Forums | MacLife

everlong205 wrote:

Between this, the about face on public financing and the about face on free trade agreements it sounds like Obama is trying for a trifecta of political sell outs.

And thats just in one week! Clearly he is the politician of change.

and lets not forget the mishandling of Muslim supporters who were kicked out of his event because they were muslims wearing head scarves. Bonus points!

... and yet McCain's not won a single national poll the entire month of June.

everlong205 wrote:

Between this, the about face on public financing and the about face on free trade agreements it sounds like Obama is trying for a trifecta of political sell outs.

And thats just in one week! Clearly he is the politician of change.

and lets not forget the mishandling of Muslim supporters who were kicked out of his event because they were muslims wearing head scarves. Bonus points!

I'm not one to sing Obama's praises, but I still think he'd be a better choice than McCain.

You're aware of his recent "flip-flops," I'm guessing....

bratboy wrote:

everlong205 wrote:

Between this, the about face on public financing and the about face on free trade agreements it sounds like Obama is trying for a trifecta of political sell outs.

And thats just in one week! Clearly he is the politician of change.

and lets not forget the mishandling of Muslim supporters who were kicked out of his event because they were muslims wearing head scarves. Bonus points!

I'm not one to sing Obama's praises, but I still think he'd be a better choice than McCain.

You're aware of his recent "flip-flops," I'm guessing....

Obama is the candidate of change. I'm counting the days for when the oceans will start lowering, and peace will reign, all because we elected him. And it turns out he's nothing but a Chicago politician who will sell out his core beliefs in a heartbeat.

Take campaign finance reform. Supposedly Barack is the reformer, and yet comes up with the lamest excuses as to why he HAS to opt out as if its some noble endeavor on his end.
And then of course he sells out on giving telecoms immunity. Seriously, if he held such strong beliefs that they shouldn't be given immunity why didn't he vote that way? Others certainly did. I disagree with those that would, but at least they stuck to their convicitions. Not Obama though. There isn't a former associate or political principle, apparently, that he wont throw under the bus if its the least bit beneficial to him.

I thought Barack was all about change and reform and yet  it sounds like he's all about political expediency and politics as usual.
Why doesnt' that go into his ads?

Last edited by everlong205 (2008-06-21 1:14 pm)

In the absence of anything good to say about their gy the Republicans have no option but to try to tear Obama down.

bratboy wrote:

everlong205 wrote:

Obama is the candidate of change. I'm counting the days for when the oceans will start lowering, and peace will reign, all because we elected him.

Yes yes, you've about worn out that line.

I thought Barack was all about change and reform and yet  it sounds like he's all about political expediency and politics as usual.

For the most part....yeah, he is.  It's generally necessary in order to run a successful campaign for president.

My god, McCain has flipped on MULTIPLE issues.

Honestly, I'd say that McCain is really the candidate for change.

He's changed his policies on so many things already!

Pariah wrote:

In the absence of anything good to say about their gy the Republicans have no option but to try to tear Obama down.

And this is different from how republicans normally act how? 

I swear, talk radio would wither and die within a week if they actually had to talk about conservative positions and values as opposed to making ad hominem attacks on "liberals".

"Kitty Farmer wrote:

Now girls... I want you to concentrate.  Failure is not an option.  And Bethany... if you feel the need to vomit up there.  Just swallow it.

everlong205 wrote:

But Obama is the new type of politician. He's above such things as politics. Don't you remember? He told us so.

He's a politician.  I'm not going to defend his sales pitch just as I doubt you'll be defending McCain's.

Pariah wrote:

bratboy wrote:

Indeed.  However, I will absolutely not defend Obama on this issue...he's wrong.

I will defend him.
I always thought the point of public funding was to keep a candidate from being beholden to small groups that can raise lots of money and thus gain disproportionate influence in government.
I would assert that Obama's millions of very small contributions represents the same thing public funding does: Untainted money.

Um, I think bratboy is saying that he won't defend Obama on the telecom immunity issue.

The public funding thing is really easy to defend. McCain already broke campaign finance law during the primaries, so why should he be trusted to follow the rules in the general election?

Yeah, I was talking about the telecom thing.

I'm fairly certain it's been profitable for them, as well...

I won't quote Glenn Greenwald often, but he's pretty clear and upfront with his denunciation of Obama:

in the past 24 hours, specifically beginning with the moment Barack Obama announced that he now supports the Cheney/Rockefeller/Hoyer House bill, there have magically arisen -- in places where one would never have expected to find them -- all sorts of claims about why this FISA "compromise" isn't really so bad after all. People who spent the week railing against Steny Hoyer as an evil, craven enabler of the Bush administration -- or who spent the last several months identically railing against Jay Rockefeller -- suddenly changed their minds completely when Barack Obama announced that he would do the same thing as they did. What had been a vicious assault on our Constitution, and corrupt complicity to conceal Bush lawbreaking, magically and instantaneously transformed into a perfectly understandable position, even a shrewd and commendable decision, that we should not only accept, but be grateful for as undertaken by Obama for our Own Good.

Accompanying those claims are a whole array of factually false statements about the bill, deployed in service of defending Obama's indefensible -- and deeply unprincipled -- support for this "compromise."

His statement is, in fact, as much a denunciation of Barack's supporters as it is of Barack, and the degree to which they will whitewash Obama's position, and even lie about it, because of their drinking the Obama cool aid.

Last edited by everlong205 (2008-06-22 5:19 pm)