You all are reading an awful lot into a pretty tame 30-second ad.

You all are reading an awful lot into a pretty tame 30-second ad.

There are more problems with McCain's campaign than the squabbling over a 30-second ad. The pattern has been that the left screams, "Outrageous!" and McCain turns on one of his own or says something nice about some liberal. McCain needs to hit Obama hard with the truth and when he gets criticized respond with a challenge to prove the allegations wrong.

 

Praising Al Gore and Nancy Pelosi for their "leadership" is not going to win any election for any Republican - McCain included.

Obama was opposed to the surge and would have already had the troops out of Iraq. There is no doubt that Obama's position at the time and his current position were both taken out of political expedience.

 

.

 

There's a difference between poor judgment and intentionally trying to inflict harm on the U.S. and its soldiers just to win a campaign. You believing that he would choose the results of the latter is EXACTLY what's wrong with politics today. We can't simply differ on philosphy. We have to label those that we disagree with as unpatriotic.

 

Debate policy all you want. Saying that the one you disagree with is unpatriotic is telling on your behalf.

Reminds me of a Miranda Lambert tune.

 

Desperation

There's danger in frustration

 

Outstanding CD.

McCain needs to hit Obama hard with the truth and when he gets criticized respond with a challenge to prove the allegations wrong.

 

.

 

Classic. Just like the attorney who says "are you still beating your wife?"

Wrong. If Obama had had his way, we would not have been in Iraq in the first place. We would have concentrated our efforts in Afganistan instead.

Not to highjack a thread but I've wanted to ask this question for a long time. If Obama heard all that we all heard about WD's in Iraq. If Obhama heard Colin Powell, one of the most honest men in the world - IMO, sit there and tell us all that was going on in Iraq. If Obama sat there and listened to everything that everyone else heard and didn't vote to go to war when so many others did, what does that say about him? Even I, who is totally opposed to this war, felt that we should go after everything I heard. If so many people were convinced that we should go to war, after being told all this stuff, why didn't he?

You all are reading an awful lot into a pretty tame 30-second ad.

 

That's what I'm thinking. Their only point IMO is just b/c he's become so famous doesn't mean he can run the country.

Not to highjack a thread but I've wanted to ask this question for a long time. If Obama heard all that we all heard about WD's in Iraq. If Obhama heard Colin Powell, one of the most honest men in the world - IMO, sit there and tell us all that was going on in Iraq. If Obama sat there and listened to everything that everyone else heard and didn't vote to go to war when so many others did, what does that say about him? Even I, who is totally opposed to this war, felt that we should go after everything I heard. If so many people were convinced that we should go to war, after being told all this stuff, why didn't he?

 

 

That also raises questions for me.

Classic. Just like the attorney who says "are you still beating your wife?"

 

Notice he said hit him hard with the truth. I would like to see both sides question each other about votes, policies and experience instead of this garbage. It just isn't going to happen.

That's what I'm thinking. Their only point IMO is just b/c he's become so famous doesn't mean he can run the country.

 

Yes. Additionally, McCain needs to come at his with what Obama's weaknesses are, not waste time comparing him to celebrities. It's just no a smart move.

There's a difference between poor judgment and intentionally trying to inflict harm on the U.S. and its soldiers just to win a campaign. You believing that he would choose the results of the latter is EXACTLY what's wrong with politics today. We can't simply differ on philosphy. We have to label those that we disagree with as unpatriotic.

 

Debate policy all you want. Saying that the one you disagree with is unpatriotic is telling on your behalf.

This is exactly what he did. Obama began changing his position for the general campaign and his position has been a moving target because conditions in Iraq have improved greatly because of the surge.

 

Yet, Obama still says that knowing what he knows now, he would still not not have supported the surge. This is Obama's ridiculous position, even as he suggests a similar strategy in Afghanistan. Had Obama gotten his way before the surge, we would have been out of Iraq and we would have lost the war. I remember how eagerly some liberals announced our defeat in Iraq and I do not recall Obama correcting Harry Reid, John Murtha, or any of his fellow liberals who declared the war lost.

Not to highjack a thread but I've wanted to ask this question for a long time. If Obama heard all that we all heard about WD's in Iraq. If Obhama heard Colin Powell, one of the most honest men in the world - IMO, sit there and tell us all that was going on in Iraq. If Obama sat there and listened to everything that everyone else heard and didn't vote to go to war when so many others did, what does that say about him? Even I, who is totally opposed to this war, felt that we should go after everything I heard. If so many people were convinced that we should go to war, after being told all this stuff, why didn't he?

This is an excellent point. Obama was not privy to any intelligence information to which his current Congressional colleagues had access. I have never understood how somebody representing a very liberal and anti-war constituency on the south side of Chicago taking a position against invading Iraq is supposed to be an indicator of superior judgment.

 

Obama has shown no inclination to take tough, non-popular positions since he was elected to the US Senate, so why are liberals so sure that he would have opposed the war if he had been a sitting US Senator with access to the same intelligence as Hillary, Kerry, et al.?

Yes. Additionally, McCain needs to come at his with what Obama's weaknesses are, not waste time comparing him to celebrities. It's just no a smart move.

 

The celibrity thing was only as a reference that he's only famous for being famous. It might not have been the best move, but it does pose the question what has he done to become the "rockstar"? And, b/c he's a "rockstar" can he run the country?

This is exactly what he did. Obama began changing his position for the general campaign and his position has been a moving target because conditions in Iraq have improved greatly because of the surge.

 

Yet, Obama still says that knowing what he knows now, he would still not not have supported the surge. This is Obama's ridiculous position, even as he suggests a similar strategy in Afghanistan. Had Obama gotten his way before the surge, we would have been out of Iraq and we would have lost the war. I remember how eagerly some liberals announced our defeat in Iraq and I do not recall Obama correcting Harry Reid, John Murtha, or any of his fellow liberals who declared the war lost.

 

Again, no. Had Obama gotten his way, we wouldn't have been in Iraq, we would have had a higher concentration of troops in Afghanistan. If he had gotten his way, 9/11 would not have been equated with Iraq.

The celibrity thing was only as a reference that he's only famous for being famous. It might not have been the best move, but it does pose the question what has he done to become the "rockstar"? And, b/c he's a "rockstar" can he run the country?

 

Neither candidate has experience in the following areas:

 

1. state governor
   
2. vice president
   
3. secretary of energy
   
4. secretary of state
   
5. secretary of defense
   
6. and cabinet member for that matter
   

 

What claim to fame does either have? McCain has had more years in Congress and is a well respected military veteran and former POW, but does that make him that much more then what Obama is?