BuffettNews.com

I'm sure the late-night comedy writers were looking forward to 4 more years of Bill living in the White House. Easy pickin's for them. So far all I hear is "McCain is old" jokes, and I don't think they quite know how to handle Obama yet. Maybe he'll hook up with another Preacher on the Edge.

chippewa wrote:I'm sure the late-night comedy writers were looking forward to 4 more years of Bill living in the White House. Easy pickin's for them. So far all I hear is "McCain is old" jokes, and I don't think they quite know how to handle Obama yet. Maybe he'll hook up with another Preacher on the Edge.

Isn't it racist to crack jokes about Obama? I'm being sarcastic.

I think McCain has a difficult road ahead of him. He doesn't have the 'base' that Bush had among conservatives (and Bush barely won in 2004), he continues to back a plan for Iraq that many say is broken (military leaders among them) and a lot of folks will link him (ie a prominent Republican) to many of the problems the country now faces after eight years of a Republican controlled White House and thirteen years of a Republican controlled House of Representatives (which began with Newt Gingrich's Contract On America back in '95).

With the Democratic primaries now over, and Obama as the presumed nominee, I think McCain will now receive more media scrutiny of his record and policies and most importantly, his plans for the nation going forward. Folks might not like what they hear from this man.

For Barack Obama, getting elected to the Oval Office will be only the beginning . . . he is going to be held responsible for cleaning up the horrific mess left by his predecessor.

I believe the neocons in the Republican establishment are counting on Obama not being able to do much about the mess they've made, and are planning, after a single term Obama presidency, on a triumphant return to power.

This also explains how McCain, who a few short years ago was widely considered an outsider by the Republican establishment, has ended up as the Republican nominee in 2008. He is a throw away candidate. The Republican establishment doesn't think he can win, and doesn't really care. After his loss this November, they won't have to worry about his maverick tendencies because his presidential aspirations will be over.

The only fly in the ointment for this hopeful Republican fantasy will be if Obama's presidency is a success with the American people (ie he get's the mess cleaned up).

Of course Obama would have an easy time in the White House. He'll raise taxes and cut spending on defense, which will make it seem like he's improving the economy. This will do nothing but lead to more problems down the road for us.

Feesh wrote:Of course Obama would have an easy time in the White House. He'll raise taxes and cut spending on defense, which will make it seem like he's improving the economy. This will do nothing but lead to more problems down the road for us.

Shhhh!!!!!!! Don't burst the bubble. Don't you know change is good???? We don't need no steenkin plan, just change!!!

I don't consider Bush a conservative. Our government is currently the largest in American history. Government workers currently make more than those in our private sector. This is not a conservative philosophy.

A small government and low taxes puts more money back into the economy. Yet, some will have you believe that only those who make money and contribute to the large majority of our economy should be taxed. Because those who are less fortunate are entitled to not pay taxes and entitled to having everything given to them for free.

ConchRepublican wrote:

Feesh wrote:Of course Obama would have an easy time in the White House. He'll raise taxes and cut spending on defense, which will make it seem like he's improving the economy. This will do nothing but lead to more problems down the road for us.

Shhhh!!!!!!! Don't burst the bubble. Don't you know change is good???? We don't need no steenkin plan, just change!!!

Exactly..let's just change. Things are horrible. Change them, right? Let's put a band-aid on but make sure it's infected prior to covering it up. Then, don't look at it for a few years so no one can see the infection. Then open it up and see the real mess you have on your hands!

flyboy55 wrote:I think McCain has a difficult road ahead of him. He doesn't have the 'base' that Bush had among conservatives (and Bush barely won in 2004), he continues to back a plan for Iraq that many say is broken (military leaders among them) and a lot of folks will link him (ie a prominent Republican) to many of the problems the country now faces after eight years of a Republican controlled White House and thirteen years of a Republican controlled House of Representatives (which began with Newt Gingrich's Contract On America back in '95).

With the Democratic primaries now over, and Obama as the presumed nominee, I think McCain will now receive more media scrutiny of his record and policies and most importantly, his plans for the nation going forward. Folks might not like what they hear from this man.

For Barack Obama, getting elected to the Oval Office will be only the beginning . . . he is going to be held responsible for cleaning up the horrific mess left by his predecessor.

I believe the neocons in the Republican establishment are counting on Obama not being able to do much about the mess they've made, and are planning, after a single term Obama presidency, on a triumphant return to power.

This also explains how McCain, who a few short years ago was widely considered an outsider by the Republican establishment, has ended up as the Republican nominee in 2008. He is a throw away candidate. The Republican establishment doesn't think he can win, and doesn't really care. After his loss this November, they won't have to worry about his maverick tendencies because his presidential aspirations will be over.

The only fly in the ointment for this hopeful Republican fantasy will be if Obama's presidency is a success with the American people (ie he get's the mess cleaned up).

The only problem with this line of reasoning Flyboy is that even though a lot of conservatives don't agree with some of McCain's positions they agree with him far more than they agree with Obama. McCain will get the conservative vote simply as the lesser of two evils. But McCain is positioned closer to the center than is Obama. So he may very well pull a large number of the "Reagan Republicans" with him in this election. It will be interesting to see how is plays out.

green1 wrote:

flyboy55 wrote:
The only problem with this line of reasoning Flyboy is that even though a lot of conservatives don't agree with some of McCain's positions they agree with him far more than they agree with Obama. McCain will get the conservative vote simply as the lesser of two evils. But McCain is positioned closer to the center than is Obama. So he may very well pull a large number of the "Reagan Republicans" with him in this election. It will be interesting to see how is plays out.

I completely agree green. I find it highly unlikely that someone who considers themself a conservative would cast a vote for Obama. While we may not be happy that McCain is the nominee, it's another lesser of two evils choice that has to be made.

Feesh wrote:

green1 wrote:

flyboy55 wrote:
The only problem with this line of reasoning Flyboy is that even though a lot of conservatives don't agree with some of McCain's positions they agree with him far more than they agree with Obama. McCain will get the conservative vote simply as the lesser of two evils. But McCain is positioned closer to the center than is Obama. So he may very well pull a large number of the "Reagan Republicans" with him in this election. It will be interesting to see how is plays out.

I completely agree green. I find it highly unlikely that someone who considers themself a conservative would cast a vote for Obama. While we may not be happy that McCain is the nominee, it's another lesser of two evils choice that has to be made.

For a while, I, a conservative, thought Hillery would be the lesser of three evils.

Aside from the idea that his nomination will move the Republican party closer to the left than the right, I think McCain may actually be crazy.

Obama has yet to really detail any of this "change" he will effect and, from what I can see of his record, he hasn't accomplished much in office. Going just by what he says, he's a pie in the sky liberal who thinks if everyone gets a timeout when their bad and then a hug the world will be just fine. ummm . . . OK.

Hillery . . . I disagree with most things she has said and think she may actually be an embodiment of pure evil (kidding, well, not totally ) but I think she's a self serving pragmatist. With that in mind, what's best for the country will be in her best interest. I don't think she really wants the "enact change" or has a blueprint for how SHE thinks things should be in the future, I just think she wants to be the first female president. And will do whatever it takes to accomplish that. Based on that, it's like the idea of having a criminal on your side. It's messy, but it gets the job done.

ConchRepublican wrote:Obama has yet to really detail any of this "change" he will effect and, from what I can see of his record, he hasn't accomplished much in office.

If I'm not mistaken, didn't Obama say one of the things he wanted to do was work together with the other side to end the partisanship that's been running rampant in Washington for who knows how many years? But he has one of the most, if not the most, liberal voting records in the Senate. If he's shown no inclination to reach across the aisle and work with the other side since he's been in the Senate what makes anyone think that will change if he's President Obama instead of Senator Obama? Especially if the Democrats maintain control of both houses of Congress.

Another thing about him that bothers me goes back to his days as an Illinois state legislator. I remember reading that he voted "present" more than 100 times. Politicians usually vote "present" to avoid taking a stand on an issue that may be unpopular. When you're the top dog you can't do that. What was it Harry Truman said? The buck stops here.

ConchRepublican wrote:

Feesh wrote:

green1 wrote:

flyboy55 wrote:
The only problem with this line of reasoning Flyboy is that even though a lot of conservatives don't agree with some of McCain's positions they agree with him far more than they agree with Obama. McCain will get the conservative vote simply as the lesser of two evils. But McCain is positioned closer to the center than is Obama. So he may very well pull a large number of the "Reagan Republicans" with him in this election. It will be interesting to see how is plays out.

I completely agree green. I find it highly unlikely that someone who considers themself a conservative would cast a vote for Obama. While we may not be happy that McCain is the nominee, it's another lesser of two evils choice that has to be made.

Obama has yet to really detail any of this "change" he will effect and, from what I can see of his record, he hasn't accomplished much in office. Going just by what he says, he's a pie in the sky liberal who thinks if everyone gets a timeout when their bad and then a hug the world will be just fine. ummm . . . OK.

Well from what he's said, he will raise the corporate tax and capital gains tax. This isn't because it will put more money into the economy, because history shows it will do the exact opposite. His reasons for doing this and he has said this in debates is that it's to be "fair".

Don't even get me started on this health care idea. IMO, the proper way to bring health care costs down and make them affordable is to create more competition amongst the health care companies forcing a price reduction. The more people who are covered on health care, the cheaper the prices will be.

But the way to allow people to afford health care is to put more money in Americans pockets. This isn't done by overtaxing those who already pay more in taxes than other Americans and making them fund healthcare for the entire country. Nothing in life is free! Lower taxes, put more money in everyone's pocket, and leave it up to individuals to make their health care decisions.

Let me ask you a question - would you rather make your own decision on your health care provider and what doctors you go to, or would you rather let a bureaucrat in Washington make that decision for you?

It would have been historic with either candidate winning, but the shame of it is that it is happening in a shady manner. The whole idea of superdelegates sickens me. This race was not decided by popular votes or pledged delegates, but by a group that picks who they want, no questions asked. Add the Mich and Fla disasters that Howard 'the screamer' Dean couldnt handle and you have one mess of a party.
In an election year that should have been dominated by the Dems based on Bush, they look like they are gonna screw it up.
As of Obama, he would have made a great candidate in 2012 or 2016. The 'present' votes and lack of experience are gonna really come out soon. Not to mention the whole Tony Rezko mess, which may be his downfall.

PIA wrote:

We will never get a leader with stones like him again:
Advisor: "Mr. President, sorry to wake you from your nap, but we have proof Gadaffi was involved in terrorism, including the killing of our servicemen"
Ronnie: "Well, send a couple of F-14s and blow his crazy a** up"

There ended the Libyan threat while he was sherriff.

The above thread is proof positive why Hillary should have been the nominee.

Mc Cain, four more years of some sort of Republican insanity!


Obama, four more years of a "Learning on the job" President like "W" and

you see where that mess has taken this country!

BTW, I consider myself a Democrat and a Liberal and NOT RACIST, but if Obama, isn't the most Racist African American I have ever seen.

You see only "white folk" can be racist! Yet you can align with your "brothers and sisters" and sit and listen to your ministers call all white people evil and "the devil", but you never heard these things. But HE is going to unite this country?!!!!

Doctor, Mr. Obama needs a hearing aid!


Hillary, was running the country, while Bill was being done from

under the desk!


You see, a return of a President to office, who already knows how to run the country.

All kidding aside, we need a President, who knows how this goverment works and knows what needs to be done.

Barack Obama, is the closest thing that has come down the pike, to make me actually consider voting for a Republican, after this "Facist Idiot" "W".

It hurts me to say that about "W", He is MY President, even if I don't like the way he has done his job!!! This is MY country and I love it.

Of course the next President will have to raise taxes, "W" has mortgage our kids future with this War, to a tune of over 525 billion dollars and ruined the economy.

But get the picture my Phriends, it isn't supposed to be US against Them!
Democrats against Republican, We are all on the same side! We just view things differently!

But remember one thing...On the Titanic, it didn't matter if you were in steerage or first class, when the boat went down, almost everyone died!

The Polarization of this country, that has happened under the Republican leadership in the country, especially the last 8 awful years, has to stop.

WE ARE NOT ADVISARIES!

A lot of good all that money, that the Republicans have made over the last 8 years will do, when we have a depression in this country and watch our dollar become worthless! How about 50.00 for a loaf of bread?

Scarey??


Sorry about the rant!

IMHO!

green1 wrote:The only problem with this line of reasoning Flyboy is that even though a lot of conservatives don't agree with some of McCain's positions they agree with him far more than they agree with Obama. McCain will get the conservative vote simply as the lesser of two evils. But McCain is positioned closer to the center than is Obama. So he may very well pull a large number of the "Reagan Republicans" with him in this election. It will be interesting to see how is plays out.

While this conservative could not vote for Obama because of his socialist leanings. I will also not be voting for Mccain for his liberal positions on most issues. I will be voting for a conservative third party candidate this year. Of the crazies that get on the ballot one has to be a conservative. They can't all be flighty left wing nuts. Worst case i vote libertarian. McCain has poked his finger in the Republican party eye too many times to have a chance at my vote.

And lest we ALL forget those in the Senate and House who pass legislation and bills every day that the president basically has nothing to do with.. they are as much, or more, to blame about the state of this country. IMHO, of course.

parrothead216 wrote:The above thread is proof positive why Hillary should have been the nominee.

Why? Hillary and her supporters like to paint this picture of her as a strong, independent woman. Everything she's ever gotten in her adult life has been because she's married to Bill. If her name was Hillary Smith nobody would care about her.

SMLCHNG wrote:And lest we ALL forget those in the Senate and House who pass legislation and bills every day that the president basically has nothing to do with.. they are as much, or more, to blame about the state of this country. IMHO, of course.

Well said! The President always takes the heat, when it's the Senate and House who have been royally screwing things up for years!

At least McCain has made it a point to get these issues cleaned up.

SMLCHNG wrote:And lest we ALL forget those in the Senate and House who pass legislation and bills every day that the president basically has nothing to do with.. they are as much, or more, to blame about the state of this country. IMHO, of course.

And as much as everybody loves to bash George Bush, since the Democrats took control of both houses of Congress their approval ratings are lower than Bush's.