Next President of the United States

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Digital_Trucker

OK, so when some lef-wing nut job supports Obama, you can't judge the candidate by who supports them, but when a bunch of right-wing nut-jobs support McCain, it's evidence that the republican party is inciting a racial war

This is certainly a peculiarity of the political spectrum. I, too have noted that, in generalities, a right-leaning individual with reprehensible views is labeled as an 'extremist'. This, of course, is fine and acceptable, as the person is indeed extreme in his or her views, and, thus, is outside of what would be considered socially acceptable. What is different is that a left-leaning individual with no less reprehensible views is frequently labeled an 'activist'. In-so-far as this goes, there seems a double standard.

[Digital_Trucker]

Originally Posted by Mikhayl

You're forgetting that McCain paid for nasty adds that were precisely aimed at getting the support of this part of the voters, let alone Palin's speeches.

So, you're saying that McCain and Palin's speeches are racist? I'll grant you that many of the speeches and ads are basic, good old boy, political mud-slinging, but the only racist remarks I've seen made by any of the candidates were made by Obamas running mate.

Edit : And you forget that all politicians will aim to get the support of whoever they can get. Obama's speeches tend to attract the left (no matter how radical), McCain's attract the right (no matter how radical). Isn't that how it's supposed to work?

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

This is certainly a peculiarity of the political spectrum. I, too have noted that, in generalities, a right-leaning individual with reprehensible views is labeled as an 'extremist'. This, of course, is fine and acceptable, as the person is indeed extreme in his or her views, and, thus, is outside of what would be considered socially acceptable. What is different is that a left-leaning individual with no less reprehensible views is frequently labeled an 'activist'. In-so-far as this goes, there seems a double standard.

Definitely true. Yet both sides will complain about double standards. Politics is illogical enough to make Mr. Spock go mad.

[Konovalov]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

This is certainly a peculiarity of the political spectrum. I, too have noted that, in generalities, a right-leaning individual with reprehensible views is labeled as an 'extremist'. This, of course, is fine and acceptable, as the person is indeed extreme in his or her views, and, thus, is outside of what would be considered socially acceptable. What is different is that a left-leaning individual with no less reprehensible views is frequently labeled an 'activist'. In-so-far as this goes, there seems a double standard.

Yep a double standard.

[Konovalov]

Originally Posted by Digital_Trucker

Politics is illogical enough to make Mr. Spock go mad.

I like that line.

[KampfSchwimmer]

I'm military..........so republican for me

[Skybird]

Palin's breathtaking yet dangerous naivete:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...583918,00.html

Sarah Palin's naivete -- or maybe it is downright bad faith -- is breathtaking. With nary a clue about recent American history, Palin has been inciting crowds to outbursts of hateful and threatening language. (...)
On Saturday, Represenative John Lewis, one of the heroes of the civil rights movement, made the comparison himself. Lewis, now a congressman from Atlanta, took the McCain-Palin campaign severely to task for "sowing the seeds of hatred and division." He said: "George Wallace never threw a bomb. He never fired a gun, but he created the climate and the conditions that encouraged vicious attacks against innocent Americans who were simply trying to exercise their constitutional rights. Because of this atmosphere of hate, four little girls were killed on a Sunday morning (in 1963) when a church was bombed in Birmingham, Alabama."
(...) And cut it out with the cheap shots, Sarah. An atmosphere of character assassination and cultural clash helps no one.

You want to know why Nazism became attractive for a parts of Austrian and German population back then? It started with rethoric hijacking of minds like Palin does, and McCain allows, and his campaign attempts. I wouldn't have expected McCain to fall that deep, but better rip off the mask late, than never.

[Tchocky]

I'm not sure if the actions are as malevolent as you think, Skybird. I believe that McCain/palin just aren't applying as much thought to their actions as the severity of the situation demands.
This is how you go negative in American politics, post-Rove.

It's plain to seee that there are a lot of nut-jobs who support McCain-Palin. That's true for both sides. What's different about this month, then?

Well, first off they keep mentioning Obama as "palling around with terrorists". In the current climate, the word "terrorist" does not mean a left-wing has-been from the 1970's. It means Osama bin Laden. The crowds at McCain/Palin events are making this connection. Notice how some of them scream "terrorist!" when Obama is mentioned, and boo MCCain when he tries (but so halfheartedly) to say that Obama is a decent man.
So some members of the crowd have made the connection Obama-Osama.


Ask any American. Ask anyone. What do we do to people like Osama bin Laden?

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archi...0/1529529.aspx

I wonder how much thought they put into this attack line.

[Von Tonner]

Palin has been deputed to play it the most crudely:

Obama “launched his political career in the living room of a domestic terrorist.” He is “palling around with terrorists” (note the plural noun). Obama is “not a man who sees America the way you and I see America.” Wielding a wildly out-of-context Obama quote, Palin slurs him as an enemy of American troops.
By the time McCain asks the crowd “Who is the real Barack Obama?” it’s no surprise that someone cries out “Terrorist!” The rhetorical conflation of Obama with terrorism is complete. It is stoked further by the repeated invocation of Obama’s middle name by surrogates introducing McCain and Palin at these rallies.

This sleight of hand at once synchronizes with the poisonous Obama-is-a-Muslim e-mail blasts and shifts the brand of terrorism from Ayers’s Vietnam-era variety to the radical Islamic threats of today.
That’s a far cry from simply accusing Obama of being a guilty-by-association radical leftist.

Attacking Obama for his toleration of Bill Ayers is legitimate. Attacking him for not dissociating himself from Jeremiah Wright earlier is legitimate. Attacking him for raising taxes is fine. But associating him with "terrorists" in the context of large, angry crowds isn't. Calling him a traitor and someone who seeks to put US troops in harm's way in an emotionally fraught time isn't. Not immediately and strongly rebuking crowd cries of "terrorist," "kill him!" and "treason" isn't.

McCain must loudly and clearly disown and disavow this rhetoric soon. Or we all may live to regret it more deeply than we can currently imagine.

I would only ad that McCain needs to forcefully come down on Palin for her attempts at demonizing Obama - it is doing no ones cause any good. All it does is raise the anger on both sides of the fence

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

I'm not sure if the actions are as malevolent as you think, Skybird.

It is an American who wrote the essay I linked, Tchocky. On my part, I principally see the possibility in every Western society that extremists like the Nazis in the Third Reich could make peopl letting them come to power. It is only a question of the right manipulation. And indeed I see the campaign McCain as having brought down self-restraints and limitations that before have to varying degrees safeguarded against this. It is for no reason that McCain has so drmaatically lost in my sympathy scheme. Two and three years ago you can find postings were I said that I could find a republican president McCain eventually as an acceptable compromise I could lvie with. well - no more. I don't trust him for his double-style, and I do not respect him a bit anymore.

[Digital_Trucker]

Comparing Sarah Palin to George Wallace? I'm speechless. Evidently so is Mr Lewis:

Later Saturday, Lewis issued a statement saying a careful review of his remarks "would reveal that I did not compare Sen. John McCain or Gov. Sarah Palin to George Wallace."
"My statement was a reminder to all Americans that toxic language can lead to destructive behavior," Lewis said. "I am glad that Sen. McCain has taken some steps to correct divisive speech at his rallies. I believe we need to return to civil discourse in this election about the pressing economic issues that are affecting our nation."

from http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/...wis/index.html

Evidently Mr. Lewis wasn't comparing the two, he just kinda mentioned George Wallace for the heck of it. Then commended the man he was just railing against for toning it down.

This race baiting is a tactic that is just as (if not more) inflamatory as any rhetoric by the candidates regarding their opponents.

[Frame57]

BO's economic policies will be nothing more than "Trickle up poverty".

[Digital_Trucker]

Originally Posted by Frame57

BO's economic policies will be nothing more than "Trickle up poverty".

I'd laugh if it wasn't so true.

[August]

Penn and Tellers take on the Obama economic plan.



NSFW - language (rude version of bovine feces)

[Digital_Trucker]

Originally Posted by August

Penn and Tellers take on the Obama economic plan.



NSFW - language (rude version of bovine feces)

Good to see entertainers with some sense about them.

[August]

You've seen the candidates debate the issues and make their speeches. Now see them do stand-up comedy at the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner:

McCain


Obama part 1


Obama Part 2


Personally I think McCain won this "debate" but both are hilarious.