When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
Connect with
I allow to create an account
When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
You’d think that the examples she alludes to would be easy to come up with.
Brian Miller
15 years ago
Evidence of a McCain campaign of fears and hate, hell, just read the above posts for that. Here are a few examples from McCain’s supporters found right here, for you inquiring minds.
“a Obama totalitarian state”…“can you imagine what some people will do if Nobama loses?”…“white cultures in this country are being rejected and oppressed”… “Do you want a President that worked with a man that bombed the Pentagon and wanted to bomb a Military dacne that probably would have killed more people that wer killed in Oklahoma???? DO you want a President that went to a Black Liberation Theology Church for 20 years???? Look up Black Liberation Theology. It is not a Christian religion, it is a Marxist front.”… “I think that Obama will change the United States of America into something we will not recognize as the United States of America.”… “Our 401 ks will be used to fund welfare and other social programs. And the Global Poverty Act will send money to the UN to fork over to tyrants and thugs that wish us harm.”…
Sounds like fear and hate to me, but then the Bushies always sound like that. Actually McCain has run a campaign based, not on hate, but on fools, good luck with the election. Interesting how the LA Times is now considered a indisputable source of facts for the McCain/Isreal-First crowd.
@Brian Miller: So I am sperading hate because I am stating facts. that is a new one to me. So showing who someone associates with is spreading hate and fear. Another new one to me. Don’t you want to know this kind fo stuff or are you too blinded to see what Obama is????
Misplaced outrage, apparently he hasn’t visited any left-wing blogs throughout the seven plus years of the Bush presidency, by doing so, he would realize how mild these comments are. Wishing death upon the President, VP and Tony Snow, racist remarks about Rice and Powell, just to call attention to a tiny, tiny bit of it all. Then we can go with the current derangement, the Palin FAMILY.
Seems like Brian Miller should go pee in his own playground.
Brian Miller
15 years ago
Yeah, I’m blind and I don’t want to know the facts, that’s why I’m reading these comments, checking out viewpoints I might not agree with, reading, all the kinds of things that are considered subversive by the true believers. Yeah, this old kettle is black and blind by some standards. Stating that predictions for the future are facts is dishonest, can’t you see that? Are you so blind? Is it a fact that you can predict 100% all the horrors that are supposed to happen once Obama gets elected? That’s a new one to me. I don’t think so, but if faith based politics is all you got, might as well call it facts. But at least we can be adult about it.
I see something totally different. Obama is not saying, vote for me because I am black. He is addressing just a couple of the fear tactics that his opponent will use against him. It’s almost like an opening statement, of what we can expect to see in the course of the race. (he is after all an attorney) He also mentioned that “I’ve got a funny name”. You can’t deny the use of his Arabic sounding name, being used to plant a seed of fear.
The problem here is Obama was telling his faithful of the “fear” tactics McCain would use. Problem is, McCain was not using any of those tactics. Obama himself brought this up, not McCain. Yet you attribute it to McCain.
You are blind to this fact. It’s been Obama bringing up the race and gender card in both the primary against Hillary, and in the general against McCain under the pretext that “this is what they will do”. The only person doing it is Obama himself. If the GOP said anything about Obama’s race, they would have been torn to bits. Only Obama is allowed to talk about race in this election.
Now, you talk about McCain personally throwing out the middle name as part of a pre’emptive strike. That was not the campaign doing so. It was conservative bloggers. And if you want to blame the McCain campaign for what the blog world does, you’d better be prepared to absorb all the BS the liberals have put out about McCain and his military record, and the tabloid BS on Sarah Palin and her family.
Are you prepared for Obama to accept responsibility that Trig is actually Sarah Palin’s daughter as smut campaigning? I doubt it….
I provided many links of liberal mouthpieces for the DNC bringing up the fear or riots if Obama is not elected. Instead you say:
Show me one thing with OBAMA’S campaign actually saying there will be RIOTS
Let me give you a reality check, Erika. Campaign strategy always has the masses doing the dirty work as to keep the candidate clean. You will never find a statement from Obama, Plouffe or Axelrod that states they expect riots if Obama isn’t elected. Why? That would instantly sink his candidacy. They are not that stupid.
Instead, it gets quietly noted to specific mouthpieces that plant the seed in the various media… talking head shows, newspapers, and let it get picked up by the blogosphere. That’s the kind of backroom pol strategy that you are unaware of. And it goes on in all campaigns, by all parties.
But trust me, these seeds are being planted. And when you want to know where it’s coming from, just examine who it benefits. Obama, of course.
And BTW, I will say this one more time. The LA Times is an Obama supporter. They wrote the article about the event which is taped. If they are not releasing it… which is the simple thing to do (like showing an original birth certificate, for example?), then why not do it? They’ve already reported. They are standing guard over this tape for some reason. If they wanted to halt the stories, all they’d have to do is make it available, and the issue is gone.
Lastly
This can also be seen as the ability to connect with all kinds of different minded people, and isn’t that what we need in order to build our allies abroad? We can disagree with someone and still find a common ground, that is where McCain doesn’t get it. He wants to ignore hostile countries, while Obama wants to keep the flow of communication open.
The naivety of both you and your guy on this is just stunning. Pakistan has a history of negotiating with the Taliban and radical tribal groups. Doesn’t work. Negotiating with Hitler didn’t work. The US did bi-lateral negotiations with N. Korea under Clinton/Reno… didn’t work. They created a nuke program, all the while smiling at the two bozos who believed they were remaining true to the agreement. The only way the N. Korea situation has gotten where it is, is because Bush refused bi-lateral talks, and insisted on six-party talks.
No one “ignores” hostile countries. However chit chats over tea by the two highest leaders is not the way to take care of it. And there has been much lower level contacts between the US and Iran on certain issues, like Iraq. But I’ll bet you didn’t know that because your guys tells you we don’t talk to them.
As I said, Erika. You are such a faithful follower that Obama could commit murder in front of you, and you will still find a way to justify and excuse his actions. That type of support is dangerous.
voter
15 years ago
@Brian Miller: If they don’t like your answer, they will skip past it, and say you haven’t given an answer. Some on this post like to ask for facts, but wouldn’t know a fact if it slaped them in the face. You’ll find on this blog site,(with most, not all) McCain can do no wrong, no scratch that REPUBLICANS can do no wrong. You’d think they could walk on water.
@Brian Miller: OK where did I put Faith Based anything into here. I was stating facts of who Obama’s associates are and making an informed observation of what will happen if Obama gets elected.
I am omly reiterating what economists and others have said would happen i a Obama Presidnency. Loss of jobs, recession and a flightof jobs over seas. It is not thathard to follow if youjustoook at basic Economics 101. Taxing during a downturn inthe economy will only make things worse. Alwyays has and always will. That is just basic economics.
And Obama has had a majority of his mentors either Marxizsor Communists. Frank Davis, RevWRight, Ayers. And he is friends with Rezko, Kahlidi, Monsour, and many other unsavoury characters in Chicago.
This is not made up, it is a fact and if you read Chicago papers other than Chicago Times and the rest of the MSM you will get more background on who Obama is.
The main people formenting hate are on the Left. Just look at Daily Kos and The Democratic Underground. Cheering the death of Reagan and Tony Snow, and wishing for the death of Bush, Cheney, Rove and a plethra of other Conservatives.
No Erika. McCain has done a lot of of stuff wrong. McCain-Feingold, Manbearpig (Global Warming), Illegal Immigration, and many other things I am disgusted with McCain about. But I am not going to let a Chicago Thug get into the White House. We are already seeing the Chicago Style Politics spread across the nation. Just ask the Hillary supporters at the cacaii.
If any McCain supporting blogger making statements is represented as “the McCain campaign”, then the “Obama campaign” will have to take credit for the HuffPo and Daily KO’s sleazy assault on Palin INRE Trig, her daughter, the supposed affair, and other sundry tabloid charges progressive/socialist bloggers are engaged in.
So I’ll tell you what, I’ll attribute the type of statements you said above were made here to McCain, if you attribute all the liberal blogosphere slime against first Hillary, then McCain and finally Palin. Because I’m darn sure you got more “hate” and lies on your side than exists on McCain’s side. Hang, I’d say Rev Wright’s got enough hate in him to count for maybe ten on our side.
You agree to that? Or do you try to choose to distance yourself from the HuffPos and Daily KOs’ types?
Somehow, I think you’ll try to have it both ways, eh?
If they don’t like your answer, they will skip past it, and say you haven’t given an answer.
You know Erika that response is more than just a bit amusing.
Ever since your post #26 several of us have been trying to get a straight answer out of you.
You made the claim that McCain’s entire campaign has been run based on fear.
Over and over and over again since then you have been asked to provide proof of your claims.
You should be very hesitant to point a gnarled finger at the rest of us when you are the one who is guilty.
Brian Miller
15 years ago
Okay, McCain/Bush are not responsible for what their followers say. But the followers are. So is it “facts” stix1972 is stating or an “informed observation”? Facts, or what some, not all, economists have supposedly claimed? Which is it? You know, there is a difference between facts and your opinion. Are you saying there is no difference between facts and what economist have told us? I got some stock to sell you if that’s your basis for reality. You know, just because you say it’s a fact, or you hear something you want to believe, inspite of your most heart felt desire, that does not make it a fact. You call them facts, I call it faith based. Stick with what you are good at. As I said, McCain is not running a campaign based on fear and hate… it’s based on fools.
voter
15 years ago
@Aye Chihuahua: I’d really like to know where you work, they must be very nice. You know to let you blog on their dime. Model employee.
@MataHarley: Yes Mata. If youattributewahtI am sayingtothe McCain camp,well youmust atribute the death threatsand out rightlies and propoganda os the HUFFPO, Daily Kos and Democratic Underground to the Obama camp. I will venture to say that my posts and comments have alot more facts in them than they do. And I have never called for the death of anybody except the Islamo-fascists.
And along with @Aye Chihuahua: where is there any proof that McCain or Palin have formented hate and fear against anybody. Stating people’s associates is not formenting fear, it is evaluating someone’s judgement. We have never said Obama is a terorists, a Socialist yes, but never a Terrorist, and neither has McCain or Palin
@Brian Miller: Ok My informded observations are not fact, and I never said they were.
Facts Obama had a relationsship with Rezko, Ayers, Rev Wright, Khalidi, Monsour and other shady characters in Chicago.
Fact: Liberation Theology (Black Liberation Theology) is a front for Marxism.
Fact If you tax people in a downturn in the economythe economy will drop. It has haoppened everytime it has been done, just ask Carter about that.
Fact: If you raise payoll taxes, youwill getlessin return.
Fact: If we tax coporations more than now, most will either lay people off or move over seas.
We already have the second highest Corporate Taxes in the World.
Voter said: “I’d really like to know where you work, they must be very nice. You know to let you blog on their dime. Model employee.”
That’s it for you on this thread “voter.”
It’s bad enough you are a time waster, but when you start threatening loyal readers you are toast.
No more comments from you on this thread. If you do, it will be deleted. You stopped contributing anything rational, original or interesting a long time ago.
Okay, McCain/Bush are not responsible for what their followers say. But the followers are.
~~~
As I said, McCain is not running a campaign based on fear and hate… it’s based on fools.
If that’s the case, Brian, then the Obama campaign is one based on hate, sleazy tabloid accusations and lazy Americans who prefer the government decide their future and support their families.
Are you saying there is no difference between facts and what economist have told us?
The Goldman Sachs ex CEO… an Obama supporter, I believe… was on Charlie Gibson last week and stated unequivocally that raising taxes in this economy is one dumb move.
The Tax Policy Center has evaluated Obama’s overall tax plans, plus 77 of the 170 some off government programs he wants to start. Even their low estimate is that Obama will increase the debt to $4.3 trillion… and remember, that doesn’t include over 100 programs that were not included in their financial evaluation.
It is true that you will never get “all” of anyone to agree on the financial analysis. Then again, that doesn’t seen to stop the AGW crowd from pushing their agenda. The point is, Brian, that many Obama supporters come here with their talking points as the absolute “truth”. And to that, I can only repeat your own words right back at ‘cha:
You know, just because you say it’s a fact, or you hear something you want to believe, inspite of your most heart felt desire, that does not make it a fact. You call them facts, I call it faith based.
I’d say you’d better halt the rock throwing from your own glass house. And generally, this crew here backs up their comments with informational links. Which is more than I can say you contributed to this thread.
Brian Miller
15 years ago
“The Goldman Sachs ex CEO… an Obama supporter, I believe… was on Charlie Gibson last week and stated unequivocally that raising taxes in this economy is one dumb move.”
This is who you pull out to support your facts an taxes. So you support what the Obama supporter is saying? Great.
And the Heritage Foundation says what? That the middle class would likely pay less under Mr. Obama’s plan than Mr. McCain’s but that the Democrat plan was excessively reliant on complicated tax breaks… http://www.businessandmedia.org/printer/2008/20081029170224.aspx
And accusing Obama of some sort of socialism considering McCain’s own plans include-
“The government would take a controlling stake in the companies it helped. All profits would go to the Treasury.” (Source: JohnMcCain.com)
You know, I was never the one claiming to provide hard facts, just commenting on others outlandish opinions. Hope I could contribute.
You truly are comprehension challeneged, Brian. Actually, the Goldman Sachs was in deference to you and your guy. He’s the one with the Countrywide/Fannie/Freddie types in his back pocket, and this guy liked Obama… save that tax raising bit for the economy.
Wall Street is mixed on their support. Then again, what have they got to lose. A GOP POTUS, along with his banking Treasury Secy’, and backed by the DNC Congress and Obama 100%, are more than willing to bailout the banking industry. The latest bailout is for Umpqua here in the NW. Wasn’t even in trouble…. I guess the trend now is to bolster the banks in good standing so they can buy out the banks in trouble. That way we’ll have just a few banks, and evidently an end to monopoly laws as we know them.
Me personally? If you went to the $4.3 trillion link I put in there, that’s from the Tax Policy Center. And I place more faith in that than all others I’ve read.
But what alot of these comparisons are missing is the government expansion that Obama proposes, compared to McCain’s promise to take a much needed hatchet to the federal behemoth.
Frankly, I’m not sure if I can believe McCain will do that, and that makes me nervous. But I am 100% sure Obama will provide a government sponsored answer for your every need. Therefore his policies will not only be more expensive, but expand government control.
I’m not sure what you call Obama’s “social and economic justice” agenda for education, taxpayer funded health care, taxpayer funded work programs, taxpayer funded college and preschool, taxpayer funded energy programs, and so on down the line…. but that’s socialism. Don’t like the label? That’s your problem. Than call yourself a European social democracy advocate instead. You’ll feel better about yourself.
And considering what a rude SOB you are, I suspect you could use a bit more self esteem.
BTW, Brian… I gave you that link to the Business and Media org that you quoted. But I suggest you put the entire quotes in.
The entire passage from the misleading Obama
advertisement read as follows:
“Mr. Hederman said the middle class would likely pay less under Mr. Obama’s plan than Mr. McCain’s but that the Democrat was excessively reliant on complicated tax breaks that would make the tax code more confusing. ‘Instead of a grab bag of tax credits, lower the marginal rates,’ Mr. Hederman said.”
So you again do an Obama ad replay here, and pass that off as the Heritage’s position? Had you not done a selective lift/paste, looking for the highlighted words that suit your candidate’s position, you’d figure out you were doing nothing more than continuing the ad lies.
INRE the Weekly Standard, the economy was in a different status than today. So if you’d like to “contribute”, something that isn’t eight months old and outdated for today’s morphed proposals would be more appropriate.
Brian Miller
15 years ago
I already voted in this election by mail and it was not for Obama, so Obama is not my man. …my guy? Wanted to clear up the error(s) in you responce. Thanks for giving me the link, was that some sort of violation on my part for using it?
“Mr. Hederman said the middle class would likely pay less under Mr. Obama’s plan than Mr. McCain’s but that the Democrat was excessively reliant on complicated tax breaks that would make the tax code more confusing. ‘Instead of a grab bag of tax credits, lower the marginal rates,’ Mr. Hederman said.”
Is that the part I missed? You missed including any of that quote in your first use the link.
While I had said the Heritage Foundation economist had said “the middle class would likely pay less under Mr. Obama’s plan than Mr. McCain’s but that the Democrat plan was excessively reliant on complicated tax breaks…” and included the link again. Wow, that totally changes everything. Very misleading of me. Using a link you provided was an ad for Obama.
You used the Obama supporter when he suits your needs as a source of believable information, that was my point when you used the Goldman Sachs Obama supporter as your source for tax policy. Comprende’? You call me rude and say I’m an SOB… classy, real classy. Stick with the alias.
I include a link to McCains website and you call that outdated? So do I.
Of course it’s not a “violation” to use the link, Brian. Be nice if you read them before the cut/paste trip tho. Let’ me try to make this more clear. You said:
And the Heritage Foundation says what? That the middle class would likely pay less under Mr. Obama’s plan than Mr. McCain’s but that the Democrat plan was excessively reliant on complicated tax breaks… http://www.businessandmedia.org/printer/2008/20081029170224.aspx
The point of the Business and Media article I provided, and you excerpted, is that Obama is using the exact same quote that you repasted above as some sort of “truth”.
That’s the bloody problem! That is *not* a quote of Heritage’s Hederman, but a quote of the NY Sun’s Russell Berman. The journalist, according to Heritage, has erroneously encapsulized Hederman’s statement. The Obama campaign ran with Berman’s misinterpretation of Hederman, and then credited the journalist’s erroneous conclusion to Hederman.
Thus the letters. Berman got it wrong. Obama’s repeating Berman and attributing it to Heritage.
~~~
INRE links. Maybe I’m missing where you supposed linked to McCain’s site. In your post #123 – the only posts you provided any hotlinks – go to the Business and Media article I provided and discussed above, the Heritage Foundation itself, and an old Feb 2008 Weekly Standard article.
So what McCain webpage have you provided?
~~~
INRE “using an Obama supporter when it suits your needs”, if you go back thru any of my authored posts here, you’ll find I use pro/con sites in all or most. My use of an Obama supporter was in response to your comment above in #115:
Facts, or what some, not all, economists have supposedly claimed? Which is it? You know, there is a difference between facts and your opinion.
You’ll also note I stated in my response #122 that you’re never going to get 100% agreement from any analyst. I’m pointing out that even many Obama supporters find flaws with his notion that raising taxes in an economic downturn is just idiotic.
I derived my own opinion by the Tax Policy Center’s analysis, combined with Obama’s plans to expand the federal gov departments (at least he’ll create jobs…. paid by the taxpayer, of course) that were only partially included.
Then I took into consideration that when both candidates were asked what would they cut in today’s economy, McCain had a more realistic outloook that his plans from 8 months ago aren’t likely applicable today. Obama, however, constantly answered with the programs he would *not* cut, and that he would use a surgical “scalpel” with existing programs.
If Obama’s costs more than McCain’s with only 1/3 of his proposed programs included, and he’s not willing to cut wasteful government programs completely, then he’s already a more expensive POTUS.
The problem is Obama creates more departments than he will cut (if any….). The places he will reduce expenses will not provide the rate of return his economists say they will. Not to mention his ways of saving may cause unintended/ill thought consequences. i.e. on prescription drugs and cutting costs of Medicare, he wants to rely in importation of drugs from other countries.
This leaves us with two potential problems… either quality control. Or the loss of US pharmaceutical company jobs bcause of “outsourcing” the drug supply. But yet he whines about NAFTA/GATT/CAFTA?
And don’t even get me started on that one. You’re probably a Libertarian, and we could be here all night.
But no one wants to talk about this stuff…. all they hear is “tax cut for 95% of Americans”… and then? yada yada yada
GFRR
15 years ago
It’s criminal to do the graffiti on someone’s property, no question. It’s very disrepectful for them to portray our President with his head cut off, no question. I would happily support people getting punished for doing those things. It actually makes me cringe to see it, even though I don’t like Bush/McCain/Palin. Because it dumbs everything down, as though all we have is a show to put on, not real issues to discuss. I realize everyone’s venting their frustrations, but there has to be limits.
Nonetheless, there is still a difference between individuals doing that and people in political office allowing that. If someone had yelled “Kill Her!” at an Obama rally against Palin, Obama would have to respond to earn respect. Palin lost respect because she didn’t do it. That’s either because she is ok with her rallies being hate parties or she just doesn’t want to step in as a leader.
Even McCain was responsible enough to say enough is enough at his rallies. He’s not a hate-monger on the scale of Sarah Palin. McCain showed he has class. Palin just has style.
Missy
15 years ago
After the Secret Service did a thorough investigation, they found the “kill him” remark unfounded. Never happened. You do know there are Secret Service members spread throughout all the crowds at all the events, or don’t you?
@GFRR: Who was the politician that said to get into people’s faces????? Who’s camp is alluding to riots of their candidate does not win???? Yes, it is not Obama himself that is saying these things, but it is the people in his camp that are alluding to riots.
And no one has ever said “Kill Him” him at any Palin or McCain rally. The so-called journalist had to retract that after the Secret Service and police looked into the accusation. And they found that is was totally unfounded.
Secret Service says “Kill him” allegation unfounded
SCRANTON – The agent in charge of the Secret Service field office in Scranton said allegations that someone yelled “kill him” when presidential hopeful Barack Obama’s name was mentioned during Tuesday’s Sarah Palin rally are unfounded.
Please do no post lies again. look into the allegations before you post something like that. It makes you look petty and ignorant when you spread lies like that.
Nonetheless, there is still a difference between individuals doing that and people in political office allowing that. If someone had yelled “Kill Her!” at an Obama rally against Palin, Obama would have to respond to earn respect. Palin lost respect because she didn’t do it. That’s either because she is ok with her rallies being hate parties or she just doesn’t want to step in as a leader.
Missy is unquestionably correct. Update your talking points, GFRR. Or go spread your lies elsewhere to those who don’t stay abreast of stuff.
Leah
15 years ago
Obama wouldn’t respond to a “kill her” remark. This is the same guy who makes fun of regular, hard-working middle class citizens at a rally and have the people laugh at them. This is the guy who keeps mum on the media probing Joe’s background. Class? I don’t think so.
Leah: Obama would just think someone was talking about an aborted fetus and agree…
It’s amazing how a LIE like the “kill him” hoax gets street cred because the “news” media will repeat it over and over and yet when the investigation reveals it is not true, the same people who spread the lie remain silent.
Contrast that with the number of Republicans, myself included, who denounced that idiot girl who claimed a black man robbed her and carved a “B” in her face. Once the truth came out it was our duty to say so.
What a shame the other side doesn’t have the same standards.
Craig
15 years ago
Conclusion:
All the stupid leftists’ moonbats here have the same problem. They want attention and they get it. On leftist’s sites, they are anonymous. On conservative sites, they get all the attention they never had in life and they are happy. It doesn’t matter to them, whether it is good or bad attention. They just want attention. They want to feel important. SO PLEASE, LET’S BE SMART AND NOT GIVE IT TO THEM. If they don’t get any, they will run dry. If you give them attention they will stay here for ever and like vampires, they will suck all of your energy.
Shawn C
14 years ago
Violence against ANYONE is wrong. Stop crying out against violence angainst women or blacks. Cry out against violence against anyone. Besides, we are guaranteed the freedom of expression by our constitution. You have the legal right to hang an effigy of anyone in your yard. It’s these PC liberal nazi college students that are the biggest threat against our freedom. Why don’t we just hang them?
Freedom of expression has it’s legal limits. I would say hanging an effigy is an incitement to violence and shouldn’t be allowed – whether it’s an effigy of Palin, Obama or whoever. Whereas burning a flag should be okay. The main thing is that the law should be consistent where possible.
MATA, AYE , STIX1972, today is 26 may 2010 : I CAN SAY that you where right ,you predicted all of it and many regret to have voted for him; IT”S too late,they cannot undo it; hopefully they will remember now. for their own futur and their children.
@voter:
There’s a huge problem with your comparison don’t you think?
You are an anonymous Internet forum poster. You can (and do) claim all sorts of things without proof.
The LA Times is one of the largest newspapers in the US.
They have a Standards and Practices Dept and editors which prevent them from printing things that are not true.
You don’t have that.
The LA Times stakes its’ reputation and future business on its’ credibility.
You aren’t doing that.
Sorry sunshine, your comparison fails to hold water.
What really messes you up though is that the LA Times admits that they have it and that they have chosen to suppress it.
Uh.,,… “voter:” The L.A. Times has ADMITTED they have the tape…
Are they lying?
You seem to find reality something very relative.
What a timewaster.
How can anyone have a rational discussion with someone who redefines reality to suit themselves?
@Mike’s America: I am still waiting for proof of McCain instigating hate and fear. Still got nothing.
@stix1972:
She’s had all night plus half the day.
You’d think that the examples she alludes to would be easy to come up with.
Evidence of a McCain campaign of fears and hate, hell, just read the above posts for that. Here are a few examples from McCain’s supporters found right here, for you inquiring minds.
“a Obama totalitarian state”…“can you imagine what some people will do if Nobama loses?”…“white cultures in this country are being rejected and oppressed”… “Do you want a President that worked with a man that bombed the Pentagon and wanted to bomb a Military dacne that probably would have killed more people that wer killed in Oklahoma???? DO you want a President that went to a Black Liberation Theology Church for 20 years???? Look up Black Liberation Theology. It is not a Christian religion, it is a Marxist front.”… “I think that Obama will change the United States of America into something we will not recognize as the United States of America.”… “Our 401 ks will be used to fund welfare and other social programs. And the Global Poverty Act will send money to the UN to fork over to tyrants and thugs that wish us harm.”…
Sounds like fear and hate to me, but then the Bushies always sound like that. Actually McCain has run a campaign based, not on hate, but on fools, good luck with the election. Interesting how the LA Times is now considered a indisputable source of facts for the McCain/Isreal-First crowd.
@Brian Miller: So I am sperading hate because I am stating facts. that is a new one to me. So showing who someone associates with is spreading hate and fear. Another new one to me. Don’t you want to know this kind fo stuff or are you too blinded to see what Obama is????
@stix1972:
Misplaced outrage, apparently he hasn’t visited any left-wing blogs throughout the seven plus years of the Bush presidency, by doing so, he would realize how mild these comments are. Wishing death upon the President, VP and Tony Snow, racist remarks about Rice and Powell, just to call attention to a tiny, tiny bit of it all. Then we can go with the current derangement, the Palin FAMILY.
Seems like Brian Miller should go pee in his own playground.
Yeah, I’m blind and I don’t want to know the facts, that’s why I’m reading these comments, checking out viewpoints I might not agree with, reading, all the kinds of things that are considered subversive by the true believers. Yeah, this old kettle is black and blind by some standards. Stating that predictions for the future are facts is dishonest, can’t you see that? Are you so blind? Is it a fact that you can predict 100% all the horrors that are supposed to happen once Obama gets elected? That’s a new one to me. I don’t think so, but if faith based politics is all you got, might as well call it facts. But at least we can be adult about it.
Erika, INRE you comment:
The problem here is Obama was telling his faithful of the “fear” tactics McCain would use. Problem is, McCain was not using any of those tactics. Obama himself brought this up, not McCain. Yet you attribute it to McCain.
You are blind to this fact. It’s been Obama bringing up the race and gender card in both the primary against Hillary, and in the general against McCain under the pretext that “this is what they will do”. The only person doing it is Obama himself. If the GOP said anything about Obama’s race, they would have been torn to bits. Only Obama is allowed to talk about race in this election.
Now, you talk about McCain personally throwing out the middle name as part of a pre’emptive strike. That was not the campaign doing so. It was conservative bloggers. And if you want to blame the McCain campaign for what the blog world does, you’d better be prepared to absorb all the BS the liberals have put out about McCain and his military record, and the tabloid BS on Sarah Palin and her family.
Are you prepared for Obama to accept responsibility that Trig is actually Sarah Palin’s daughter as smut campaigning? I doubt it….
I provided many links of liberal mouthpieces for the DNC bringing up the fear or riots if Obama is not elected. Instead you say:
Let me give you a reality check, Erika. Campaign strategy always has the masses doing the dirty work as to keep the candidate clean. You will never find a statement from Obama, Plouffe or Axelrod that states they expect riots if Obama isn’t elected. Why? That would instantly sink his candidacy. They are not that stupid.
Instead, it gets quietly noted to specific mouthpieces that plant the seed in the various media… talking head shows, newspapers, and let it get picked up by the blogosphere. That’s the kind of backroom pol strategy that you are unaware of. And it goes on in all campaigns, by all parties.
But trust me, these seeds are being planted. And when you want to know where it’s coming from, just examine who it benefits. Obama, of course.
And BTW, I will say this one more time. The LA Times is an Obama supporter. They wrote the article about the event which is taped. If they are not releasing it… which is the simple thing to do (like showing an original birth certificate, for example?), then why not do it? They’ve already reported. They are standing guard over this tape for some reason. If they wanted to halt the stories, all they’d have to do is make it available, and the issue is gone.
Lastly
The naivety of both you and your guy on this is just stunning. Pakistan has a history of negotiating with the Taliban and radical tribal groups. Doesn’t work. Negotiating with Hitler didn’t work. The US did bi-lateral negotiations with N. Korea under Clinton/Reno… didn’t work. They created a nuke program, all the while smiling at the two bozos who believed they were remaining true to the agreement. The only way the N. Korea situation has gotten where it is, is because Bush refused bi-lateral talks, and insisted on six-party talks.
No one “ignores” hostile countries. However chit chats over tea by the two highest leaders is not the way to take care of it. And there has been much lower level contacts between the US and Iran on certain issues, like Iraq. But I’ll bet you didn’t know that because your guys tells you we don’t talk to them.
As I said, Erika. You are such a faithful follower that Obama could commit murder in front of you, and you will still find a way to justify and excuse his actions. That type of support is dangerous.
@Brian Miller: If they don’t like your answer, they will skip past it, and say you haven’t given an answer. Some on this post like to ask for facts, but wouldn’t know a fact if it slaped them in the face. You’ll find on this blog site,(with most, not all) McCain can do no wrong, no scratch that REPUBLICANS can do no wrong. You’d think they could walk on water.
@Brian Miller: OK where did I put Faith Based anything into here. I was stating facts of who Obama’s associates are and making an informed observation of what will happen if Obama gets elected.
I am omly reiterating what economists and others have said would happen i a Obama Presidnency. Loss of jobs, recession and a flightof jobs over seas. It is not thathard to follow if youjustoook at basic Economics 101. Taxing during a downturn inthe economy will only make things worse. Alwyays has and always will. That is just basic economics.
And Obama has had a majority of his mentors either Marxizsor Communists. Frank Davis, RevWRight, Ayers. And he is friends with Rezko, Kahlidi, Monsour, and many other unsavoury characters in Chicago.
This is not made up, it is a fact and if you read Chicago papers other than Chicago Times and the rest of the MSM you will get more background on who Obama is.
The main people formenting hate are on the Left. Just look at Daily Kos and The Democratic Underground. Cheering the death of Reagan and Tony Snow, and wishing for the death of Bush, Cheney, Rove and a plethra of other Conservatives.
@voter:
No Erika. McCain has done a lot of of stuff wrong. McCain-Feingold, Manbearpig (Global Warming), Illegal Immigration, and many other things I am disgusted with McCain about. But I am not going to let a Chicago Thug get into the White House. We are already seeing the Chicago Style Politics spread across the nation. Just ask the Hillary supporters at the cacaii.
Brian Miller #105… and ensuing.
If any McCain supporting blogger making statements is represented as “the McCain campaign”, then the “Obama campaign” will have to take credit for the HuffPo and Daily KO’s sleazy assault on Palin INRE Trig, her daughter, the supposed affair, and other sundry tabloid charges progressive/socialist bloggers are engaged in.
So I’ll tell you what, I’ll attribute the type of statements you said above were made here to McCain, if you attribute all the liberal blogosphere slime against first Hillary, then McCain and finally Palin. Because I’m darn sure you got more “hate” and lies on your side than exists on McCain’s side. Hang, I’d say Rev Wright’s got enough hate in him to count for maybe ten on our side.
You agree to that? Or do you try to choose to distance yourself from the HuffPos and Daily KOs’ types?
Somehow, I think you’ll try to have it both ways, eh?
@voter:
You know Erika that response is more than just a bit amusing.
Ever since your post #26 several of us have been trying to get a straight answer out of you.
You made the claim that McCain’s entire campaign has been run based on fear.
Over and over and over again since then you have been asked to provide proof of your claims.
You should be very hesitant to point a gnarled finger at the rest of us when you are the one who is guilty.
Okay, McCain/Bush are not responsible for what their followers say. But the followers are. So is it “facts” stix1972 is stating or an “informed observation”? Facts, or what some, not all, economists have supposedly claimed? Which is it? You know, there is a difference between facts and your opinion. Are you saying there is no difference between facts and what economist have told us? I got some stock to sell you if that’s your basis for reality. You know, just because you say it’s a fact, or you hear something you want to believe, inspite of your most heart felt desire, that does not make it a fact. You call them facts, I call it faith based. Stick with what you are good at. As I said, McCain is not running a campaign based on fear and hate… it’s based on fools.
@Aye Chihuahua: I’d really like to know where you work, they must be very nice. You know to let you blog on their dime. Model employee.
@MataHarley: Yes Mata. If youattributewahtI am sayingtothe McCain camp,well youmust atribute the death threatsand out rightlies and propoganda os the HUFFPO, Daily Kos and Democratic Underground to the Obama camp. I will venture to say that my posts and comments have alot more facts in them than they do. And I have never called for the death of anybody except the Islamo-fascists.
And along with @Aye Chihuahua: where is there any proof that McCain or Palin have formented hate and fear against anybody. Stating people’s associates is not formenting fear, it is evaluating someone’s judgement. We have never said Obama is a terorists, a Socialist yes, but never a Terrorist, and neither has McCain or Palin
@voter:
Being a self made business owner has its’ advantages.
The only person I have to answer to is my wife and as long as I keep the grass mowed and my socks picked up she’s very easy on me.
Strange, still no straight answer from you to the questions that are looming.
You’d rather create another distraction about what someone else is or is not doing.
Seems you should have learned about false accusations by now.
@Brian Miller: Ok My informded observations are not fact, and I never said they were.
Facts Obama had a relationsship with Rezko, Ayers, Rev Wright, Khalidi, Monsour and other shady characters in Chicago.
Fact: Liberation Theology (Black Liberation Theology) is a front for Marxism.
Fact If you tax people in a downturn in the economythe economy will drop. It has haoppened everytime it has been done, just ask Carter about that.
Fact: If you raise payoll taxes, youwill getlessin return.
Fact: If we tax coporations more than now, most will either lay people off or move over seas.
We already have the second highest Corporate Taxes in the World.
Voter said: “I’d really like to know where you work, they must be very nice. You know to let you blog on their dime. Model employee.”
That’s it for you on this thread “voter.”
It’s bad enough you are a time waster, but when you start threatening loyal readers you are toast.
No more comments from you on this thread. If you do, it will be deleted. You stopped contributing anything rational, original or interesting a long time ago.
Also here is a article about the Historic Vote we are about to make
Brian, you said:
If that’s the case, Brian, then the Obama campaign is one based on hate, sleazy tabloid accusations and lazy Americans who prefer the government decide their future and support their families.
The Goldman Sachs ex CEO… an Obama supporter, I believe… was on Charlie Gibson last week and stated unequivocally that raising taxes in this economy is one dumb move.
The Tax Policy Center has evaluated Obama’s overall tax plans, plus 77 of the 170 some off government programs he wants to start. Even their low estimate is that Obama will increase the debt to $4.3 trillion… and remember, that doesn’t include over 100 programs that were not included in their financial evaluation.
Obama claims the Heritage Foundation supports his tax plan. They’ve sent two letters from their legal counsel asking him to pull the ads as they misrepresent their position. Obama’s campaign ignores them. All he needs to do is push the propaganda campaign to the legal limits in order to brainwash the faithful into his deficient math.
It is true that you will never get “all” of anyone to agree on the financial analysis. Then again, that doesn’t seen to stop the AGW crowd from pushing their agenda. The point is, Brian, that many Obama supporters come here with their talking points as the absolute “truth”. And to that, I can only repeat your own words right back at ‘cha:
I’d say you’d better halt the rock throwing from your own glass house. And generally, this crew here backs up their comments with informational links. Which is more than I can say you contributed to this thread.
“The Goldman Sachs ex CEO… an Obama supporter, I believe… was on Charlie Gibson last week and stated unequivocally that raising taxes in this economy is one dumb move.”
This is who you pull out to support your facts an taxes. So you support what the Obama supporter is saying? Great.
And the Heritage Foundation says what? That the middle class would likely pay less under Mr. Obama’s plan than Mr. McCain’s but that the Democrat plan was excessively reliant on complicated tax breaks… http://www.businessandmedia.org/printer/2008/20081029170224.aspx
It’s fine with me that Obama and the Coors-booze funded elitist Heritage Foundation aren’t soulmates- http://www.heritage.org/Support/about.cfm
Even McCains advisors don’t agree that all these supposed “facts” and conclusions are so obvious, yet you all got it completely mapped out when it comes to Obama-
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/751tryie.asp?pg=1
And accusing Obama of some sort of socialism considering McCain’s own plans include-
“The government would take a controlling stake in the companies it helped. All profits would go to the Treasury.” (Source: JohnMcCain.com)
You know, I was never the one claiming to provide hard facts, just commenting on others outlandish opinions. Hope I could contribute.
You truly are comprehension challeneged, Brian. Actually, the Goldman Sachs was in deference to you and your guy. He’s the one with the Countrywide/Fannie/Freddie types in his back pocket, and this guy liked Obama… save that tax raising bit for the economy.
Wall Street is mixed on their support. Then again, what have they got to lose. A GOP POTUS, along with his banking Treasury Secy’, and backed by the DNC Congress and Obama 100%, are more than willing to bailout the banking industry. The latest bailout is for Umpqua here in the NW. Wasn’t even in trouble…. I guess the trend now is to bolster the banks in good standing so they can buy out the banks in trouble. That way we’ll have just a few banks, and evidently an end to monopoly laws as we know them.
Me personally? If you went to the $4.3 trillion link I put in there, that’s from the Tax Policy Center. And I place more faith in that than all others I’ve read.
But what alot of these comparisons are missing is the government expansion that Obama proposes, compared to McCain’s promise to take a much needed hatchet to the federal behemoth.
Frankly, I’m not sure if I can believe McCain will do that, and that makes me nervous. But I am 100% sure Obama will provide a government sponsored answer for your every need. Therefore his policies will not only be more expensive, but expand government control.
I’m not sure what you call Obama’s “social and economic justice” agenda for education, taxpayer funded health care, taxpayer funded work programs, taxpayer funded college and preschool, taxpayer funded energy programs, and so on down the line…. but that’s socialism. Don’t like the label? That’s your problem. Than call yourself a European social democracy advocate instead. You’ll feel better about yourself.
And considering what a rude SOB you are, I suspect you could use a bit more self esteem.
Even cBS admits that the charlatans’ numbers don’t add up.
BTW, Brian… I gave you that link to the Business and Media org that you quoted. But I suggest you put the entire quotes in.
So you again do an Obama ad replay here, and pass that off as the Heritage’s position? Had you not done a selective lift/paste, looking for the highlighted words that suit your candidate’s position, you’d figure out you were doing nothing more than continuing the ad lies.
INRE the Weekly Standard, the economy was in a different status than today. So if you’d like to “contribute”, something that isn’t eight months old and outdated for today’s morphed proposals would be more appropriate.
I already voted in this election by mail and it was not for Obama, so Obama is not my man. …my guy? Wanted to clear up the error(s) in you responce. Thanks for giving me the link, was that some sort of violation on my part for using it?
“Mr. Hederman said the middle class would likely pay less under Mr. Obama’s plan than Mr. McCain’s but that the Democrat was excessively reliant on complicated tax breaks that would make the tax code more confusing. ‘Instead of a grab bag of tax credits, lower the marginal rates,’ Mr. Hederman said.”
Is that the part I missed? You missed including any of that quote in your first use the link.
While I had said the Heritage Foundation economist had said “the middle class would likely pay less under Mr. Obama’s plan than Mr. McCain’s but that the Democrat plan was excessively reliant on complicated tax breaks…” and included the link again. Wow, that totally changes everything. Very misleading of me. Using a link you provided was an ad for Obama.
You used the Obama supporter when he suits your needs as a source of believable information, that was my point when you used the Goldman Sachs Obama supporter as your source for tax policy. Comprende’? You call me rude and say I’m an SOB… classy, real classy. Stick with the alias.
I include a link to McCains website and you call that outdated? So do I.
Of course it’s not a “violation” to use the link, Brian. Be nice if you read them before the cut/paste trip tho. Let’ me try to make this more clear. You said:
The point of the Business and Media article I provided, and you excerpted, is that Obama is using the exact same quote that you repasted above as some sort of “truth”.
That’s the bloody problem! That is *not* a quote of Heritage’s Hederman, but a quote of the NY Sun’s Russell Berman. The journalist, according to Heritage, has erroneously encapsulized Hederman’s statement. The Obama campaign ran with Berman’s misinterpretation of Hederman, and then credited the journalist’s erroneous conclusion to Hederman.
Thus the letters. Berman got it wrong. Obama’s repeating Berman and attributing it to Heritage.
INRE links. Maybe I’m missing where you supposed linked to McCain’s site. In your post #123 – the only posts you provided any hotlinks – go to the Business and Media article I provided and discussed above, the Heritage Foundation itself, and an old Feb 2008 Weekly Standard article.
So what McCain webpage have you provided?
INRE “using an Obama supporter when it suits your needs”, if you go back thru any of my authored posts here, you’ll find I use pro/con sites in all or most. My use of an Obama supporter was in response to your comment above in #115:
You’ll also note I stated in my response #122 that you’re never going to get 100% agreement from any analyst. I’m pointing out that even many Obama supporters find flaws with his notion that raising taxes in an economic downturn is just idiotic.
I derived my own opinion by the Tax Policy Center’s analysis, combined with Obama’s plans to expand the federal gov departments (at least he’ll create jobs…. paid by the taxpayer, of course) that were only partially included.
Then I took into consideration that when both candidates were asked what would they cut in today’s economy, McCain had a more realistic outloook that his plans from 8 months ago aren’t likely applicable today. Obama, however, constantly answered with the programs he would *not* cut, and that he would use a surgical “scalpel” with existing programs.
If Obama’s costs more than McCain’s with only 1/3 of his proposed programs included, and he’s not willing to cut wasteful government programs completely, then he’s already a more expensive POTUS.
The problem is Obama creates more departments than he will cut (if any….). The places he will reduce expenses will not provide the rate of return his economists say they will. Not to mention his ways of saving may cause unintended/ill thought consequences. i.e. on prescription drugs and cutting costs of Medicare, he wants to rely in importation of drugs from other countries.
This leaves us with two potential problems… either quality control. Or the loss of US pharmaceutical company jobs bcause of “outsourcing” the drug supply. But yet he whines about NAFTA/GATT/CAFTA?
And don’t even get me started on that one. You’re probably a Libertarian, and we could be here all night.
But no one wants to talk about this stuff…. all they hear is “tax cut for 95% of Americans”… and then? yada yada yada
It’s criminal to do the graffiti on someone’s property, no question. It’s very disrepectful for them to portray our President with his head cut off, no question. I would happily support people getting punished for doing those things. It actually makes me cringe to see it, even though I don’t like Bush/McCain/Palin. Because it dumbs everything down, as though all we have is a show to put on, not real issues to discuss. I realize everyone’s venting their frustrations, but there has to be limits.
Nonetheless, there is still a difference between individuals doing that and people in political office allowing that. If someone had yelled “Kill Her!” at an Obama rally against Palin, Obama would have to respond to earn respect. Palin lost respect because she didn’t do it. That’s either because she is ok with her rallies being hate parties or she just doesn’t want to step in as a leader.
Even McCain was responsible enough to say enough is enough at his rallies. He’s not a hate-monger on the scale of Sarah Palin. McCain showed he has class. Palin just has style.
After the Secret Service did a thorough investigation, they found the “kill him” remark unfounded. Never happened. You do know there are Secret Service members spread throughout all the crowds at all the events, or don’t you?
@GFRR: Who was the politician that said to get into people’s faces????? Who’s camp is alluding to riots of their candidate does not win???? Yes, it is not Obama himself that is saying these things, but it is the people in his camp that are alluding to riots.
And no one has ever said “Kill Him” him at any Palin or McCain rally. The so-called journalist had to retract that after the Secret Service and police looked into the accusation. And they found that is was totally unfounded.
Please do no post lies again. look into the allegations before you post something like that. It makes you look petty and ignorant when you spread lies like that.
GFRR said:
The option you left out is the one that is fact… it simply never happened.
Instead you’re continuing to spread what is tandamount to another one of those media exaggerations, trying to be passed off as breaking news. Rather like that idiot Ron Paul supporter who claimed to be a McCain supporter and carved a B in her cheek?
Missy is unquestionably correct. Update your talking points, GFRR. Or go spread your lies elsewhere to those who don’t stay abreast of stuff.
Obama wouldn’t respond to a “kill her” remark. This is the same guy who makes fun of regular, hard-working middle class citizens at a rally and have the people laugh at them. This is the guy who keeps mum on the media probing Joe’s background. Class? I don’t think so.
Leah: Obama would just think someone was talking about an aborted fetus and agree…
It’s amazing how a LIE like the “kill him” hoax gets street cred because the “news” media will repeat it over and over and yet when the investigation reveals it is not true, the same people who spread the lie remain silent.
Contrast that with the number of Republicans, myself included, who denounced that idiot girl who claimed a black man robbed her and carved a “B” in her face. Once the truth came out it was our duty to say so.
What a shame the other side doesn’t have the same standards.
Conclusion:
All the stupid leftists’ moonbats here have the same problem. They want attention and they get it. On leftist’s sites, they are anonymous. On conservative sites, they get all the attention they never had in life and they are happy. It doesn’t matter to them, whether it is good or bad attention. They just want attention. They want to feel important. SO PLEASE, LET’S BE SMART AND NOT GIVE IT TO THEM. If they don’t get any, they will run dry. If you give them attention they will stay here for ever and like vampires, they will suck all of your energy.
Violence against ANYONE is wrong. Stop crying out against violence angainst women or blacks. Cry out against violence against anyone. Besides, we are guaranteed the freedom of expression by our constitution. You have the legal right to hang an effigy of anyone in your yard. It’s these PC liberal nazi college students that are the biggest threat against our freedom. Why don’t we just hang them?
@Shawn C
Freedom of expression has it’s legal limits. I would say hanging an effigy is an incitement to violence and shouldn’t be allowed – whether it’s an effigy of Palin, Obama or whoever. Whereas burning a flag should be okay. The main thing is that the law should be consistent where possible.
MATA, AYE , STIX1972, today is 26 may 2010 : I CAN SAY that you where right ,you predicted all of it and many regret to have voted for him; IT”S too late,they cannot undo it; hopefully they will remember now. for their own futur and their children.