Debate #1

Martonian · Post by **Martonian** » September 28, 2008 9:22 pm

12vmanRick wrote:
drunkpirate66 wrote:I am the most laid back person you will ever meet.
obviously NOT with the threatening PM I got from you

So a person that is SUPPOSED to represent America that doesn't believe in individual freedoms like the 2nd Amendment is equivalent to...? yea those that don't believe in America and what it stands for are those that are socialists and trying to destroy it in whatever way they can, whatever political party they claim.

http://obama.3cdn.net/7d467fe75a3029d7df_hum6injwr.pdf

Obama's Website wrote:Barack Obama believes the Second Amendment creates an individual right, and he respects the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms.

Moonie · Post by **Moonie** » September 28, 2008 11:21 pm

Staredge wrote:
Moonie wrote: I'm no fan of Couric, but she was very diplomatic with Palin, she handled Palin's apparent lack of knowledge regarding her running mate with eloquence, I don't think some reporters would have afforded her.
I missed the interview, but I find that hard to believe. Couric had a tendency to sneer whenever she had to interview ANYONE to the right of her. I though it was just me, but I've had a couple of other people I know point it out to me. (long before this)

I could be wrong.

the parts I've seen, Couric didn't sneer. I think she was more in shock at what she was hearing.

Frank4 · Post by **Frank4** » September 29, 2008 11:08 am

Moonie wrote:
Staredge wrote:
Moonie wrote: I'm no fan of Couric, but she was very diplomatic with Palin, she handled Palin's apparent lack of knowledge regarding her running mate with eloquence, I don't think some reporters would have afforded her.
I missed the interview, but I find that hard to believe. Couric had a tendency to sneer whenever she had to interview ANYONE to the right of her. I though it was just me, but I've had a couple of other people I know point it out to me. (long before this)

I could be wrong.
the parts I've seen, Couric didn't sneer. I think she was more in shock at what she was hearing.

I have to tell you, Tina Fey is dead on as Sarah Palin. I watched SNL over the weekend and I am still laughing

Martonian · Post by **Martonian** » September 29, 2008 11:12 am

Moonie wrote:
Staredge wrote:
Moonie wrote: I'm no fan of Couric, but she was very diplomatic with Palin, she handled Palin's apparent lack of knowledge regarding her running mate with eloquence, I don't think some reporters would have afforded her.
I missed the interview, but I find that hard to believe. Couric had a tendency to sneer whenever she had to interview ANYONE to the right of her. I though it was just me, but I've had a couple of other people I know point it out to me. (long before this)

I could be wrong.
the parts I've seen, Couric didn't sneer. I think she was more in shock at what she was hearing.

from the end of Howard Kurtz's column today:

"And the worst may be yet to come for Palin; sources say CBS has two more responses on tape that will likely prove embarrassing. "

Frank4 · Post by **Frank4** » September 29, 2008 12:15 pm

Martonian wrote:
Moonie wrote:
Staredge wrote:
Moonie wrote: I'm no fan of Couric, but she was very diplomatic with Palin, she handled Palin's apparent lack of knowledge regarding her running mate with eloquence, I don't think some reporters would have afforded her.
I missed the interview, but I find that hard to believe. Couric had a tendency to sneer whenever she had to interview ANYONE to the right of her. I though it was just me, but I've had a couple of other people I know point it out to me. (long before this)

I could be wrong.
the parts I've seen, Couric didn't sneer. I think she was more in shock at what she was hearing.
from the end of Howard Kurtz's column today:

"And the worst may be yet to come for Palin; sources say CBS has two more responses on tape that will likely prove embarrassing. "

My question is, doesn't someone brief Palin on all of this stuff? Surely McCain has to have someone briefing her on all of this.

drunkpirate66 · Post by **drunkpirate66** » September 29, 2008 12:22 pm

I see Obama pushed ahead in most of the major nation wide polls. I am convinced at this point that those polls don't really matter. It is all about Ohio (not even Ohio AND Florida) . . . that one state wins the election.

On a side note, I cannot believe that Obama and McCain are as close as they are. I though Obama would've been the clear favorite and I mean by alot. I vote third party because my vote is worthless in Massachusetts but I won't be surprised by either candidates potential victory.

Martonian · Post by **Martonian** » September 29, 2008 12:40 pm

drunkpirate66 wrote:I see Obama pushed ahead in most of the major nation wide polls. I am convinced at this point that those polls don't really matter. It is all about Ohio (not even Ohio AND Florida) . . . that one state wins the election.

On a side note, I cannot believe that Obama and McCain are as close as they are. I though Obama would've been the clear favorite and I mean by alot. I vote third party because my vote is worthless in Massachusetts but I won't be surprised by either candidates potential victory.

But if by Obama wins by 5-7 points, which is what Gallup and Rasmussen and many other polls are showing right now, the states are going to fall suit. Obama's not going to win 50-44 and lose the electoral college.

Obviously these national polls can change very quickly though, but time is starting to run out.

Frank4 · Post by **Frank4** » September 29, 2008 12:41 pm

drunkpirate66 wrote:I see Obama pushed ahead in most of the major nation wide polls. I am convinced at this point that those polls don't really matter. It is all about Ohio (not even Ohio AND Florida) . . . that one state wins the election.

On a side note, I cannot believe that Obama and McCain are as close as they are. I though Obama would've been the clear favorite and I mean by alot. I vote third party because my vote is worthless in Massachusetts but I won't be surprised by either candidates potential victory.

McCain started off pretty slow during the debate on Friday. I thought he finished much stronger then Obama. I was suprised when a lot of people on Saturday said Obama won the debate.

I have a feeling regardless of the Polls-this is going to be a closer election then most people think. I won't be stunned to wake up on the day after the election and see McCain has President.

LIPH · Post by **LIPH** » September 29, 2008 12:44 pm

The shape the country's in now, Obama should be up by 20 points. I think the fact McCain is as close as he is says a lot about what a lightweight Mr. Change is as a candidate. This might turn out to be 2000 Part II. Al Gore should have walked away with that election, just like Obama should be walking away with this. If the Democrats had a candidate who was actually qualified for the job, we wouldn't even have to hold an election he'd be so far ahead.

carolinagirl · Post by **carolinagirl** » September 29, 2008 1:15 pm

Frank4 wrote:
Moonie wrote:
Staredge wrote:
Moonie wrote: I'm no fan of Couric, but she was very diplomatic with Palin, she handled Palin's apparent lack of knowledge regarding her running mate with eloquence, I don't think some reporters would have afforded her.
I missed the interview, but I find that hard to believe. Couric had a tendency to sneer whenever she had to interview ANYONE to the right of her. I though it was just me, but I've had a couple of other people I know point it out to me. (long before this)

I could be wrong.
the parts I've seen, Couric didn't sneer. I think she was more in shock at what she was hearing.

I have to tell you, Tina Fey is dead on as Sarah Palin. I watched SNL over the weekend and I am still laughing

Oh, I missed it! but I'm laughing now: http://www.usmagazine.com/news/tina-fey ... arah-palin

(Palin thought Fey's first spoof was "quite funny, particularly because she once dressed up as Tina Fey for Halloween," a spokesperson said.)

Fey has said she was open to parodying Palin more, but "I want to be done playing this lady Nov. 5.

"So if anybody can help me be done playing this lady Nov. 5," Fey said, "that would be good for me."

Frank4 · Post by **Frank4** » September 29, 2008 1:17 pm

carolinagirl wrote:
Frank4 wrote:
Moonie wrote:
Staredge wrote:
Moonie wrote: I'm no fan of Couric, but she was very diplomatic with Palin, she handled Palin's apparent lack of knowledge regarding her running mate with eloquence, I don't think some reporters would have afforded her.
I missed the interview, but I find that hard to believe. Couric had a tendency to sneer whenever she had to interview ANYONE to the right of her. I though it was just me, but I've had a couple of other people I know point it out to me. (long before this)

I could be wrong.
the parts I've seen, Couric didn't sneer. I think she was more in shock at what she was hearing.

I have to tell you, Tina Fey is dead on as Sarah Palin. I watched SNL over the weekend and I am still laughing
Oh, I missed it! but I'm laughing now: http://www.usmagazine.com/news/tina-fey ... arah-palin

I went back and watched it on youtube again this morning. She was fabulous.

Skibo · Post by **Skibo** » September 29, 2008 1:25 pm

LIPH wrote:If the Democrats had a candidate who was actually qualified for the job, we wouldn't even have to hold an election he'd be so far ahead.

So true. The Dem political machine needs to step back and look at their talent pool and allow the cream to rise to the top instead of pushing out the candidates that are "entitled". I didn't think any of the top 3 were qualified. All were opportunists. Richardson would have been good, or one or their other governors (except Rendell). Would have had an experienced outsider with executive experience balancing a budget.

drunkpirate66 · Post by **drunkpirate66** » September 29, 2008 1:56 pm

Skibo wrote:
LIPH wrote:If the Democrats had a candidate who was actually qualified for the job, we wouldn't even have to hold an election he'd be so far ahead.
So true. The Dem political machine needs to step back and look at their talent pool and allow the cream to rise to the top instead of pushing out the candidates that are "entitled". I didn't think any of the top 3 were qualified. All were opportunists. Richardson would have been good, or one or their other governors (except Rendell). Would have had an experienced outsider with executive experience balancing a budget.

The last Democrat I liked was Bill Bradley as far as a presidential candidate is concerned. I felt he was much stronger than Al Gore. Granted Al Gore got more votes then any presidential candidate ever and still lost.

LIPH · Post by **LIPH** » September 29, 2008 1:58 pm

drunkpirate66 wrote:The last Democrat I liked was Bill Bradley as far as a presidential candidate is concerned. I felt he was much stronger than Al Gore. Granted Al Gore got more votes then any presidential candidate ever and still lost.

Al Gore is a, what's the term you like, tool.

drunkpirate66 · Post by **drunkpirate66** » September 29, 2008 2:04 pm

LIPH wrote:
drunkpirate66 wrote:The last Democrat I liked was Bill Bradley as far as a presidential candidate is concerned. I felt he was much stronger than Al Gore. Granted Al Gore got more votes then any presidential candidate ever and still lost.
Al Gore is a, what's the term you like, tool.

And he would be a lousy - non HoF catcher, too.

Wino you know · Post by **Wino you know** » September 29, 2008 2:10 pm

drunkpirate66 wrote:The last Democrat I liked was Bill Bradley as far as a presidential candidate is concerned. I felt he was much stronger than Al Gore.

The last one I liked was Harry Truman.
(Well, J.F.K. was pretty good too).

Granted Al Gore got more votes then any presidential candidate ever and still lost.

He got more votes ever than any candidate who LOST the election.
G.W. Bush got more in 2004, and, in all liklihood, in every subsequent elections, each winning (and eventually, each LOSING candidate) will get more votes than those in the previous one. For the simple reason, there's more registered voters.
And when you factor in all the illegals and dead people who vote, the numbers will be even more astounding. Especially for the Demmys.

Frank4 · Post by **Frank4** » September 29, 2008 2:19 pm

Skibo wrote:
LIPH wrote:If the Democrats had a candidate who was actually qualified for the job, we wouldn't even have to hold an election he'd be so far ahead.
So true. The Dem political machine needs to step back and look at their talent pool and allow the cream to rise to the top instead of pushing out the candidates that are "entitled". I didn't think any of the top 3 were qualified. All were opportunists. Richardson would have been good, or one or their other governors (except Rendell). Would have had an experienced outsider with executive experience balancing a budget.

I really thought Richardson would have generated more interest also.

jackiesic · Post by **jackiesic** » September 29, 2008 5:23 pm

carolinagirl wrote:
Wino you know wrote:I think this election has been decided WAY before either V.P. candidates were chosen.
Obama will win the election thanks to the votes of the misguided ones, no matter if he chose Joe Biden or Jesus Christ himself as his running mate, while the REGULAR Americans are voting for McCain regardless of HIS running mate.
Well, I've never been proud to be irregular before, but I guess this makes me so! I can't see Palin as VP, so I'm not voting for McCain. Lived through Bush/Quayle; don't want to do it again.

About the debate, it irked me how McCain would not look at Obama, or address him at all. What's up with that? Like he didn't want to acknowledge his existence. It appeared racist to me.

mind games

jackiesic · Post by **jackiesic** » September 29, 2008 5:29 pm

carolinagirl wrote:
12vmanRick wrote:Obama has SO much more leadership time than... um.. Me maybe.. At least Palin was a GOVERNOR that actually showed up for her job unlike Obama Bin Laden who spent less than 6 months as a Senator and abstained from voting OFTEN.

Oh yea, he was a community activist with a less than desirable organization. That is a change we need
I like what Susan Sarandon said a smile, "Jesus was a community organizer, and Pontius Pilate was a governor."

Susan (and others in the media that have used this quote) need to go read their Bibles more closely. Pilate could find no fault in Jesus and wanted him released. According to the scripture it was passover holiday and custom to release a prisoner to the people. The people demanded the release of Barabbus (spelling?). I understand that Susan Sarandon and others are implying that Pilate (the governor) was responsible for crucifying Jesus but I think they all need to read the scripture a little closer.

jackiesic · Post by **jackiesic** » September 29, 2008 5:33 pm

drunkpirate66 wrote:I see Obama pushed ahead in most of the major nation wide polls. I am convinced at this point that those polls don't really matter. It is all about Ohio (not even Ohio AND Florida) . . . that one state wins the election.

On a side note, I cannot believe that Obama and McCain are as close as they are. I though Obama would've been the clear favorite and I mean by alot. I vote third party because my vote is worthless in Massachusetts but I won't be surprised by either candidates potential victory.

I believe at one point BHO thought that he would have a 50 state sweep