| 0 |
Subject: If you are not for McCain you are not a Moderate
Posted by: Jag
- [171592622] Sat, Mar 01, 2008, 04:39
More and more, I am hearing that Obama has one of the most Liberal records in Congress and McCain is the only candidate to reach out to the other side, so if we truly want both parties to work together, there can only be one man up for the job.
This Presidental election will show 'beyond dispute' who the true Moderates are. |
| Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well. |
| 64 | Perm Dude
ID: 6253135 Thu, Mar 13, 2008, 21:56
|
The passage in his book where he speaks of the sermon in question.
Disgusting, indeed.
I love a lot of people who love people I don't like at all--hate, even. I think most people are grown up enough to know that you don't take on all the attributes of your supporters. Even your pastor. The question is: Is Barrack Obama's stances on the issues in question the exact same as his pastor's? If the answer is "no" then you have to believe Obama has the ability to discern, from different viewpoints, a middle path toward reasonableness.
One of my best friends (until he passed away) was a far right kook when it came to politics. But we would constantly use each other as a sounding board. He made me think, frankly, and I didn't always agree with him but I respected his approach. Does this make me a kook?
|
| 65 | Myboyjack
ID: 8216923 Thu, Mar 13, 2008, 22:04
|
The question for me is: How did Obama get so closely affiliated with a man who hates whitey and gives awards to anti-Semites for "speaking truth".
A lot of people do and say things which I like and support. Some of those people are racist and nutjobs. Those, I keep at arms length.
|
| 66 | Perm Dude
ID: 6253135 Thu, Mar 13, 2008, 22:10
|
Where do you get "hates whitey?" There is nothing wrong with a black church approaching their religion from their own perspective. This doesn't mean that they hate whites. In fact, this white guy found himself to be "enthusiastically welcomed."
|
| 67 | Perm Dude
ID: 6253135 Thu, Mar 13, 2008, 22:13
|
BTW, I agree with a lot of people that this is an issue that needs clarifying. His pastor is obviously espousing ideas which won't resonate very well with non-blacks, and Obama needs to clarify things.
|
| 68 | Myboyjack
ID: 8216923 Thu, Mar 13, 2008, 22:21
|
PD - I'm assuming that when he calls upon God to damn America for "gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law", that he is talking about white America doing the "giving" and that "them" is blacks. I'm assuming that he means what he says in his support for Farakhan's truth that white people are of Satan. Nice thing about the old bat is he honest, all someone would have to do is ask him; the Tribne story I linked to from last year didn't bother while slathering him with praise.
McCain seems to be afraid that Obama is taking a big lead in the nutty "spiritual advisor" angle; however, he'll he'll never catch Obama. McCain's guy just stood on stage with him once; Wright married Barack and Michelle.
|
| 69 | Myboyjack
ID: 8216923 Thu, Mar 13, 2008, 22:23
|
His pastor is obviously espousing ideas which won't resonate very well with non-blacks, and Obama needs to clarify things.
Please. The "chickens came home to roost on 09/11" and God Damn [White] America" crap doesn't resonate well with any of the people I know, regardless of race.
|
| 71 | Mattinglyinthehall Leader
ID: 01629107 Thu, Mar 13, 2008, 22:29
|
You don't think that the insane views of the man Obama says is a "moral compass" are relevant to who I should vote for in the Democratic primary? You're the one who started this whole line in the first place with the Hagge nutcase aren't you?
I've never so much as passively implied that McCain's association with Hagee might suggest that he harbors similar opinions and objectives as the preacher. I wanted to know why McCain hadn't been put on the spot over Hagee (it was pointed out that he had) and point out the stark flipflop from McCain's previous statements against people who were not nearly so extreme as Hagee.
-----
I've had people whom I've looked up to as "moral compases" over the years. One good example is my grandmother. She got through to me in ways that other adults couldn't and I learned plenty of great life lessons from her.
Grandma also felt very strongly that minorities are just a lower class of people than whites.
Does this throw my moral character into question for you? Well rest assured, from an early age in my childhood I realized that as wonderful a person as Grandma was and as much as I valued and trusted in her wisdom on most things, there were some things she didn't quite grasp.
Can anyone honestly say that the people they depend on most for moral advice are consistant authorities on all issues?
From the provided excerpts and from what I've read and gather about Obama, I'd guess he depends on Wright for support on certain things. I think it likely that Wright helps him stay grounded in certain values. And while a good deal of Wright's message (be it his public messag eor his personal message to Obama) may be different from or even contradictory to those values, I also believe Obama is likely grown up enough to seperate out the part of the message that he finds moralor virtuous or whatever.
Honestly, MBJ, would you be "getting disgusted" if Obama were instead a follower of someone like the late Jerry Falwell?
|
| 72 | Perm Dude
ID: 6253135 Thu, Mar 13, 2008, 22:30
|
I dunno, MBJ. I'm not saying it is particularly attractive speech. But are you saying Obama espouses this himself? In any way? In the many, many, many speeches Obama's given, are you of the belief that he is of the "Damn America" crowd?
Wright uses inflamatory rhetoric. But he's not running for President. I think Wright's influence on Obama is a good question. But if Wright is such a kook, and we see none of that kookiness in the many opportunities to examine Obama, what is the point then?
|
| 73 | Tree
ID: 442541318 Thu, Mar 13, 2008, 22:32
|
I think the right wing of this country is having a hard time finding something negative to stick on Obama, so they'll go after people he has associated with, and work that angle.
desperate times call for desperate measures...
|
| 74 | Mattinglyinthehall Leader
ID: 01629107 Thu, Mar 13, 2008, 22:33
|
"Closet kook". Probably has a better chance to stick than "closet terrorist", at least with the HS education and above crowd.
|
| 75 | Myboyjack
ID: 8216923 Thu, Mar 13, 2008, 22:41
|
Honestly, MBJ, would you be "getting disgusted" if Obama were instead a follower of someone like the late Jerry Falwell? ?
Absolutely. Why would you think otherwise.
Your Grandma, MITH? How 'bout someone you chose to associate with.
I dunno, MBJ. I'm not saying it is particularly attractive speech. But are you saying Obama espouses this himself? In any way? In the many, many, many speeches Obama's given, are you of the belief that he is of the "Damn America" crowd?
His wife's mouth and pen certainly haven't given any concerns one might have about these things any easy rest.
Obviously, one can associate with all sorts of people, love them and not be of one mind with them; those associations do often raise concerns though. You guys are commited to dismissing them with a wave; I still have to decide whom to vote for.
I'll never get a president who I'm even close to idealogically; I accept that. I would like to think that my president, at a minimum, is smart, wise and loves his country and its people the way I do. Obama's long-term association with Wright calls all 3 of those criteria into question for me.
|
| 76 | Perm Dude
ID: 6253135 Thu, Mar 13, 2008, 22:45
|
Well, at least your call allow that, as a Protestant, he's probably much freer to disagree with his pastor and still remain at his church.
:)
I've never seen any indications, in the many words of Obama'a I've read and heard, that he doesn't have each of those three qualities.
|
| 77 | Seattle Zen
ID: 529121611 Thu, Mar 13, 2008, 22:49
|
I think the right wing of this country is having a hard time finding something negative to stick on Obama, so they'll go after people he has associated with, and work that angle.
desperate times call for desperate measures...
I don't agree with that. I think MBJ is onto something and I think Sen. Obama will distance himself from this reverend. I don't foresee him becoming a speech writer for the campaign, but I also imagine that the Senator will still occasionally talk to him, quietly...
|
| 78 | Myboyjack
ID: 8216923 Thu, Mar 13, 2008, 22:49
|
I think the right wing of this country is having a hard time finding something negative to stick on Obama, so they'll go after people he has associated with, and work that angle.
That's pretty weak considering that we're having this conversation in this thread because of questions about people who merely endorsed McCain.
|
| 79 | Mattinglyinthehall Leader
ID: 01629107 Thu, Mar 13, 2008, 23:47
|
Really I'm much more concerned with the man than I am his supposed influences, much less trying to determine exactly what advice he seeks from different people in his personal life. As long as he publlicly distinguishes himself from Wright's controversal statement, I think you're blowing up a nonissue.
And obviously Obama is quite aware that much of what Write opines is extreme and he hasn't been afraid to seperate himself from it. Interesting that you prefer to rely on statements (some of dubious contex) cherrypicked from fluff pieces about Obama's church.
I think different people take different kinds of things from their faith. For some, the religious community is an extension of one's family that they might even be born into. I don't recall how Obama came to join that church. Wouldn't be surpprised if it was for political connections but is there any chance it's his wife's church? Anyway, for others, the uplifting experience of the service might be more important than the specific message.
You insist this relationship is a sign that Obama might not be very wise or very smart or might not really love America. If you were already hoping to find something to dislike, I guess it might be easy for you to see it that way.
And you say you'd also be disgusted if Obama were similarly close with Falwell, instead. So maybe you'd also question the wisdom, intelligence and love of country of a politician who was close with Falwell but also publicly seperated himself from his more controversal opinions. I wouldn't.
|
| 80 | Perm Dude
ID: 6253135 Fri, Mar 14, 2008, 00:37
|
#78: Hagee's endorsement was more than merely an endorsement. McCain sought it out, then appeared with the guy.
Here's a decent piece on the Rev Wright and Sen Obama which is far too nuanced for the FOX News crowd but there you go. The generational thing I think is something worth considering, just as Obama is "post-racial" when it comes to his politics.
|
| 81 | Mattinglyinthehall Leader
ID: 01629107 Fri, Mar 14, 2008, 09:26
|
From PD's link in #80:I find myself empathizing with Obama, and admiring his instincts. He doesn't want to denounce a man who played a crucial role in his own life, who was a friend and a mentor when he needed one, just because it's now expedient to do so. He understands that Rev. Wright hails from a different generation (what, in another context, he labeled the Moses Generation) and Obama's entire candidacy is premised on the notion that that generation's day has passed, that it is now time for the next generation to take the reins of leadership, to transcend the divisiveness of earlier battles, to move us forward to a better future without neglecting the sacrifices of the past. I'm even sympathetic to the problem of a controversial spiritual leader. Who among us attends religious services with regularity, and hasn't squirmed in the pew from time to time, as the pastor or preacher or reverend or rabbi gives voice to a thought with which we adamantly disagree? Perhaps even a thought that is politicized or prejudiced? Or hasn't had an elderly relative do the same?
That's why I've always moved the scurrilous, conspiratorial e-mails to the trash bin on my computer. I was content to know that Obama was attracted to Reverend Wright and his church for the "cultural community" that they embodied; for their recognition that not just material interests, but also "hopes and dreams and...ideals and...values" motivate actions; and yes, for their Christian faith. If there's a single theme to Obama's intellectual achievements, it's been his ability to sieze upon powerful words and themes, lifting them out of their original context and reframing them to be inclusive and uplifting. Thus, Rev. Wright's fiery sermon on "The Audacity to Hope" in a racialized world becomes the title of Obama's serene meditation on the possibilities of transcending political and racial polarization. That seems to hold true more broadly. It's how Obama is able to credit the honorable motives of his opponents even as he disagrees with them. It's how Obama took the best of what Reverend Wright had to offer - community, inspiration, rebukes for his congregation's shortcomings - and set aside the anger and divisiveness that seemed to him relics of an earlier time.
|
| 82 | Jag
ID: 171592622 Fri, Mar 14, 2008, 17:07
|
I would love to attend Obama's church, I may not agree with the preacher, but that is one funny dude.
|
| 83 | Myboyjack
ID: 8216923 Fri, Mar 14, 2008, 17:17
|
Interesting that you prefer to rely on statements (some of dubious contex) cherrypicked from fluff pieces about Obama's church.
I've got to remember this whole "cherry picking" defense. It's a fun mulligan.
"God damn America"
"Farakhan speaks the truth about the racial ills of America"
"Aids was created by America to kill black people"
"America and Israel imprisoned Mandela"
Cherry picked or not, my children wouldn't have been sitting in pews listening to that crap week after week and I wouldn't have donated thousands of dollars to the "kindly Uncle" who spewed it; not if I wanted to be President of all the people of this country.
But I do like how quoting someone can be dismissed as "cherry picking" Trent Locke should have tried that one.
|
| 84 | Boldwin
ID: 3013265 Fri, Mar 14, 2008, 19:35
|
Are the candidates responsible for every one of their supporters? If you or anyone else has any information that Obama believes the same things attributed to Mr. Wright, it would certainly be of great interest. - bibA
Forget Wright's support of Obama, what about Obama's $22,500 contribution to Wright? Obama's wife's comment about 'being proud of America for the first time' make a lot more sense when put in context with her spiritual inspiration.
Twenty years of that kinda talk and I can imagine a person thinking we gotta rise above all this hate.
He didn't get the 'trancending' message from Wright. Unless you want to say that he was struck by the negative space in Wright's artwork.
He tapped into a loooong unexpressed message America was dying to hear. Namely 'America has trancended it's racial problem'. The trancending was already there in the audience for decades waiting to be expressed. MLK won. There really is no racial barrier to Obama becoming president and Ferraro is right. It's even a huge plus that he's everyman, not just another white candidate.
To top it off he's capitolizing on the unspoken illogic that if he can so easily trancend race he must therefore be able to trancend all problems. A tenuous stretch I have to say, but if you hope hard enuff...
Then there is the intriguing trick of accusing anyone who asks him a logical question for such a critical job, of being divisive anytime they dare kick the tires on the hope train. Not many people could pull that trick off or from another angle, the media wouldn't let anyone else pull that one and it remains to be seen how long that romance lasts.
|
| 85 | astade
ID: 241071315 Fri, Mar 14, 2008, 21:11
|
Boldwin,
Do you think Obama would be successful president (relative to former presidents)? How about relative to the current candidates running for the next term?
|
| 86 | Wilmer McLean
ID: 272451414 Sat, Mar 15, 2008, 02:03
|
And now, a word from our unsponsors. -------------------------------------------------
Obama needs the Hispanic vote.
------------------------------------------------- Back to your regularly scheduled distraction.
|
| 87 | Boldwin
ID: 3013265 Sat, Mar 15, 2008, 05:35
|
Astade
Thinking in relative terms...
One of the few tools a president has is the 'fireside chat'. The inspirational quality he's got. If he had principles that succeeded in the real world he could be Reagan. Since he's more of a 'Great Society' LBJ utopian they won't work. Worse he will prolly get the congress that will go along with accelerating the decent into socialism.
In foreign policy he strikes me as having all the realism of Jimmy Carter. We should all remember how well hope worked for Neville Chamberlain. Our enemies will 'love' him and us as they pick our pockets and leave us prostrate in the alley.
|
| 88 | Boldwin
ID: 3013265 Sat, Mar 15, 2008, 06:05
|
Party conventions should be stomach turning affairs.
All the conservatives looking up at the stage sayin to themslves 'no one pointed out in time that he intended to freeze us out of the party'.
All the blue collar union people lookin up and telling themselves 'no one pointed out those Wright recordings until it was too late'.
If you don't like hypocracy turn away from those carnivals.
|
| 89 | Tree
ID: 511251614 Sat, Mar 15, 2008, 10:02
|
And now, a word from our unsponsors. -------------------------------------------------
Obama whoever wins the presidency needs the Hispanic vote.
------------------------------------------------- Back to your regularly scheduled distraction.
WM = fixed that for ya...
in more relevant info, and perhaps i missed this above, but Rev. Wright has been removed from Obama's campaign trail.
he has definitely distanced himself from some of the more controversial things the minister said, and now, he's gone from the campaign all together.
and regarding Baldwin's post #88 -
interesting that the Republican Party person on the stage in question is their true candidate, John McCain, while the Democrat person you're referring to is not only not the candidate, but not even part of Obama's campaign anymore.
|
| 90 | Madman
ID: 14139157 Sat, Mar 15, 2008, 12:48
|
Forget Wright's support of Obama, what about Obama's $22,500 contribution to Wright?
Exactly. This question is about why Obama was so attracted to this man, and why he supported him all these years.
I think we all understand the need to build a large political tent, soliciting and accepting support from people of a wide range of ideologies. That's how we will all become one big happy political family. But the standard for accepting support from someone is much lower than the standard for who you choose to support and associate with.
It's also interesting to see Obama defenders simply assert that Obama has set aside the hate and bigotry. This is something that we just don't have good evidence on, unfortunately. The most direct evidence we can gather is from the sort of people that have inspired him and the sort of people who advise him -- people like Wright. You can't just throw out evidence because it doesn't fit the picture of the man you wish him to be.
|
| 91 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 37838313 Sat, Mar 15, 2008, 12:52
|
Just so that I know I'm getting straight the problem with Obama's association with Wright --- it's that Obama might be a hateful bigot?
|
| 92 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 37838313 Sat, Mar 15, 2008, 13:00
|
Myboyjack I've got to remember this whole "cherry picking" defense. It's a fun mulligan.
"God damn America"
"Farakhan speaks the truth about the racial ills of America"
"Aids was created by America to kill black people"
"America and Israel imprisoned Mandela"
MBJ I'll give you the benefit of doubt here and assume you're just being really lazy and not deliberately distorting the context of what I wrote. I'm aware that the tendency when you are certain you're right and the other guy is very wrong that you might just kneejerk dismiss whatever the other guys writes without bothering to consider what he's actually saying but please try to refrain from that. In the end it amounts to an insult.
|
| 93 | Madman
ID: 14139157 Sat, Mar 15, 2008, 23:39
|
MITH -- There are many problems. First, there is the problem of judgment ... why continue to support such a person for all these years, put them on your advisor list, etc.?
Second, there is now the problem of credibility ... hard to believe that he wasn't aware of Wright's political and personal views prior to now ... Either's he misleading us now, or we now have to wonder what his relationship really with his pastor and chosen spiritual mentor.
Third, what does Obama truly believe? He doesn't have a record to analyze his actions ... instead, we must infer as best we can. Wright and Obama's chosen church reflect a particularly unattractive (to blokes like me) view of race relations, foreign policy, government theories. For example, it is interesting that Obama, in his distancing from Wright cited Wright's work on HIV ... Wright has apparently argued that HIV was started by the US government to keep the black man down. What about Wright's position on HIV does Obama support? He's bringing up more questions than he's answering ... which leads to the fourth and final question: can Obama defend himself and, by extension, will he be able to rhetorically defend us as President (something we all agree we need at the moment)?
|
| 94 | Madman
ID: 14139157 Sun, Mar 16, 2008, 00:05
|
WRT to my question 2 ... link "Mr. Obama then told him [Dr. Wright], “You can get kind of rough in the sermons, so what we’ve decided is that it’s best for you not to be out there in public.”" -- March 6, 2007. So Obama was aware of something, whether it was the specific statements that have been made public or not, we don't know. Obama's clarification / denunciation is apparently a Clintonian 'parsification'.
It strains credulity. Obama's responses are getting him in deeper and deeper. It's somewhat ironic ... the transcendental politician who was to transcend race can't even deal with the most basic racial overtones of his chosen church. Makes you wonder how he'll transcend everyone else's race issues. For the record, that's question 5.
|
| 95 | Myboyjack
ID: 8216923 Sun, Mar 16, 2008, 15:24
|
David Bernstein says what Madman did, sorta:
but when you're left with the choice of either acknowledging that you had sincere close, personal, and political ties with a minister whose views most Americans find beyond the pale, or defending yourself by using the "hey, I'm just a cynical politician who uses religion to get votes just like anything else, and I don't believe in it any more than I really believe that NAFTA is bad" excuse, I think you may be in for some trouble.
|
| 96 | Boldwin
ID: 3013265 Sun, Mar 16, 2008, 16:23
|
We can hope he comes up with a more credible answer. We can do it! Yes we can!
|
| 97 | Boxman
ID: 571114225 Sun, Mar 16, 2008, 16:30
|
I love it when The Great Leader works the mentally bendable crowd into a chanting froth of "Yes we can!" almost as if they are calling for Bob The Builder to emerge from backstage.
|
| 98 | Madman
ID: 14139157 Mon, Mar 17, 2008, 18:26
|
Obama plans a race speech ... link
I think this is the right move. Until now, he has relied on his biography to transcend race relations. With this speech, he'll have a chance to begin a national discussion on how he can facilitate true reconciliation. How will an Obama administration deal with reverse discrimination civil rights cases? Reparations? Busing? Etc.
With his black credentials fully satisfied, he has wiggle room to blunt the Wright fiasco with white, Asian, and Hispanic America. It will be interesting to see how he'll do it. Furthermore, this may be one of the first glimpses we'll get of how Obama will actually try to follow through on his promises for unity and reconciliation. If we all agree to his policy initiatives and executive approaches and then sing Kumbaya, he'll deserve to be President.
|
| 99 | Mattinglyinthehall Dude
ID: 01629107 Fri, Jun 06, 2008, 09:09
|
Re: post 17:Only Jimmy Carter and certain Liberals in Congress today would purpose such a ludicrous idea. "Certain liberal" Charles Krauthammer continues to push a gas tax hike:Want to wean us off oil? Be open and honest. The British are paying $8 a gallon for petrol. Goldman Sachs is predicting we will be paying $6 by next year. Why have the extra $2 (above the current $4) go abroad? Have it go to the U.S. Treasury as a gasoline tax and be recycled back into lower payroll taxes.
Announce a schedule of gas tax hikes of 50 cents every six months for the next two years. And put a tax floor under $4 gasoline, so that as high gas prices transform the U.S. auto fleet, change driving habits and thus hugely reduce U.S. demand - and bring down world crude oil prices - the American consumer and the American economy reap all of the benefit.
Herewith concludes my annual exercise in futility. By the time I advocate the tax floor again next year, you'll be paying for gas in bullion.
|
| 100 | Razor
ID: 4532926 Fri, Jun 06, 2008, 09:39
|
Using the government to change the market? Hmmm...
Anyway, that proposal sort of ignores the 800-lbs. gorilla in the room, which is that high gas prices is ruinous for more than just a soccer mom looking for an SUV or a yuppie deciding on whether to move out to the suburbs. There are few sectors of our economy that are not seriously impacted by rising gas costs. We've built our economy and our country on the ability to transport goods and ourselves on gas relatively cheaply, and the price has tripled in the past 5 years. Everything costs more when gas prices are high.
|
| 101 | Tree
ID: 3955367 Fri, Jun 06, 2008, 10:46
|
just as an aside, i love seeing Jag's "black & white" subject headers crop up now and then...you must this, without certainty that, and so on.
i wish my world was so simple as to be able to not actually think about things, and instead, just follow the bleat.
|
| 102 | Mattinglyinthehall Dude
ID: 01629107 Fri, Jun 06, 2008, 10:56
|
As someone who was recently called "one of the, if not THE, most lopsided poster here" (for pointing out blatent - and still undenied - factual errors in a Coulter column) I admit being a little compelled to butt them whenever I come across an applicable excuse to do so.
|
| 103 | Jag
ID: 28457122 Fri, Jun 06, 2008, 13:43
|
Krauthammer is being an idiot. McCain's not wanting us to drill in AMWAR is shear stupidity also. I agree with much these too guys say, but on some issues they can be as nonsensical as Liberals.
This is not brain surgery guys, drill our asses off, seriously explore alternative energy and mandate MPG for automobliles.
|
| 104 | Boxman
ID: 337352111 Fri, Jun 06, 2008, 16:00
|
Jag: Anything other than outright surrender to their socialist viewpoints is not accepted. Notice how people are willing to accept alternative sources and gov't funding for them, but they are vocally against new drilling and exploration.
|
| 105 | Mattinglyinthehall Dude
ID: 01629107 Fri, Jun 06, 2008, 16:04
|
Anything other than outright surrender to their socialist viewpoints is not accepted
You're calling Charles Krauthammer a socialist?
|
| 106 | Boxman
ID: 337352111 Fri, Jun 06, 2008, 16:43
|
No, are you?
|
| 107 | Mattinglyinthehall Dude
ID: 01629107 Fri, Jun 06, 2008, 18:23
|
Of course not. But I see no other logical explanation for who you could be referring to as "they" in your post 104.
|
| 108 | Jag
ID: 28457122 Fri, Jun 06, 2008, 18:44
|
Krauthammer believes this is the only way America will wean itself off oil and on that point he may be right. It would be much better, economically, if America could use self-discipline, but we are a country that quickly forgets.
|
| 109 | Boldwin
ID: 58452178 Fri, Jun 06, 2008, 19:00
|
I just heard today that the USA could produce 20x the power it consumes today just with hydrothermal power. I'd say bring on the tax credits and lets get promoting that but we already are afaik.
|
| 110 | Mattinglyinthehall Dude
ID: 01629107 Fri, Jun 06, 2008, 19:11
|
#108: he may be right.
Ah - so maybe Krauthammer isn't "being an idiot?"
|
| 111 | Jag
ID: 28457122 Fri, Jun 06, 2008, 23:56
|
Krauthammer is one of my favorite commentators and I hope he is wrong. I can't believe we have to do something so damaging to our economy because we can't trust our lawmakers to do the right thing.
|
| 112 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 37838313 Sat, Jun 07, 2008, 13:25
|
OK, so just to be clear, Krauthammer might not be an idiot for saying the same thing that you called liberals stupid for saying back in March. Of course you hope that none of this is necessary, that Americans are capable of doing what liberals have been saying we should to do for decades, even as the right was calling them stupid.
I think I got it.
|
| 113 | Jag
ID: 28457122 Sat, Jun 07, 2008, 15:47
|
I reread his article and I will stand by my original comment that it is stupid, but no where near the insanity of the carbon tax bill congress proposed and the fact McCain would support this POS bill literally makes me ill.
|
| 114 | Boldwin
ID: 58452178 Sat, Jun 07, 2008, 17:42
|
Krauthammer is like the king of the neocons and he would loooove to kill off the Reagan legacy and steer the R party to Trotskyite version of socialism. Smart as a whip but just headed in the wrong direction.
|
If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect, you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com |
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|