So you'd rather raise taxes in this 'troubled economic condition' that we are currently mired in? Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. lol Take it from me, someone who actually conducts business, Obama would be a nightmare of epic porportions for our nation's economy.
Great insight from Frank Rich today, but this is a wonderful question... Is a man who is just discovering the Internet qualified to lead a restoration of America’s economic and educational infrastructures?
But he was a POW. Would it be too low for Obama to run an ad in which McCain admitted to not using the internet? My college age son could not believe it.
Those are classic neoconservative tactics. Conservative basically means lower taxes and smaller government. How are those attacks on McCain have anything to do with classic conservatism? I agree it's not a big deal ...unless you comtinue to try to paint Obama as an elitist. Obama supporters are annoyed by the tactic, frankly, and have something to lash back with now. So if you can shovel it out ...you better be ready to take some back.
more of a nightmare than what we've currently got? lol All time gas prices. All time commodity prices Funding the most expensive war in world history ...without a coalition. Mortgage crisis affecting ALL segments of lending from low income of multi-national companies. Failing banks and lending institutions requiring government bailouts. Record discrepencies beteen dollar and all other major currencies Largest gap between superwealthy and middle class in US history Largest federal debt increase in presidential history by astounding proportions The two largest unfunded programs in US history (no child left behind and medicare presciption) Geez, I can understand your concern if you think things will be whole lot worse than that. Or maybe things will run like the last Democrat we had in office (which incidentally is almost the mirror opposite of the list above.)
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/jehhdBeNPkU&color1=11645361&color2=13619151&fs=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jehhdBeNPkU&color1=11645361&color2=13619151&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> Obama is caught lying again... the guy is just in over his head. Not qualified to be President. But hey, if Montel Williams or Oprah need an understudy, he'd make a great selection! HO HO HO
OK, so Cindy owns 7 houses... good to know who wears the pants in the relationship. (That ad was really really bad... Surely you can find better)
That's incorrect. You are still struggling with the facts. Re-watch the video and report back, rookie.
No, it doesn't mean that at all. It means his wife has a ton of assets and he doesn't keep track of them so he couldn't answer the question off the top of his head. That's really all it means. Your conclusion is as flawed as saying "he knows his wife is worth $100 million so he must think everyone else has a $100 million in the bank." That's just silly. No, those don't have anything to do with neoconservatism. You're lumping in a whole bunch of people and then labeling anything you don't like as 'neocon.' Karl Rove is not a neoconservative and that's where those attacks came from. Classic conservatism and neoconservatism are not the same thing, but you're defining neoconservatism as Rove-ism, a conclusion for which there is no logical support or reasoning. It's like you've taken your idea of what a 'neocon' is from a poorly written blog. Which another silly argument I've seen a lot of in this thread. "Wow, how horrible and terrible the Republicans have been going negative, and how dispicable it is! So we should do it too!" That's a nice principled stand!
Why else would he believe the economy is fundamentally strong? If the rising costs across the board combined with lower wages aren't affecting you, I could see where you would think the economy is fundamentally strong. The fact that he believes everything is a-ok economic-wise and then can't remember the number of homes he has leads me to believe he is out of touch with what the average American is going through right now. Principled stands have resulted in the disastrous last eight years. If the American public is going to buy it, it's time to rethink our approach to elections. Fight fire with fire, instead of with a broom.
Yeah, he really should be on the net to... - check his financial accounts; no..probably has accountants for that - get his news; no....he's got all kinds of congressional and other resources for that -argue with people on bbs's; no....he probably doesn't have that kind of time -check the weather? surf ESPN? read MOVEON.org? check out p*rn? He's a huge advocate of technology keeping America at the forefront of innovation, so it's not like he's a Luddite. I seriously doubt Obama spends too much time surfing the web, nor did Clinton (although I guess Gore is another question altogether). It might be a shocking statement but only superficially ala the housing comment. He doesn't believe everything is a-ok with the economy. That's not even a mischaracterization but an outright deceptive statement. Both campaigns recognize people are hurting right now and both are talking about making the economy better. That they approach the problem from two differing ideological positions doesn't mean either is ignoring the problem. YES! OUT WITH PRINCIPLES! LET'S ALL BECOME JUST LIKE KARL ROVE!!! - Rocketman95 Uh.....no. It really is sad that people like yourself think you cannot be aggressive without become Rove-like. THAT is a sad commentary.
John McCain explains " I wish I could have written my wife to tell her I was alive, but those nasty Vietcong wouldn't let me near a computer. I begged, I pleaded, but nothing would convince Charlie. They said I could use it and would teach me how to use e-mail if I signed a confession saying I was a war criminal. I vowed then never to learn, just to spite those bastards!"
That's one of the worst attack adds I've ever seen. The only redeeming value is the circa 1980 Hawaii Five-O sound track. I could debate the merrits of this silly add point for point (eg If his wife owns the house then John also owns the house) but that simply detracts from the issue. The point is that John McCain or his supporters should never again utter the words 'Obama is an elitist'. case closed. btw, it isn't a lie if its truthful. Does McCain and his wife own 7 houses? Yes.
No. You continue to whiff on the facts. Re-watch the video and then apologize to us for taking the discussion backwards. ...typical Obama supporter...
Just like me. No wonder McCain does better with "working class" people. I won't fully disagree here. However Rove has REDEFINED neocon during his tenure. Now a neocon and religion are almost inseperable things. It was Rove who quickly jumped on board this bandwagon and rode it for all its worth. So maybe you make that distinction ...but I don't necessarily differentiate Rove's political menuevering and neocon because in todays world ...they both serve the same ends. I know. You misread my post. You are questioning the Dems principles? You throw mud at me and if I throw mud back you call me unprincipled? hmmm. Interesting position you've taken.
Watched it. It says he and his wife own all 7 houses by inheritance, investments and gifts. He owns 7 houses. If he owns 4 or 7, doesn't matter. What matters is you and your cast of characters can no longer call Obama an elitist. lol Thanks for your stimulating video, however.
That's just absurd. Rove hasn't defined anything about neoconservatism. It is a political ideology concentrated on policy decisionmaking, not political ad decisionmaking. Rove, if anything is a realist, not a neoconservative. He is only concerned with gaining and maintaining power. They have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Look, you can have (or not)ethics, whether you're a liberal or neoconservative or classic conservative or communist (well, maybe not a communist). Lack of ethics are what led Rove to pursue the South Carolina tactics, not neoconservatism. No, I am calling out the hypocrisy of bbs posters who have been decrying the practice and now are saying it's ok for Obama to do. Pretty simple stuff here - if you say X is bad and then do X yourself, you're a hypocrite.
It says his wife owns 4. He has 1-2 investments (which still means "owns") and it's been reported that his/her kids live in 1 or 2 ...presumably that was purchased from his household cause it doesn't say that the kids purchased the house(s). That's all irrelevant anyway so I'll concede the qauntity of houses owned by what's reported in the silly attack ad. McCain is FAR FAR FAR FAR more of an elitist than Obama.
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/08/how_many_houses_does_mccain_ow.php 8-11.... you're right 7 was under.
