighbor, both the killer and I go to jail, would it be the same for a fetus? If not, then it could be argued that if I hire someone to knock off my neighbor, I shouldn't be held responsible because I didn't pull the trigger. Taking it further, could a woman who smokes or drinks during her pregnancy be charged with neglect? It doesn't seem to me that the federal government should have a part in any of this.

Education would be the most effective route, both at home and in the schools. Abstinence only education is pretty much worthless and wouldn't do anything to curb the abortion rate.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

One of the most mocked countries in the world, France, utilizes nuclear power for 75% of their energy. they recycle 90% of their fuel rods. Their energy is far more secure and less polluting than ours. The French clearly trust nuclear energy enough, why are Americans so afraid?

Now, there are other types of nuclear reactors, such as Thorium reactors for those people who are worried about the supply of Ur on this planet. When well designed and maintained, they provide safe, clean power with relatively little waste.

Coupled with other alternative energies (hybrid cars, hydrogen cars, CNG cars whatever as well as wind, geothermal, tidal etc power) and a little domestic drilling, this could go a long way to gaining our energy independence.

And to Moltar and his anti-military style rifles.

This is an AR-15 rifle in .22LR, it has a fake suppressor that makes the barrel longer than 16" so that it is legal, like any other civilian rifle it is semi-automatic only. .22LR is a relatively weak round, suitable for not much more than punching paper or killing squirrels. It is a SCARY looking rifle (Evil Black Rifle). It is NOT used by the military, although it is built off the same platform as the M16.

Clearly this rifle needs to be banned yes?

Edited September 7, 2008 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[Satty]

.22s are deadly, as long as you dont mind the C.O.D. being blunt force trauma.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

.22s are deadly, as long as you dont mind the C.O.D. being blunt force trauma.

well of course they can be deadly, but so can throwing a rock at someones head.

[balthazar]

McCain does although he doesn't address the fact that a lot of people oppose nuclear plants near their homes. Obama has said its worth looking into, but its not going to solve everything.

There is NO 'magic energy bullet'; no one source could possibly solve "everything", any potential leader talking in that manner just look naive. At this point, with general instability of some areas of the world geo-politically & economically, what we need to do is NOT ban any workable sources of energy at this point. Drill, fuse, blow, photo, hydro, bring it all on. Dems like to cater to the enviro-nazis by saying 'no' to select energy sources using the oversimplification of 'it won't solve every one of our problems, so it's not worth pursuing'.

Edited September 7, 2008 by balthazar

[Satty]

McCain talks like he wants nuclear plants in every city (ok, I'm exaggerating, but he's pushing hard for nuclear) and that will never fly. People dont want nuclear reactors nearby, they dont want nuclear waste nearby. McCain is going to lose Nevada on the Yucca Mountain issue alone, he wants more nuclear plants, which means more nuclear waste, which means (McCain himself has said this) more junk in Yucca Mtn. The NIMBY mentality is going to lead Nevadans to revolt.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

McCain talks like he wants nuclear plants in every city (ok, I'm exaggerating, but he's pushing hard for nuclear) and that will never fly. People dont want nuclear reactors nearby, they dont want nuclear waste nearby. McCain is going to lose Nevada on the Yucca Mountain issue alone, he wants more nuclear plants, which means more nuclear waste, which means (McCain himself has said this) more junk in Yucca Mtn. The NIMBY mentality is going to lead Nevadans to revolt.

Not necessarily, as the old nuke reactors are phased out, then in the LONG RUN there will be less waste produced because the newer reactors can recycle the vast majority of their fuel rods unlike the archaic dinosaurs of reactors that we have now.

Plus a lot of the new designs are inherently safer than the older designs. I think the reason McCain is pushing so hard is because this is technology that we KNOW works. France has quite easily demonstrated that nuclear power is clean safe and reliable. So what is the problem with using this as the forefront of alternative energy while we develop other means of power generation?

[Satty]

We dont want America to become the France of the 21st century

It doesn't matter where you stand politically, that was an asinine statement.

Edited September 8, 2008 by Satty

[regfootball]

man this thread is about as dull as the constant 'how GM should reorganize its brands and models' threads on GMI..........nsap mgescuro, all of that.

[ocnblu]

A clarification: I have to fall on the side of keeping abortion legal, but I think (among other restrictions) parental notification should be mandatory if the woman is not of age. To me it's a sad procedure, and absolutely must be a last resort, but it is her body when all is said and done.

[Oracle of Delphi]

A clarification: I have to fall on the side of keeping abortion legal, but I think (among other restrictions) parental notification should be mandatory if the woman is not of age. To me it's a sad procedure, and absolutely must be a last resort, but it is her body when all is said and done.

She should have been on some type of birth control, when all is said and done. Oh wait, abortion is her birth control!

Edited September 8, 2008 by Pontiac Custom-S

[loki]

Ok, so if you want to count a fetus as a person under the 14th Amendment (as has been suggested by some) does that mean that a woman who has an abortion and the doctor that performs it are both criminals and can be punished with death? If I pay someone $20 to kill my neighbor, both the killer and I go to jail, would it be the same for a fetus? If not, then it could be argued that if I hire someone to knock off my neighbor, I shouldn't be held responsible because I didn't pull the trigger. Taking it further, could a woman who smokes or drinks during her pregnancy be charged with neglect? It doesn't seem to me that the federal government should have a part in any of this.

Education would be the most effective route, both at home and in the schools. Abstinence only education is pretty much worthless and wouldn't do anything to curb the abortion rate.

I'm against the death penalty. somehow it's not ok when one person kills one or a lot of people, but it's somehow ok for a judge/jury to sentence someone to death... a person dies prematurely (not of their own hands) either way.

don't studies show that smoking and drinking more and sip here and there can be harmful to the (yet) unborn.

nothing personal, but liberals are the ones trying to take away smokes, booze (other than "bible thumpers", but it's the same idea) because it's bad for you. but don't see anything wrong with people taking the lives of others. true liberals want to force their "morality" on others. the pro-life movement just wants people to respect human life, from the natural beginning to the natural end. do you see it some other way?

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

I'm against the death penalty. somehow it's not ok when one person kills one or a lot of people, but it's somehow ok for a judge/jury to sentence someone to death... a person dies prematurely (not of their own hands) either way.

The idea is that if you are found guilty on certain charges by a jury/judge, then you are stripped of your constitutional rights (as can be done if found guilty). This includes your right to life. However you may not be deprived of your life prior to being found guilty.

[loki]

She should have been on some type of birth control, when all is said and done. Oh wait, abortion is her birth control!

I chatted with someone, for a few years, that was on the pill, she wasn't respected early in her life and had a tragic experience... she couldn't respect herself enough later to see she was making bad b/f choices because her actions had no long term consequences.

I also have a married friend that's on the pill for medical purposes, they still use a condom just to stay on the safe side till they plan to have a child.

[Satty]

The idea is that if you are found guilty on certain charges by a jury/judge, then you are stripped of your constitutional rights (as can be done if found guilty). This includes your right to life. However you may not be deprived of your life prior to being found guilty.

When are Constitutional rights gained?

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

It can be (and has been) argued that, Constitutionally, Equal Protection doesn't apply to unborn fetuses, as they're not a person born or naturalized in the United States.

[loki]

The idea is that if you are found guilty on certain charges by a jury/judge, then you are stripped of your constitutional rights (as can be done if found guilty). This includes your right to life. However you may not be deprived of your life prior to being found guilty.

ok, then why do we think we have to be humane? if you lose your right to life, we have to be "nice" about it. it becomes uneconomical. but again... aren't our rights/freedoms god given.... how is it fine that a legal person/group of people can take that away, they thus are put above "god"...?

". . . endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights . . ." (Declaration of Independence)

[gm4life]

Ohhhhhhh 68 hits it again.

[gm4life]

The record Obama has is dangerously extreme, the most liberal in the senate. Being dangerously extreme on either side isn't good and McCain is more of a moderate and was right on the surge (weather you agree with the war or not, he was right). I am just glad he has picked a fresh new face with energy. I just find it funny how "car people" will go vote for a man that has hatered for performance cars and wants to DO nothing about domestic drilling. If you think Barack is really a mainstream help the common man out canidate I think your fooling yourself. I let McCains record of reaching across party lines speak for itself. I also think when a previously dem Joe Liberman speaks at the RNC you know something has gone wrong in that party and it has changed. And yes liberals are the ones whom most likely tend to hate American's, our big bold Ameircan cars especially RWD performance ones that many of us like and yet you still vote for that side. Hmmmmmmm, it is very sad how "extreme" some of you think McCain is, for a conservative he is not nearly conservative or traditional enough. Community Organizer and Junior Senator or a proud patriot with years of service and many years as a leader... That is real hard.

[loki]

When are Constitutional rights gained?

It can be (and has been) argued that, Constitutionally, Equal Protection doesn't apply to unborn fetuses, as they're not a person born or naturalized in the United States.

that argument can be the same for terrorists, because they're not citizens, or they're deemed enemies of the state...so torture away...who cares if some/all die.

and an example of ageism... hahahah, but seriously... hm, trying not to be too outlandish... farmer seeds his land. someone, by the farmers request, removes all the planted soil from the land and says it's ok because nothing was growing yet, now he doesn't have any food growing and can't continue feeding his family. and that should be legal?

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

ok, then why do we think we have to be humane? if you lose your right to life, we have to be "nice" about it. it becomes uneconomical. but again... aren't our rights/freedoms god given.... how is it fine that a legal person/group of people can take that away, they thus are put above "god"...?

". . . endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights . . ." (Declaration of Independence)

I dont know. But by being God Given you have just included church in state.

Therefore you fail.

[Oracle of Delphi]

The record Obama has is dangerously extreme, the most liberal in the senate. Being dangerously extreme on either side isn't good and McCain is more of a moderate and was right on the surge (weather you agree with the war or not, he was right). I am just glad he has picked a fresh new face with energy. I just find it funny how "car people" will go vote for a man that has hatered for performance cars and wants to DO nothing about domestic drilling. If you think Barack is really a mainstream help the common man out canidate I think your fooling yourself. I let McCains record of reaching across party lines speak for itself. I also think when a previously dem Joe Liberman speaks at the RNC you know something has gone wrong in that party and it has changed. And yes liberals are the ones whom most likely tend to hate American's, our big bold Ameircan cars especially RWD performance ones that many of us like and yet you still vote for that side. Hmmmmmmm, it is very sad how "extreme" some of you think McCain is, for a conservative he is not nearly conservative or traditional enough. Community Organizer and Junior Senator or a proud patriot with years of service and many years as a leader... That is real hard.

McCain is so old he could die tomorrow, and I don't want Dan Quale with a Ponytail running the country.

[Camino LS6]

McCain talks like he wants nuclear plants in every city (ok, I'm exaggerating, but he's pushing hard for nuclear) and that will never fly. People dont want nuclear reactors nearby, they dont want nuclear waste nearby. McCain is going to lose Nevada on the Yucca Mountain issue alone, he wants more nuclear plants, which means more nuclear waste, which means (McCain himself has said this) more junk in Yucca Mtn. The NIMBY mentality is going to lead Nevadans to revolt.

You should watch C-span more often, it is actually the dems that have been pushing nuclear lately. Clean coal scares them more than nukes these days. The proposals I heard in hearings led by Pelosi herself called for well over 100 new nuclear plants in a ten year period.

A rediculuos number given nimby and other roadblocks, yet they used it as justification for meeting porposed CO2 limits. I was screaming at the TV.

[Croc]

The record Obama has is dangerously extreme, the most liberal in the senate.

Really? Trot out his voting record and prove it. I'm pretty sure Dennis Kucinich is far more liberal than Obama. Guaranteed.

Being dangerously extreme on either side isn't good and McCain is more of a moderate and was right on the surge (weather you agree with the war or not, he was right).

Really? How is McCain a "moderate"? Trot out his record and prove it. Is Bush a "moderate" by your definition? Because McCain has voted with Bush 95% of the time. As for the surge, how has it "worked"? What are your performance criteria for calling it a success? My criterion for a military success are that it stabilizes or significantly stabilizes a region, and that isn't even close to happening at this point.

I am just glad he has picked a fresh new face with energy.

What do you think Obama is?

I just find it funny how "car people" will go vote for a man that has hatered for performance cars and wants to DO nothing about domestic drilling.

False. Show me a quote where Obama has said he hates performance cars. He never said that. Also, you might want to research domestic oil drilling...if started NOW, none of that oil would be in the system until 2012 due to infrastructure setup. How is that going to impact prices? And what happens when THOSE reserves run out?

If you think Barack is really a mainstream help the common man out canidate I think your fooling yourself.

Why? Demonstrate some proof.

I let McCains record of reaching across party lines speak for itself.

What record? Voting with Bush 95% of the time?

I also think when a previously dem Joe Liberman speaks at the RNC you know something has gone wrong in that party and it has changed. And yes liberals are the ones whom most likely tend to hate American's, our big bold Ameircan cars especially RWD performance ones that many of us like and yet you still vote for that side.

Wow, so liberals hate America and performance cars, yet many of us on this board do not...you are not making a lick of sense.

Hmmmmmmm, it is very sad how "extreme" some of you think McCain is, for a conservative he is not nearly conservative or traditional enough. Community Organizer and Junior Senator or a proud patriot with years of service and many years as a leader... That is real hard.

How does being in the army as a POW qualify McCain for executive office? How does being a senator really qualify someone for executive office? Obama was a community organizer, which is at the very least an executive leadership position. Frankly, I think the "qualifications" argument is stupid. I'm not voting for someone's resume. I'm voting based on how each candidate has made decisions throughout their career, throughout the campaign, and how they handle stress based on the way they handle stress on the campaign. In these regards, Obama has run a much more successful campaign. He "Got Out The Vote" during the primaries, he out-fundraised all of his rivals, he has a strong grass-roots network (probably based on his background as a community organizer), and he is a very good speaker. All I've seen from McCain are flip-flops on key issues between his campaign in 2000 and this one. According to John McCain, he has changed his mind completely on several issues in the past 8 years. His campaign has not been run well by any metric, and his lack of fundraising in comparison to Obama's is a stark testament to that. I also severely question his judgment, not just in how he runs his campaign, but in his inability to make decisions. The memos are out there, McCain wanted Lieberman as his VP. That's a fact. So why didn't McCain make a decision HE wanted instead of kow-towing to the team of advisors who are the same ones who advised Bush?

Frankly, had McCain chosen Lieberman, I would have had a lot more respect for the man than I do now. There's a big difference between political strategy and pandering, and by picking Palin, McCain pandered, just like he did when he changed his mind on those countless issues between 2000 and 2008.

[Oracle of Delphi]

I heard a rumor today that Palin is running her husband's business partner, the media is investigating that allegation as we speak, if true, stick a fork in her, she's done.

Edited September 8, 2008 by Pontiac Custom-S

[Croc]

that argument can be the same for terrorists, because they're not citizens, or they're deemed enemies of the state...so torture away...who cares if some/all die.

But that's where the Geneva Convention and Treaty of Human Rights kicks in. Sorry, bad analogy.

[Camino LS6]

McCain is so old he could die tomorrow, and I don't want Dan Quale with a Ponytail running the country.

A valid point.

She is interesting, but I can't say that I want her brand of politics behind the big desk.

I know she pleases the extreme right, but I was hoping that McCain wouldn't appease those folks with his pick.

I was disapppointed.

[Robert Hall]

But that's where the Geneva Convention and Treaty of Human Rights kicks in. Sorry, bad analogy.

Yes, but Bush/Cheney don't believe in any of that..they think they are above international treaties.

Edited September 8, 2008 by moltar

[loki]

I dont know. But by being God Given you have just included church in state.

Therefore you fail.

right back at you. the declaration uses "creator" so either you have to concede it's inherent in the system, or just part of human nature.

or were you being facetious?

But that's where the Geneva Convention and Treaty of Human Rights kicks in. Sorry, bad analogy.

Yes, but Bush/Cheney don't believe in any of that..they think they are above international treaties.

aka, laws evidently don't matter this day and age....at levels above the "common man"

[balthazar]

Croc- >>"Really? Trot out his voting record and prove it."<<

The 'grade', based on his voting, comes from HERE.

>>"Because McCain has voted with Bush 95% of the time."<<

Notice you never hear the % of how often Obama voted 'with Bush' ? 49% (2006). Thought it might be around 6%, perhaps? And you do realize that a great many votes cover utter fluff & nonsense, like approving National Watermelon Day or agreeing to congratulate the Giants on their SB win, right? Surely you don't think that Big Gov is getting meaningful things accomplished, by & large, do you? With this in mind, the 95% is pretty meaningless.

>>"As for the surge, how has it "worked"?"<<

Not up on the specfics myself, but BO pretty much admitted this himself in the O'Reilly interview this week. BO: "It has gone very well." Is he lying for some incomprehensible reason? Check youtube.

>>"Also, you might want to research domestic oil drilling...if started NOW, none of that oil would be in the system until 2012 due to infrastructure setup. How is that going to impact prices?"<<

This is another short-sighted Dem talking point. What's going to get here quicker: new oil well production, or solar/ wind/ nuclear/ other? Those have a minute fraction of the infrastructure of oil and will take many more years to get 'on grid'.

No, the only common sense plan is to activate ALL feasible energy sources so the results hit as quickly as possible for each.

Ask yourself why the Dems -who up until a few minutes ago- were vehemently & unilaterally against drilling, but now Pelosi grudgingly admits they 'will consider it'. It's all a smokescreen; she has no intention whatsoever in voting for drilling, she's far too out-of-touch to understand how important this has become and far too obsessed with opposing Bush to care. All the Dems who have switched their position on this are doing is placating voters who have pushed energy to the #1 issue spot.

>>"I'm voting based on how each candidate has made decisions throughout their career, throughout the campaign, and how they handle stress based on the way they handle stress on the campaign."<<

Sounds reasonable... but when the history of the candidate is paper-thin, there's not much "throughout their career" to go on. Trot out his 'community organizer record', why don't you? Stress, he does not handle as well as I would like; he is easily flustered on cold questions, too much stammering.

>>"In these regards, Obama has run a much more successful campaign. He "Got Out The Vote" during the primaries, he out-fundraised all of his rivals, he has a strong grass-roots network (probably based on his background as a community organizer), and he is a very good speaker."<<

I would submit: August 2008 estimate including independants: 51% lean D and 38% lean R.

In 2004 numbers, there were 72M Ds and 55M Rs. Who do you think is more likely to raise more $ ?

He is a very good teleprompter reader, yes. He lacks convinction when not spoon-fed, however.

>>"According to John McCain, he has changed his mind completely on several issues in the past 8 years."<<

The world and this country have changed completely on several issues in the past 8 years. Remember Sept 10th, 2001? Sticking resolutely to the same line in light of that is failing to 'adapt, overcome, improvise', which is what we need.

>>"I also severely question his judgment, not just in how he runs his campaign, but in his inability to make decisions. The memos are out there, McCain wanted Lieberman as his VP. That's a fact. So why didn't McCain make a decision HE wanted instead of kow-towing to the team of advisors who are the same ones who advised Bush?"<<

It had been reported that this was a 'floating' of Lieberman to gauge his pro-choice standing with the R base.

>>"...by picking Palin, McCain pandered, just like he did when he changed his mind on those countless issues between 2000 and 2008.'<<

And you don't think BO has changed his mind countless times on countless issues ?? Did he not swear he never heard any of Rev Wright's racist, anti-American speeches in 20 years, then recant that under pressure ?

In January 2004, Obama said it was time "to end the embargo with Cuba" because it had "utterly failed in the effort to overthrow Castro." Speaking to a Cuban American audience in Miami in August 2007, he said he would not "take off the embargo" as president because it is "an important inducement for change."

What changed in Cuba in those 3 years?

Edited September 8, 2008 by balthazar

[ocnblu]

Starry-eyed schoolgirls...