McCain’s Landstuhl attack on Obama is ‘literally is not true’

[Clyde]

So let me understand: if you say something and you don't prove it, you're a "liar." A lot of liars on BGP then, Clyde.:lol:

 

Liar? Nope.

 

Big-time agenda? Absolutely.

[AcesFull]

HB, do you realize that you have contradicted your own premise? To wit:

 

Thread title:

McCain’s Landstuhl attack on Obama is ‘literally is not true’

 

 

From your post #17:

A new McCain ad says Obama "made time to go to the gym, but canceled a visit with wounded troops. Seems the Pentagon wouldn't allow him to bring cameras."

 

McCain's facts are literally true, but his insinuation – that the visit was canceled because of the press ban or the desire for gym time – is false. In fact, Obama visited wounded troops earlier – without cameras or press – both in the U.S. and Iraq. And his gym workouts are a daily routine.

 

The Obama campaign canceled the visit with wounded troops at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany, Obama says, when he learned that the Pentagon would not allow him to bring along a retired Air Force major general who is serving as a foreign policy adviser to the campaign. Obama says that "triggered then a concern that maybe our visit was going to be perceived as political."

Which is it? Are McCain's facts literally true or are they literally not true? Have you flip-flopped with rapidity that would turn Obama green with envy? :lol:

[Clyde]

McCain believes that the Pentagon's response was truthful and I agree. There was nothing wrong with the ad and the Obama camp has once again displayed its thin skin and demonstrated just how biased the mainstream media is in Obama's favor.

 

There was nothing wrong as long as you ignore the fact that he wasn't trying to bring along cameras.

 

Why ignore the facts?

[Clyde]

1. Many of Obama's positions and decisions seem illogical to me, so IMO, expecting his decisions to be logically consistent is not realistic.

 

 

Is there a school for avoiding answers that I'm not aware of?

[AcesFull]

Again, all of these avoid the question. I'll stop asking them, though. I won't make you squirm in your seat anymore.

Again, I answered all of your questions very directly. Saying that I did not does not make it true. I am still waiting for any quote from Obama in which he categorically rules out supporting reparations and that is a question that is relevant to the topic. The motivation of a campaign advisor for wanting to visit wounded troops is kind of a tangential issue, is it not? Who cares? Obama made the decision and Obama is whining about the criticism of that decision. There is nothing new here.

[AcesFull]

Is there a school for avoiding answers that I'm not aware of?

My answers are visible to anybody who wants to read them and draw their own conclusions. They do not require your personal critique. If you do not like the answers, then ask different questions of your own or respond in a substantive way to my answers. Thanks. :thumb:

[True blue (and gold)]

My answers are visible to anybody who wants to read them and draw their own conclusions. They do not require your personal critique.

 

I want to read them, but I am not seeing a "yes" or a "no" but an attempt to avoid them or spin them. Just answering yes or no to them does not mean that your opinion of what really happened is any different.

[HHSDad]

The only thing uglier than the candidates campaigns will be the election results.

[AcesFull]

I want to read them, but I am not seeing a "yes" or a "no" but an attempt to avoid them or spin them. Just answering yes or no to them does not mean that your opinion of what really happened is any different.

I am so very sorry. I was not aware that I was supposed to limit my answers to "yes" or "no." Do you have any more wife beater-type questions to which you want me to respond?

[AcesFull]

The only thing uglier than the candidates campaigns will be the election results.

If McCain really wants to win, I expect the election to be very tight. The closer the election gets, the more voters will begin worrying about the economy, national security, and Obama's qualifications. I am glad that McCain is finally poking Obama and exposing his thin skin. Goading Obama into visiting Iraq will help McCain in the long run. It drew attention to the improved conditions and forced Obama to move toward McCain's position on the war.

[True blue (and gold)]

I am so very sorry. I was not aware that I was supposed to limit my answers to "yes" or "no." Do you have any more wife beater-type questions to which you want me to respond?

 

It's interesting...because you accuse Obama of doing the exact same thing that you are doing. "He won't come out and specifically state that he is against monetary reparations" (or some similar wording). He has said many times in many different ways that he does not feel that handing someone a check is the best way. Yet you want the actual words.

 

You avoid my questions or spin them, and then accuse me of wanting too specific of an answer. I am not the only one that sees that your "answers" aren't really answers. I honestly don't know what your answer is, particularly to my first (main) question.

[True blue (and gold)]

By the way, fill me in on what a "wife beater" type question is. I have evidently missed that.

[AcesFull]

It's interesting...because you accuse Obama of doing the exact same thing that you are doing. "He won't come out and specifically state that he is against monetary reparations" (or some similar wording). He has said many times in many different ways that he does not feel that handing someone a check is the best way. Yet you want the actual words.

 

You avoid my questions or spin them, and then accuse me of wanting too specific of an answer. I am not the only one that sees that your "answers" aren't really answers. I honestly don't know what your answer is, particularly to my first (main) question.

It is interesting that those who claim to be undecided in this election cycle put up the most spirited defense of Obama and the harshest criticism of McCain.

 

I do not believe liberals apply logic effectively in making decisions (otherwise they would not be liberals). So your questions that involve Obama and logic are not ones that a "yes" or "no" answer makes any sense to me. It was illogical for Obama not to follow the Pentagon's rules and visit the wounded troops as he had planned to do. What he did on other days is irrelevant.

 

The motivation of a campaign staffer for wanting to visit the troops is also irrelevant because the general's motivation should have had zero impact on Obama's decision.

 

I cannot answer the questions any more clearly and I doubt that anybody else is having any trouble understanding my answers.

 

However, if you prefer giving "yes" and "no" answers yourself, then I will be glad to frame any questions that I might pose to you in the future in a way such that those will be the only acceptable responses. :lol:

[AcesFull]

By the way, fill me in on what a "wife beater" type question is. I have evidently missed that.

Have you stopped beating your wife? (Please respond with a yes or no answer.)

[True blue (and gold)]

It is interesting that those who claim to be undecided in this election cycle put up the most spirited defense of Obama and the harshest criticism of McCain.

 

I do not believe liberals apply logic effectively in making decisions (otherwise they would not be liberals). So your questions that involve Obama and logic are not ones that a "yes" or "no" answer makes any sense to me. It was illogical for Obama not to follow the Pentagon's rules and visit the wounded troops as he had planned to do. What he did on other days is irrelevant.

 

The motivation of a campaign staffer for wanting to visit the troops is also irrelevant because the general's motivation should have had zero impact on Obama's decision.

 

I cannot answer the questions any more clearly and I doubt that anybody else is having any trouble understanding my answers.

 

However, if you prefer giving "yes" and "no" answers yourself, then I will be glad to frame any questions that I might pose to you in the future in a way such that those will be the only acceptable responses. :lol:

 

If my criticism of McCain is the harshest, then he most certainly has it easy. I like him a heck of a lot better then many of you that have already decided that you will vote for him. This board, due to the large number of conservative posters, is plastered with "bring Obama down" threads. There are very few similar McCain ones. Even in this thread, I don't see anyone attacking McCain, just defending Obama. There is a difference. The only criticism that I have had of McCain that I can recall all stem from his negative campaigning (that I thought he was above). As you state it, whether you think I am undecided or not, is irrelevant. A close conservative friend of mine (who is certainly voting for McCain) is suprised and interested in my analysis of the issues and points, as is my father who is a democrat (who is certainly voting for Obama). Both are shocked that I haven't chosen a candidate yet.

 

I won't respond to your liberal stereotype comment. I certainly do not subscribe to it or conservative stereotypes either.

 

You are correct about the Major Gen.'s reason for wanting to visit having no affect on Obama's decision. I just thought that it might be a reason why. Purely speculation.

 

I am not the only person having difficulty understanding what your answers to the actual questions are...see Clyde's comment above.

 

As far as stating your questions differently in the future, feel free to. Let me even help you ask me some:

 

Is is possible that the note Obama left at the "wailing" wall in Israel was actually a setup? yes

 

Is it possible that Obama is a closet Muslim? yes

 

Is it possible that Obama is Santa Claus? yes

 

Possibilities do not mean actualities.

Edited August 2, 2008 by True blue (and gold)