The Offical TIF American Elections thread

[jackattack]

 

 

 

The reason she changed her mind was because the cost went up like $100 million dollars.

 

 

 

Is that why she took the pork money anyway?

 

 

 

Please, I won't give you that he flip-flopped on public financing either.

 

 

 

States doesn't really write checks to the Federal Government to return earmarks. While Governor she did cut the amout of earmarks Alaska takes by like a hundred million dollars or something. And Obama completely flip flopped on public financing. Before he had a 3 to 1 money advantage it was 'Oh ya public financing is great! It lessens corruption and the influence of special interests and all that stuff. Of course I'll take public financing.' Then once he has an advantage not only did he go back on his pledge, but he blatantly spread lies about the RNC.

[magekillr]

I fail to see how he flipped on campaign finance reform. He stated that he would work with the opponent to reach an agreement on public financing. Because the McCain campaign refused to do anything about the 527's, no agreement was reached.

 

 

 

I will agree to disagree, but I do not see a flip-flop here, especially when the sole purpose of public financing is to reform how candidates are funded, which he has done anyway.

[1_man_army]

So what does everyone think of the report finding that Palin abused her power when she fired Walter Monegan? I'm betting that they try to play this as being politically motivated.

[Lordjake]

So what does everyone think of the report finding that Palin abused her power when she fired Walter Monegan? I'm betting that they try to play this as being politically motivated.

 

I blame the liberal, elitist, terrorist-supporting, inexperienced Alaskan panel for trying to slander the infallible, well spoken V.P candidate.

[Saru Inc]

So what does everyone think of the report finding that Palin abused her power when she fired Walter Monegan? I'm betting that they try to play this as being politically motivated.

 

 

 

 

 

First off, we don't know all the full facts yet. And, if we find out she really did that, oh please. Presidents have done it before, I'm not condoning it, but it's not like she's the first one.

[1_man_army]

I'm not speculating that she abused her power, it's part of the report's findings.

 

 

 

As for the "oh please" comment, I can't help but shake my head, some people (on both sides) would forgive their ticket of anything to see them elected - it's quite pathetic. Just because others have abused their powers in the past doesn't mean it should be condoned now regardless of who it involves on either end of the political spectrum.

 

 

 

 

 

Link:

 

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jOTk ... wD93NV5L00

[Lordjake]

 

First off, we don't know all the full facts yet. And, if we find out she really did that, oh please. Presidents have done it before, I'm not condoning it, but it's not like she's the first one.

 

 

 

If you want to read the full report, you can here (big pdf file)

 

If there were any missing details in the panel hearing, it's because people ignored subpoenas and refused to testify (Palin).

 

 

 

Even though she violated state law, I'm sure she did it in a mavericky way.

[Saru Inc]

I'm not speculating that she abused her power, it's part of the report's findings.

 

 

 

As for the "oh please" comment, I can't help but shake my head, some people (on both sides) would forgive their ticket of anything to see them elected - it's quite pathetic. Just because others have abused their powers in the past doesn't mean it should be condoned now regardless of who it involves on either end of the political spectrum.

 

 

 

 

 

Link:

 

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jOTk ... wD93NV5L00

 

 

 

 

 

I just said I'm not condoning it. And oh PLEASE Obama is a [bleep]ing buddy with Bill Ayers, how can you ignore that? Some people would forgive their ticket of anything to see them elected - it's quite pathetic.

[magekillr]

I just said I'm not condoning it. And oh PLEASE Obama is a [bleep] buddy with Bill Ayers, how can you ignore that? Some people would forgive their ticket of anything to see them elected - it's quite pathetic.

 

 

 

http://www.slate.com/id/2201953/

 

 

 

Excerpt:

 

 

 

That Barack Obama and William Ayers knew each other during the 1990s may tell us something about the two men. But it says much more about a particular time and place: Hyde Park, Chicago, more than a decade ago.

 

 

 

Obama first moved to Chicago in 1985, when he worked as a community organizer. But his career got on its current course when he returned to Hyde Park in 1991 to practice law and teach constitutional law at the University of Chicago. Four years later, he met Ayers at a lunchtime meeting about school reform.

 

 

 

What do you know about Obama's relationship with Ayers? You probably don't know anything. You're just looking for reasons to not support Obama.

 

 

 

Before it was "Universal Health Care", we proved that Obama isn't bringing universal health care, and then it's something else. You're running out of options, and time...just like someone else we know.

[Saru Inc]

I just said I'm not condoning it. And oh PLEASE Obama is a [bleep] buddy with Bill Ayers, how can you ignore that? Some people would forgive their ticket of anything to see them elected - it's quite pathetic.

 

 

 

http://www.slate.com/id/2201953/

 

 

 

Excerpt:

 

 

 

That Barack Obama and William Ayers knew each other during the 1990s may tell us something about the two men. But it says much more about a particular time and place: Hyde Park, Chicago, more than a decade ago.

 

 

 

Obama first moved to Chicago in 1985, when he worked as a community organizer. But his career got on its current course when he returned to Hyde Park in 1991 to practice law and teach constitutional law at the University of Chicago. Four years later, he met Ayers at a lunchtime meeting about school reform.

 

 

 

What do you know about Obama's relationship with Ayers? You probably don't know anything. You're just looking for reasons to not support Obama.

 

 

 

Before it was "Universal Health Care", we proved that Obama isn't bringing universal health care, and then it's something else. You're running out of options, and time...just like someone else we know.

 

 

 

How is he not bringing that? I'm not sure you proved it yet. Also, I probably know a lot more than you know. ;) I have my sources. But although, I don't expect you to trust me. But I ask this question: This whole debate is kinda trifling, seeing as a lot of us can't even vote. Either cause of ags, or cuase they live in a different country, so why continue it? Are we really changing peoples minds? And you also have to remember, politics is all opinion, just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them a moron, they just believe something else. And I'm sorry if I came off a bit harsh.

[walka92]

well, being australian and also under age, theres no way i can vote....but id vote for obama if i had the chance

[Deiophobus]

Saru, of course debating like this is useless in the long run, but it's still a good discussion. I've been reading the thread since page one, and learned new things about both candidates.

 

 

 

Almost all political arguments are useless. Both sides come in knowing full well that nothing that is said will change their mind, and both sides ignore the negatives about their candidate.

[J a m e s]

Almost all political arguments are useless. Both sides come in knowing full well that nothing that is said will change their mind, and both sides ignore the negatives about their candidate.

 

 

 

I strongly disagree. Many open-minded people will be persuaded by sound debate.

[dangeresque]

Even if Obama didn't have much to do with Ayers at all he still might not be able to view Classified documents because of his supposed association with him. Freaky, but true.

[Ginger_Warrior]

The only thing that has surprised me on US politics in the past two years (since Obama and Hillary both stated their intentions to run for presidency) is the level of anger against the Democrats in some parts of central America. A video was posted on the other topic about Palin showing her supporters going into a "riot", but it seems as though rallies like that aren't too rare.

 

 

 

What is it about Obama specifically that provokes such a huge sense of hostility in these people? It's not good enough to dismiss them as I usually would - as irrational lunatics. The education system in America cannot surely be so bad that that many people seemingly fail to understand logic. There must be a reason for that anger.

 

 

 

I really am interested in knowing what crawls up their bill so much. Aside from the generic "I don't think he's ready to be Commander-in-Chief" stuff, nothing I have heard from them makes a rational explanation for what is clearly such a deep-rooted feeling. Is it just closet racism; is it a blacklash because of the War on Terror or the Cold War; hatred against liberal ideology in general; or something else? Furthermore, why is this feeling only specific to these areas, and not America as a whole?

 

 

 

You can honestly picture these people sitting down on Conservapedia and nodding at every word it says.

[Deiophobus]

I was wondering the same thing Ginger, but I don't have an answer for you. I think a little of it is racism, but most of it is just how they were brought up. Brought up to think that America is the best country in the world, and that liberals will bring it down; brought up to think anyone different from them is bad. Seeing that video you mentioned, and other ones like it just infuriate me.

 

 

 

 

 

Also, I made another post here a few minutes ago, did it get deleted or something? It was responding to James saying that political debates will make people change their minds.

[Saru Inc]

The only thing that has surprised me on US politics in the past two years (since Obama and Hillary both stated their intentions to run for presidency) is the level of anger against the Democrats in some parts of central America. A video was posted on the other topic about Palin showing her supporters going into a "riot", but it seems as though rallies like that aren't too rare.

 

Umm, Obama does that a lot, actually, but the media is liberal, and so people in other countries, are 90% Democrat, only the knowledgeable and logical people vote Republican.

 

 

 

What is it about Obama specifically that provokes such a huge sense of hostility in these people? It's not good enough to dismiss them as I usually would - as irrational lunatics. The education system in America cannot surely be so bad that that many people seemingly fail to understand logic. There must be a reason for that anger.

 

One thing, is on a scale for 1-10, most Democrats are a 4, Obama is a 12. He's is SO liberal, people hate him. And what is this logic you're talking of? Obama hasn't shown any so far. He's a great politician, as in he knows what to say to get people to like him, certain people in the past, not to name names. But really, he's got awful ideas, and if you look at it LOGICALLY, you'll see his ideas aren't that good.

 

 

 

I really am interested in knowing what crawls up their bill so much. Aside from the generic "I don't think he's ready to be Commander-in-Chief" stuff, nothing I have heard from them makes a rational explanation for what is clearly such a deep-rooted feeling. Is it just closet racism; is it a blacklash because of the War on Terror or the Cold War; hatred against liberal ideology in general; or something else? Furthermore, why is this feeling only specific to these areas, and not America as a whole?

 

And please do not bring race into this, thats just an unintelligent statement, it really is. And actually, the education is pretty bad in America in SOME places, where I go it is better then the other countries.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You can honestly picture these people sitting down on Conservapedia and nodding at every word it says.

 

Good grief. I can honestly picture people like you reading Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto. And then realize that Obama got his whole platform from that. Well, maybe not to that extreme, but pretty close.

[baron8000]

 

Good grief. I can honestly picture people like you reading Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto. And then realize that Obama got his whole platform from that. Well, maybe not to that extreme, but pretty close.

 

 

 

PLEASE say you did not just compare Das Kapital with Obama's policy, thats like comparing a moderate right wing party to Mein Kampf, dear god. There is a little more to the political spectrum than communists and fascists.

 

 

 

Also, can people please stop throwing the word liberal around in a tone that suggests it is synonymous with "child molestor" or "serial genocidal maniac"? Liberal means nothing more than favouring individual liberty, free trade, and moderate reform. I'd also like to hear which policies of the democrat's that the republicans disagree with - so far I've heard nothing more than ad hominem and personal attacks (most of which are of questionable base)

 

 

 

Also, I don't understand the whole "liberalism results in downfall of nation" most of Europe has had more liberal governments than the US for years and have successfully avoided massive economic conflicts/useless wars/summoning the four horseman of the apocalypse. Can a republican the logical steps that result in this conclusion?

[Ginger_Warrior]

The only thing that has surprised me on US politics in the past two years (since Obama and Hillary both stated their intentions to run for presidency) is the level of anger against the Democrats in some parts of central America. A video was posted on the other topic about Palin showing her supporters going into a "riot", but it seems as though rallies like that aren't too rare.

 

Umm, Obama does that a lot, actually, but the media is liberal, and so people in other countries, are 90% Democrat, only the knowledgeable and logical people vote Republican.

 

You're epitomising that exact feeling I'm talking about.

 

 

 

If any criticism comes onto the Republicans, you reflect onto the Democrats and say "They're the same, so what?". Yet strangely, you go further to suggest that, despite being the same, only sensible people vote for your way of thinking, and degrade all else to the depths of stupidity.

 

 

 

That's not democracy. It's an ill-thought out fish slapping contest.

 

What is it about Obama specifically that provokes such a huge sense of hostility in these people? It's not good enough to dismiss them as I usually would - as irrational lunatics. The education system in America cannot surely be so bad that that many people seemingly fail to understand logic. There must be a reason for that anger.

 

One thing, is on a scale for 1-10, most Democrats are a 4, Obama is a 12. He's is SO liberal, people hate him. And what is this logic you're talking of? Obama hasn't shown any so far. He's a great politician, as in he knows what to say to get people to like him, certain people in the past, not to name names. But really, he's got awful ideas, and if you look at it LOGICALLY, you'll see his ideas aren't that good.

 

Well, firstly, if you're talking about liberalism on a global scale, the Democrats are about 3, and Obama's about 4. The Conservative party in the UK holds policies that would be regarded socialism in the US, and the Tories are by no means a liberal party. The Democratic Party really isn't as pseudo-socialist as you would like to make out.

 

 

 

The "logic" I'm referring to is that of Palin's supporters. That scientists across the world regard polar bears as endangered, but they place Palin's judgement above all those trained scientists. That pretty much everyone now accepts global warming is a man-made problem, but her supporters still believe it is the cause of divine intervention. That they talk about how she fought against corruption as though it's something they care passionately about, but turn a blind eye when a report implies Palin herself was involved in corruption.

 

 

 

Now, even if you remove Palin from the picture, her supporters seem to use inconceivably flawed logic in order to make their personal judgements. However, I don't believe that many people can be that misinformed. There must be another factor, something greater, in explaining why they feel the why they do than just simply blaming it on illogic and pinning them down as nutjobs.

 

 

 

I'm trying to look at the big picture here, rather than its small corner of this election.

 

You can honestly picture these people sitting down on Conservapedia and nodding at every word it says.

 

Good grief. I can honestly picture people like you reading Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto. And then realize that Obama got his whole platform from that. Well, maybe not to that extreme, but pretty close.

 

Have you ever actually read the Communist Manifesto?

 

 

 

Its ending line calls for the working classes of the world to unite against their bourgeois oppressors. Obama supports the middle classes, albeit alongside the working classes too. To say he bases his economic policies on Marxism is baffling to say the least.

[Lordjake]

Umm, Obama does that a lot, actually, but the media is liberal, and so people in other countries, are 90% Democrat, only the knowledgeable and logical people vote Republican.

 

 

are you serious? lol

[magekillr]

[hide=]

The only thing that has surprised me on US politics in the past two years (since Obama and Hillary both stated their intentions to run for presidency) is the level of anger against the Democrats in some parts of central America. A video was posted on the other topic about Palin showing her supporters going into a "riot", but it seems as though rallies like that aren't too rare.

 

 

 

What is it about Obama specifically that provokes such a huge sense of hostility in these people? It's not good enough to dismiss them as I usually would - as irrational lunatics. The education system in America cannot surely be so bad that that many people seemingly fail to understand logic. There must be a reason for that anger.

 

 

 

I really am interested in knowing what crawls up their bill so much. Aside from the generic "I don't think he's ready to be Commander-in-Chief" stuff, nothing I have heard from them makes a rational explanation for what is clearly such a deep-rooted feeling. Is it just closet racism; is it a blacklash because of the War on Terror or the Cold War; hatred against liberal ideology in general; or something else? Furthermore, why is this feeling only specific to these areas, and not America as a whole?

 

 

 

You can honestly picture these people sitting down on Conservapedia and nodding at every word it says.

[/hide]

 

 

 

It's just bigotry man. There is no other explanation. Hillary had a much more liberal health care plan, and they call Obama a socialist. Saruman is a perfect example. We've explained to him how Obama is not a socialist, and never proposed a socialist health care plan (although, he does support Universal Health care lol).

 

 

 

I'll give some examples here in Virginia. Mark Warner was a highly popular Democratic Governor. Without him, Virginia would still be a Republican state. However, people saw how much progress we made with education, and with the budget, that they overwhelmingly support him. He left office with a 70% approval rating. Obama is fairly close to Warner in professed political ideology, yet the people around here will not support Obama. Many people are voting for Warner in the Senate, and McCain in the General Election. They just don't "trust him", and that mistrust stems from his name, and his race. You can go through policy with them, and they have no other explanation except for, "I just don't know..." It's obviously just fear of blacks.

 

 

 

When I was registering voters last football game at Virginia Tech in the parking lot while people were tailgating, I had a man walk by going, "Obama is black." While canvassing at apartment complexes, I had people slam doors in my face with "I'd never vote for a N*" Another apartment I saw an American Flag waving on their porch, and I whispered to my fellow canvasser, "Don't get discouraged, but I have a feeling these people are going to laugh in our face, and call Obama racist things. It's just a hunch." Sure enough, they opened the door, we asked if they wanted to register to vote, they saw our Obama stickers, laughed, and said, "Obama? HA! Did you not see the American flag on the porch? Why would we vote for that unpatriotic n*?" *SLAM*

 

 

 

It's nothing more than fear and bigotry.

 

 

 

Oh, and here's a glimmer of hope for American Politics. It may be that Obama has done the impossible, or that Republican politics just aren't successful anymore...or a mix of both, but:

 

 

 

Falling behind in a sheaf of polls amid one of the nastiest campaigns in the country, Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.) announced today that he will unilaterally disarm: He will pull his negative advertising and urge his supporters to do the same.

 

 

 

At a St. Paul press conference, the onetime Democrat-turned-Republican sounded as though he was channeling Sen. Barack Obama, who has taken a strong lead in Minnesota polls. Coleman said he would change his tactics and his tone, traveling the state "to connect with people and let them know there's hope."

 

 

 

...Coleman told reporters that he would not be appearing at a planned rally with McCain this afternoon. Could it be McCain's sliding polling numbers in Minnesota? His attacks on Obama? Coleman said he needs the time to work on suspending his own negative ads.

 

 

 

"Today," he said, "people need hope and a more positive campaign is a start."

 

 

 

The American people are truly tired of it, they are the change that they have been waiting for just as Obama has professed, and what I've tried to get across to people who don't "buy it".

[Range_This11]

 

Oh, and here's a glimmer of hope for American Politics. It may be that Obama has done the impossible, or that Republican politics just aren't successful anymore...or a mix of both, but:

 

 

 

Falling behind in a sheaf of polls amid one of the nastiest campaigns in the country, Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.) announced today that he will unilaterally disarm: He will pull his negative advertising and urge his supporters to do the same.

 

 

 

At a St. Paul press conference, the onetime Democrat-turned-Republican sounded as though he was channeling Sen. Barack Obama, who has taken a strong lead in Minnesota polls. Coleman said he would change his tactics and his tone, traveling the state "to connect with people and let them know there's hope."

 

 

 

...Coleman told reporters that he would not be appearing at a planned rally with McCain this afternoon. Could it be McCain's sliding polling numbers in Minnesota? His attacks on Obama? Coleman said he needs the time to work on suspending his own negative ads.

 

 

 

"Today," he said, "people need hope and a more positive campaign is a start."

 

 

 

The American people are truly tired of it, they are the change that they have been waiting for just as Obama has professed, and what I've tried to get across to people who don't "buy it".

 

Yeah the Coleman vs Franken ads are completely ridiculous. I've been watching them slam each other since late May. Personally, Franken is better at it haha.

[Saru Inc]

The only thing that has surprised me on US politics in the past two years (since Obama and Hillary both stated their intentions to run for presidency) is the level of anger against the Democrats in some parts of central America. A video was posted on the other topic about Palin showing her supporters going into a "riot", but it seems as though rallies like that aren't too rare.

 

Umm, Obama does that a lot, actually, but the media is liberal, and so people in other countries, are 90% Democrat, only the knowledgeable and logical people vote Republican.

 

You're epitomising that exact feeling I'm talking about.

 

 

 

If any criticism comes onto the Republicans, you reflect onto the Democrats and say "They're the same, so what?". Yet strangely, you go further to suggest that, despite being the same, only sensible people vote for your way of thinking, and degrade all else to the depths of stupidity.

 

 

 

That's not democracy. It's an ill-thought out fish slapping contest.

 

 

 

So uhh, look at the bolded text, are you saying all Republicans are illogical?

 

What is it about Obama specifically that provokes such a huge sense of hostility in these people? It's not good enough to dismiss them as I usually would - as irrational lunatics. The education system in America cannot surely be so bad that that many people seemingly fail to understand logic. There must be a reason for that anger.

 

One thing, is on a scale for 1-10, most Democrats are a 4, Obama is a 12. He's is SO liberal, people hate him. And what is this logic you're talking of? Obama hasn't shown any so far. He's a great politician, as in he knows what to say to get people to like him, certain people in the past, not to name names. But really, he's got awful ideas, and if you look at it LOGICALLY, you'll see his ideas aren't that good.

 

Well, firstly, if you're talking about liberalism on a global scale, the Democrats are about 3, and Obama's about 4. The Conservative party in the UK holds policies that would be regarded socialism in the US, and the Tories are by no means a liberal party. The Democratic Party really isn't as pseudo-socialist as you would like to make out.

 

 

 

The "logic" I'm referring to is that of Palin's supporters. That scientists across the world regard polar bears as endangered, but they place Palin's judgement above all those trained scientists. That pretty much everyone now accepts global warming is a man-made problem, but her supporters still believe it is the cause of divine intervention. That they talk about how she fought against corruption as though it's something they care passionately about, but turn a blind eye when a report implies Palin herself was involved in corruption

.

 

First off, I didn't say the Democratic Party, I said Obama. ;) And also, do you really need to turn to the scape goat game and blame religion for everything? There are plenty of athiestic scientists who say Global Warming is a crock. And do you realize, you always ignore the scientists you don't agree with? And also, I'm not some republcian extremist, 98% of my friends are Democrats. I don't see anything wrong with the Democratic party, in the past I think the Democrats were a far better choice then the Republican candidates. FDR, for one. It's just, McCain is far right, and Obama is far left, which is why there is so much tormoil in this campaign.

 

 

 

Now, even if you remove Palin from the picture, her supporters seem to use inconceivably flawed logic in order to make their personal judgements. However, I don't believe that many people can be that misinformed. There must be another factor, something greater, in explaining why they feel the why they do than just simply blaming it on illogic and pinning them down as nutjobs.

 

 

 

I'm trying to look at the big picture here, rather than its small corner of this election.

 

You can honestly picture these people sitting down on Conservapedia and nodding at every word it says.

 

Good grief. I can honestly picture people like you reading Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto. And then realize that Obama got his whole platform from that. Well, maybe not to that extreme, but pretty close.

 

Have you ever actually read the Communist Manifesto?

 

 

 

Its ending line calls for the working classes of the world to unite against their bourgeois oppressors. Obama supports the middle classes, albeit alongside the working classes too. To say he bases his economic policies on Marxism is baffling to say the least.

 

 

 

And no, I wasn't serious, I tend to be sarcastic, and forget people can't tell online. :|

 

 

 

And Magekillr, thank-you for atacking the core of my being. :roll: So are you really un educated enough to think that anyone who doesn't agree with you is a bigot? Nice. Actually, I don't think you know anything about me, except that I'm a human, who used to play RS. Really, the race card is thrown because people don't know why people don't like Obama. Yet none of you can seem to fathom, that some people will always be Republican, and some will always be Democratic, no matter waht you say. And Magekillr, when people come to ym house to ask if I'll vote for Obama, I simply say "No, sorry I'm goin for McCain." And they say how I'm a racist and too stupid to understand why an old guy shouldn't be in office.And do you guys realize you're the ones doing the name game? I'm just playing along. And anyone remember a certain Alan Keyes? I was rooting for him, actually. It's funny how people only remember Obama, and not Keyes.

 

 

 

And if someone could "repost" that thing abiut his healthcare plan. (I'm serious, I'll re-read it, and re think about it.)

 

 

 

And even though this is getting really heated, just remember, anyone can be wrong. I mean, for all you guy know, Obama will be awful, and destroy America, and McCain woulda been better. Or vice versa, but eevn so, you guys have to realize that some people may not like Obama simply because he's a Democrat. And it has nothing to do with his race.

[jackattack]

Magekillr, that all evens out. For every one person who won't vote for him based on race there is one who vote for him just because of it. Maybe because you live in Virginia you see the opposite of what I do. Go to a black neighborhood and register people. You will probably get the exact opposite. Over here if I ask people why they are voting for Obama it's "Oh he inspires me with his message of hope!" and they have no other reasons. And basically every black person I ask except one is voting for him solely based on race. And by the way, when you are registering voters you are only registering people once right? Not 71 times like the group Obama is paying that is under investigations in nearly a dozen swing states. And Norm Coleman's got the right idea. It doesn't really matter about Ayers. Wright did but that's mostly over. What matters is that Obama will gut the economy. I honestly think I could do a better job of running McCain's campaign.

 

 

 

I fail to see how he flipped on campaign finance reform. He stated that he would work with the opponent to reach an agreement on public financing. Because the McCain campaign refused to do anything about the 527's, no agreement was reached.

 

 

 

I will agree to disagree, but I do not see a flip-flop here, especially when the sole purpose of public financing is to reform how candidates are funded, which he has done anyway.

 

 

 

 

 

He totally flipped. He's not doing anything about democratic 527's either. That's because candidates are not allowed to communicate with them. His other excuse for not taking it was that McCain and the RNC are "fueled" by money from Pac's and special interests which is a total lie when less than 2% of their total money is from them. No agreement was reached because Obama had a 3 to 1 advantage in cash. And I guess Obama really has reformed the way candidates are funded.

 

 

 

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=13981

 

http://www.newsmax.com/timmerman/Obama_ ... 35718.html

 

 

 

It was even in the New York Times but you have to register to get access.

 

 

 

So what does everyone think of the report finding that Palin abused her power when she fired Walter Monegan? I'm betting that they try to play this as being politically motivated.

 

 

 

It was politically motivated. The investigator was a democrat. And he didn't find that she abused her power by firing the guy. He found that she abused her power by not stopping her husband from trying to get the state trooper, who tazered his son and gets drunk on duty, fired. The report said that it was only part of the reason she fired Monegan.

 

 

 

Liberal means nothing more than favouring individual liberty, free trade, and moderate reform.

 

 

 

Funny you mention free trade. Obama is a protectionist. He's against the Colombian free trade agreement. That's stupid. Right now most of Colombia's stuff coming into the U.S. aren't taxed while American stuff going to Colombia is taxed at like 40%.

 

 

 

edit: Ya I fixed it now.

[1_man_army]

I'm not saying it was or wasn't politically motivated, I haven't read the report or know who's involved in the investigation (I've just seen news reports about it), all I was saying is that it's the obvious rebuttal to the allegations regardless if whether they're true or not.

 

 

 

and Jack, I think you've accidentally deleted your last quote...