2

10/30/2008 7:19:26 AM

OH SHIT! aaronburro is pissed!

10/30/2008 7:32:22 AM

Quote :

"I want to see The Obama Show every Wed. before The Daily Show."

it would be just as much of a joke, just like is presidency

[Edited on October 30, 2008 at 8:22 AM. Reason : ]

10/30/2008 8:22:41 AM

OH GOD

10/30/2008 8:30:20 AM

haha, nice edits aaronburro. It made me laugh. Let me Guess, you are Joe the Troller?

10/30/2008 8:52:43 AM

GOD I LOVE ELECTION TIME

PLEASE, GOD, EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE DEAD AS SHIT, MAKE IT GODDAMN 2009 ALREADY

[Edited on October 30, 2008 at 8:54 AM. Reason : asdfasaaaa]

10/30/2008 8:54:09 AM

Quote :

"The reality is that he went back on his word, and his only justification (that he needed extra money to counter 527 attack ads) was very weak considering the insignificance of 527's in this election cycle."

I don't believe that this is a fair assessment of the situation at hand. You state that it was a weak reason because 527s played such a small role this election cycle? That doesn't really make a lot of sense seeing how you can't tell how little of a role they are going to play until the election is almost over. Given what they laid down on Kerry he could only reasonably ascertain that he was going to get as much, if not worse, of that sort of treatment.

I agree he went back on his word. There isn't much one can say about that. but given what he'd actually have to deal with this campaign i think it was the right move. the are some people who do hold pre-existing biases and believe every internet rumor they get in a chain mail, so for every 1 dollar mccain could spend saying something negative that could reinforced those misconceptions obama would have to spend 10x to combat that. he was being realistic, but regardless of how realistic he was being and how justifiable his actions were, yes, he retreated from his word but this explainable act of hypocrisy is minor compared to the ones that have been perpetuated by the right during the past few years and mccain during this campaign. (e.g. mccain saying he would run a clean campaign when in fact all of his adds from july until october were negative ones often times composed of nothing but fallacy or his absolute 180 from being the man he was in 2000)

10/30/2008 9:52:41 AM

Quote :

"THE SPIN: "Here's what I'll do. Cut taxes for every working family making less than $200,000 a year. Give businesses a tax credit for every new employee that they hire right here in the U.S. over the next two years and eliminate tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas. Help homeowners who are making a good faith effort to pay their mortgages, by freezing foreclosures for 90 days. And just like after 9-11, we'll provide low-cost loans to help small businesses pay their workers and keep their doors open. " THE FACTS: His proposals -- the tax cuts, the low-cost loans, the $15 billion a year he promises for alternative energy, and more -- cost money, and the country could be facing a record $1 trillion deficit next year. Indeed, Obama recently acknowledged -- although not in his commercial -- that: "The next president will have to scale back his agenda and some of his proposals.""

Yeah, thats just what we need. Feel free to check the link, more goodies there.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/29/ap-fact-check-obama-ad-avoids-budget-realities/

10/30/2008 10:13:52 AM

^ that's pretty funny, actually.... and clever on Fox's part. They take what the candidate says and label it as "SPIN", then they put their actual spin on it, without actually addressing the points that Obama was talking about, and label that as "FACT".
nicely done, guys..... really.

10/30/2008 10:22:37 AM

well i guess that is what they mean by a "no spin" zone.

take a + spin, and then counter it with a -

10/30/2008 10:26:06 AM

^&^^way to even check it out. Yes its on Fox's website, but its an AP ARTICLE that they just posted. So take your shit up with the Associated Press

10/30/2008 10:32:25 AM

Quote :

"I agree he went back on his word. There isn't much one can say about that."

What? Don't concede that to point these assholes. Obama never promised to take on public campaign financing. This is another outright lie. What did say is he would "aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election".

And he did pursue it. They did hold a meeting. No agreement was reached, and Obama decided to forget it. He never went back on his word, nor did he break any promise. It's more bullshit from the right. Also, don't give me this "he bought the presidency" bullshit. McCain has a 24/7 cable news network campaigning for him 7 days a week. That more or less evens things out.

[Edited on October 30, 2008 at 10:35 AM. Reason : :]

10/30/2008 10:33:54 AM

a presidential candidate talks about doing many things during a campaign, then has to make tradeoffs during budget negotiations with Congress?

OMG THIS HAS NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE.









this, truly, changes everything

there go the double digit leads

10/30/2008 10:49:11 AM

Obama backed away from public financing because McCain let slip that he would not control the 527's and at the time there was a massive ground swell of that happening. Obama had said that he wouldn't support 527's, but that made things pretty uneven because of how bad he would about to be swift boated by an endless and unregulated set of groups. Without the money to counter that, Obama would have been toast and you know it.

Besides, Obama's massive fundraising machine--which thrives on small checks from millions of individual donors and rejects money from lobbyists and PACs deserves a shit ton of praise. Point to point it the most democratic in American political history.

So stop whining for fuck's sake.

10/30/2008 10:51:05 AM

Quote :

"Indeed, Obama recently acknowledged -- although not in his commercial -- that: "The next president will have to scale back his agenda and some of his proposals."

Both candidates have said they'll need to roll back their plans.

Does that mean they're lying every time they propose a plan? Will everything be rolled back?

10/30/2008 10:51:34 AM

^^^^ Wow, way to be a partisan douche-bag.

http://www.commoncause.org/atf/cf/%7Bfb3c17e2-cdd1-4df6-92be-bd4429893665%7D/MDNNATIONALRELEASE.PDF

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/06/obama-to-break.html

Call a spade a spade. Obama answered "yes" to a specific question about publicly-financed campaigns. He signed his name on that paper. And he justified his response with a promise to "aggressively pursue an agreement" on public financing. Then he broke his promise and opted out because it benefited him politically.

there is no other way to view it unless you're a hack. Does it mean that he's a pathological liar? No. But it does mean that he's just another politician. Have the courage to call out a candidate regardless of political affiliation. And give me a fucking break about the 527's. They played NO ROLE in this election. Much, much more money was spent by groups on the left in attacking McCain.

[Edited on October 30, 2008 at 10:57 AM. Reason : 2]

10/30/2008 10:55:26 AM

so... that's the entire sum of your argument against obama?

that when he was a virtual unknown, he agreed to public finance, then several months later when he exploded into an unexpected and unprecedented fundraising machine DRIVEN ALMOST ENTIRELY BY INDIVIDUAL DONATIONS OF $100 AND LESS

...that this somehow makes him incorrigible and unfit to lead



what a joke. i'm going to go donate $25 to his campaign, right now, in your name.

do you want me to put your real name and address, or just "Prawn Star, c/o thewolfweb.com"






[Edited on October 30, 2008 at 11:00 AM. Reason : ]

10/30/2008 10:58:45 AM

its easy for obama worshipers to justify every single thing he's ever done...every lie...every association with anti americans and terrorists...everything

and now watch, they'll start replying how nobody worships him and then they'll attack me personally...destroy the credibility of anyone who dares question this holy lord...oh you dont like him? you're a racist...oh no, guilt by association only works when people donate money to exxon, not when they get indoctrinated for 20 years by a racist preacher...mccain? yeah he's 100% the same as george bush

10/30/2008 11:00:33 AM

you are SO irrelevant

10/30/2008 11:01:11 AM

When did I ever say that he was unfit to lead?

Get with the program schmoe, I've been saying for like a month now that I was gonna vote for him, and I did so on Tuesday. I just think it's important to recognize the flaws in any candidate rather than blindly accept them.

Obama's move on campaign finance reeks of hypocrisy, and it's very interesting that it didn't get more media attention. Hopefully it's a 1-time thing and not a sign of his character.

10/30/2008 11:02:16 AM

schmoe will never get with the program...he's too busy hating white people and southerners...he's too busy choosing his friends carefully...from the chicanos, to the marxist professors, to the structural feminists whatever the fuck that means

10/30/2008 11:03:34 AM

okay, Prawn Star, my bad.

i re-read your criticism after i posted, saw that my response was disproportionate, but by then it was too late to edit.

i guess i dont think his switch on the public money issue for campaign is a big deal.

for one, even as a "progressive", i have a problem with public funding of campaigns. not to mention that it's just not realistic any more.

for two, if he would have ignored the his unprecedented fundraising ability from individual donors, and instead opted to take taxpayer money... that would have been the most FINANCIALLY STUPID thing he could have possibly done.

if he cant recognize the value of that, then his ability to lead would have been in question. his very sanity would have been in question.

10/30/2008 11:08:59 AM

Quote :

"Call a spade a spade. Obama answered "yes" to a specific question about publicly-financed campaigns. He signed his name on that paper. And he justified his response with a promise to "aggressively pursue an agreement" on public financing. Then he broke his promise and opted out because it benefited him politically."

Obama decided to bail out of public campaign financing because he realized he could make waaaaaaaaaaaaay more money on his own. That was the reason, nothing more and nothing less. There, happy?

However, he didn't lie, or break any promise. Saying he would "aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election" is not the same as "I promise to use the public campaign financing system" . Saying he went back on his word is nothing but a distortion and sour grapes.

10/30/2008 11:19:42 AM

once again citing that the 527s played a small role in this election isn't really relevant. it was a safe bet at the beginning that they would play a heavier role than they had before. there would be no way, on the front end, to gauge what role they would play.

combating his actions with that statement in this point of the game would be like me asking you for a loan only to later get mad at you because you originally said you couldn't because you have save up in order to pay 10,000 for heart surgery, but later find out its a false diagnosis and those savings won't have to go towards that.

10/30/2008 11:24:07 AM

Obama is, in fact, a spade

10/30/2008 11:24:32 AM

Quote :

"Obama decided to bail out of public campaign financing because he realized he could make waaaaaaaaaaaaay more money on his own. That was the reason, nothing more and nothing less. There, happy? However, he didn't lie, or break any promise. Saying he would "aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election" is not the same as "I promise to use the public campaign financing system" . Saying he went back on his word is nothing but a distortion and sour grapes."

Since when do the political parties keep promises to each other anyway?

I mean if this is the worst thing they can mention that he did there must not be much there.

10/30/2008 11:34:14 AM

^^ dont you got a *real* fight you should be preparing for?






[Edited on October 30, 2008 at 11:34 AM. Reason : ^]

10/30/2008 11:34:14 AM

Quote :

"So? He flat out lied about it. "

My understand is that Obama "promise" to pursue public financing was a survey that he filled out for a magazine artcile on the potential candidates and most candidates did not even return the survey.

Is this not correct?

10/30/2008 11:42:28 AM

I'm not sure what the questionnaire was exactly but the fact remains that he touted the benefits of public financing only until he realized he cold make more money by opting out. Here is the link again:

http://www.commoncause.org/atf/cf/%7Bfb3c17e2-cdd1-4df6-92be-bd4429893665%7D/MDNNATIONALRELEASE.PDF

Quote :

"However, he didn't lie, or break any promise. Saying he would "aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election" is not the same as "I promise to use the public campaign financing system" . Saying he went back on his word is nothing but a distortion and sour grapes."

What constitutes a promise to you? The paper asked him point blank if he would opt into public financing, and he said yes. Did he have to say, "I promise" in order to make it a promise? Last time I checked, when I say that I'm gonna do something, it's pretty much a promise that I'll do it.

[Edited on October 30, 2008 at 11:47 AM. Reason : 2]

10/30/2008 11:45:16 AM

goddamn.

for one, he never "promised" anything. all he did was change his mind when the reality on the ground CHANGED

for two, WHY do you even care about this? its a non-issue.





[Edited on October 30, 2008 at 11:51 AM. Reason : ]

10/30/2008 11:46:42 AM

At this point I'm just defending my original statement, that he went back on his word and it's at least a bit disturbing to me.

10/30/2008 11:48:47 AM

okay. im sorry you're disturbed.

but I would be disturbed if he ignored the reality of his unprecendented fundrainsing ability, and instead held fast to some checkbox he indicated on a Readers' Digest survay

millions and millions of individual donations >>>>> soaking up taxpayer money.

10/30/2008 11:50:40 AM

Quote :

"he went back on his word"

Yeah, sure.

Quote :

"and it's at least a bit disturbing to me"

Really, though? On the political shadiness-o-meter, this hardly registers

10/30/2008 11:51:06 AM

OK my last post on the matter. I'll let former Democratic Senator Bob Kerrey state the case I'm making:

Quote :

" DEMS' CAMPAIGN-FINANCE HYPOCRISY By Bob Kerrey ON the question of public funding of presidential campaigns, we Democrats who strongly support Sen. Barack Obama's candidacy and who previously supported limits on campaign spending and who haven't objected to Obama's opting out of the presidential funding system face an awkward fact: Either we are hypocrites, or we were wrong to support such limitations in the first place. The next time we speak of the virtue of level playing fields or state our strong belief that democracy can't survive in the modern age unless big money is taken out of campaigns, we'll be counting on our audience's forgetting our silence this year, when the free market was flowing in our direction. A hypocrite is a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue - who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings. And that, it seems to me, is what we're doing now. Former Sen. Wendell Ford once gave me good advice about public issues and votes: "If it takes you more than 10 minutes to explain why you voted a particular way, you probably voted wrong." It would take me a lot longer than those 10 minutes to explain why I'm not outraged by Obama's decision to opt out of funding - which has given him a decisive spending advantage over Sen. John McCain. Actually, I could keep my answer under 10 minutes if I were willing to answer that it's now to my advantage to act in contradiction to my previously stated beliefs. All I would need to say is that, on the issue of public funding in 2008, I was a hyprocrite. Of course, there's another option: Admit I was wrong on such limitations in the first place. And that's exactly what I'm likely to do. For the facts in evidence seem to make the case that this presidential campaign is the most exciting, most closely watched and most expensive in my lifetime. That is, there seems to be no correlation between the amount of money spent and disillusionment among the voters. Indeed, the contrary appears to be true. The argument that money is corrupting our democratic system is as old as our first election. And it is an argument usually made by liberals, who have proposed various interventions in the marketplace of political ideas. The bedrock federal law here was enacted in 1971 and has been challenged time and again by individuals and groups who view such limits as a violation of the First Amendment. On each of the several occasions when the Supreme Court has ruled against the law, Congress came back with further modifications to the statute. The most recent effort was in 2002, when Sen. McCain led a bipartisan effort to "clean up the system." Last year, the high court overturned the key provision of that law, which restricted individuals and groups from engaging in issue campaigns. There is great irony here, since the key vote in that 5-4 decision was Justice Sam Alito - just the kind of "nonactivist" judge that Sen. McCain has promised to nominate. So maybe I was simply wrong about placing limits on spending and providing public monies in exchange for adhering to these limits. Of course, it's possible that I'm making a virtue out of a necessity - since my candidate is now winning in part because, by opting out of the system, he has more money to spend. In the short term, I'm sad to report that hypocrite is a more accurate label. In the long term, perhaps this will be the moment that causes me to change my views. It certainly feels better than remaining a hypocrite forever. Bob Kerrey, president of the New School, served as a US senator and governor of Nebraska. "

10/30/2008 12:11:33 PM

Quote :

"but I would be disturbed if he ignored the reality"

After 8 years of that, I'm tired of it.

10/30/2008 12:13:32 PM

Quote :

"McCain has a 24/7 cable news network campaigning for him 7 days a week. That more or less evens things out."

Please pull your head out of your ass.

10/30/2008 12:25:51 PM

obama has every other news network, not limited to cable, campaigning for him 24/7


fair? i think not

10/30/2008 12:27:30 PM

He actually has his own channel on Dish Network!

10/30/2008 12:29:49 PM

It comes in HD too

10/30/2008 12:36:52 PM

my candidate's opponent had extraordinarily more financial support and spent his campaign money well

10/30/2008 12:43:14 PM

Quote :

"I am not perfect man and I will not make a perfect President"

- Barack Obama -

So basically he's admitting that he will make mistakes

[Edited on October 30, 2008 at 1:28 PM. Reason : ./]

10/30/2008 1:25:33 PM

its insane not to. no one has the perfect presidency and everyone makes mistakes.

10/30/2008 1:44:10 PM

I'm never going to make any mistakes for as long as I live.

10/30/2008 1:51:04 PM

^^^lol what

do you never make mistakes? are you perfect?

I mean, if he says he's perfect, he's an elitist.

If he says he isn't perfect, he is "admitting he'll make mistakes."

What the fuck?

[Edited on October 30, 2008 at 1:51 PM. Reason : ]

10/30/2008 1:51:34 PM

the right has lost all sense of objectivity. they are slowly devolving to rabid mindless attack dogs.

10/30/2008 1:54:01 PM

HAHAHA...damn i got you guys. God, seriously I LOL'd big time. I love this place!!

Go Obama/Biden, Hagen, McCory!!

[Edited on October 30, 2008 at 1:58 PM. Reason : whooot!]

10/30/2008 1:57:19 PM

its mcrory, and hes a republican.

when you're attempting to make such a fine display of weak-minded wit, it at least helps if you use correct information in it because otherwise your poorly constructed recourse actually demonstrates your ignorance.

[Edited on October 30, 2008 at 2:04 PM. Reason : .]

10/30/2008 2:02:52 PM

I missed it.

10/30/2008 2:12:25 PM

ooops...sorry for spelling Mcory wrong, and I know he's republican. I don't vote straight ticket.

10/30/2008 2:14:51 PM

I assumed that your previous comment was sarcasm and in such tone you were saying "these candidates ftw" that may have been my misunderstanding.

so you are/did vote for barack obama and those listed above?

10/30/2008 2:21:24 PM