McSame

MG, you're super-late on this. This happened in July, and we pretty much plastered the sift with videos about it. Do a search for FISA.

At the time, I took solace in the fact that his stated position was the right one, that the 4th amendment requires a court to issue warrants for this level of surveillance, and that we should bring it to an end. I was sore over the fact that he had a choice between making a big stand and having a knock-down drag-out political fight over it, or quietly acquiescing, and he backed down.

I'd chalk that up to political calculation, really, but I'd rather he back down on that one, and help his chances of becoming President (who controls those wiretaps in the first place), than stage the fight, maybe win, maybe lose, and have it cost him the Presidency, and put Grampy McSame, puppet for Republican thugs, at the listening end of those wiretaps.

With some distance, and now the certainty that Obama will be President, I'm starting to wonder if the issue of telecomm immunity was being overblown by the netroots. Now that we're going to have a Democratically controlled DOJ, investigations into the possible law-breaking done from the government side can be done, and since the telecomms are immune, they should be free to provide evidence/testimony for the criminal charges leveled at Dick & George.

All that said, I am a little puzzled at your use of "messiah", as many have pointed out, only his detractors call him that. Those of us who like the guy are excited because he's right on so many things we like, and he conveys the message in such a compelling way that we're excited to see what he can do.

We don't like the triangulation he does on gay marriage (says he's against calling it marriage, but wants legally equivalent civil unions). We don't like how he keeps being nice to Republicans, and treating them like they're human. We aren't too excited about some of the things he's said about foreign policy, or pumping up the military budget. But those are trifles compared to the large mass of things he agrees with us on.

So, in closing, let me lay out my response to the BS about "lesser of two evils" one last time (or at least until 2012): the 2008 election isn't a choice between the lesser of two evils, it was the choice between McCain who was 95% evil, 5% good, and Obama who's 98% good, and 2% evil. Sure, that's technically the "lesser of two evils" but it's not like it was a close call.

After all, had we lost, Vice President Palin's daughter's mother-in-law would be the top news story for her arrest on possible drug dealing, and no one would know how to pronounce or spell Blagojevich, and I'd be talking with an emigration lawyer, and shopping for a new country to live in.

>> ^rougy:
": Note that I am in NO way saying McSame would have been a better choice, but just emphasizing that Obama isn't some messiah like a lot of people seem to believe::"
And who would that be?


there were alot of conservatives freaking about an obama messiah movement in black communities. if you look at black history, using religous metaphors for social/liberating movements is prevelant, and also just a metaphor.

": Note that I am in NO way saying McSame would have been a better choice, but just emphasizing that Obama isn't some messiah like a lot of people seem to believe::"

And who would that be?

the "gaffes" Joe Biden made? as compared to the DOZENS of gaffes made by McSame AND Palin?

Yeah McSame did look very stoned last night, eye's were glossy as all hell. Well that is unless he was just fighting back tears of defeat.

>> ^nibiyabi:
MGR, is it just me, or have you been slowly devolving from an intelligent, worldly conservative to a neocon lacky mouthpiece?


You apparently don't pay attention to pretty much anything I say about John McSame or Sarah Palin.
Of course police brutality is bad. But that doesn't mean this can't be funny.

I've watched this whole thing unfolding, and I'm actually in the middle of reading "Audacity of Hope"...Obama's no liberal/progressive ideologue, and certainly not a party partisan.

He's not kidding about wanting a "new kind of politics" and it's driving the Democratic partisans nuts (or it was, when Obama was down in the polls). In Democratic circles, there's been constant calls for Obama to go on massive offense against McCain, but what little he's done has been very restrained, and has actually stuck to relevant policy differences.

I know VS is awash in anti-McCain video, but have you noticed how little of it is from the Obama campaign? Even the clips of TV interviews of Obama surrogates are just surrogates giving a good response to a McCain attack -- not going on the attack themselves. The McCain being one of the Keating Five is not being mentioned, even though it's directly relevant to the events of the day, and the only reason for that is that Obama's told his people to keep clear of it.

He's not like John McCain, who's just flat out betrayed his party when he disagreed, had a whim, or saw political advantage in doing so. Obama has been trying to get Democrats to learn to pick their battles more carefully, and make sure that they only really get into fights when they have to. In his book, he says that he thinks that the greatest failings of the Democratic party over the last few decades has been a lack of appreciation and respect for the conservative viewpoint, and thinks Democrats could get more of their agenda passed if they just learned the right buttons to push to make it more palatable to conservatives.

In the primaries, Obama got beaten up for the left about his healthcare plan, because it didn't include a mandate. At the time, I didn't understand why he omitted it, but now that I've gotten a better understanding of conservative ideology, I get it -- mandates are a poison pill to conservatives. His healthcare plan is something Friedman would've appreciated; it makes government put up or shut up by directly competing with market alternatives.

You should read Audacity of Hope...or at least the prologue. It filled in a lot of blanks for me about how he approaches politics, and governance.

That's probably more than you were looking for, but I get that way with politics.

In reply to this comment by swampgirl:
Of course if I break everything thing down idea at a time...I do disagree with some of his ideology. BUT One can't have a shopping list when voting for president. We have two guys to choose from.

I don't want McSame.

My concerns about Obama is not about what he personally believes in but how reasonable a president he is. Can he see the big picture and make decisions that are right for the country and not just towing the party lines.

In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
I don't know your politics, but I'd recommend voting third party, rather than not voting.

If your objections to Obama are truly about his competency, and not his ideology, watch the debates and some of his policy speeches. He's no dummy, and he'll be surrounded by the best and the brightest in every topic.

Of course if I break everything thing down idea at a time...I do disagree with some of his ideology. BUT One can't have a shopping list when voting for president. We have two guys to choose from.

I don't want McSame.

My concerns about Obama is not about what he personally believes in but how reasonable a president he is. Can he see the big picture and make decisions that are right for the country and not just towing the party lines.

In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
I don't know your politics, but I'd recommend voting third party, rather than not voting.

If your objections to Obama are truly about his competency, and not his ideology, watch the debates and some of his policy speeches. He's no dummy, and he'll be surrounded by the best and the brightest in every topic.

I don't likes no Broadband Penetration. I'm not into internet Porns. You keep that stuff out of my internet tubes. Keep them clean, or I'll make you clean those tubes out.

Vote for internets. Vote McSame.

>> ^MarineGunrock:
What I want to know is who is actually stupid enough to even consider that Paul might endorse McSame?


^ Everyone who still believes in that Ronald Reagan 11th commandment bullshit.

What I want to know is who is actually stupid enough to even consider that Paul might endorse McSame?

And your hero John McSame once shoved a woman in a wheelchair.

ALLEGEDLY.

Why is McCain's "temper" an issue? I like a guy who expresses his anger. America's savage enemies fear wrath, not timeouts from the Department of Peace. The world's dictators and other sh;ts fear McCain. They should.

Obama quit smoking to please others and improve his image. A man who would compromise his own enjoyment of smoking to placate nanny-state assholes has no business leading a Boy Scout troop, much less the nation.

Wait - isn't one of McSame's biggest points of his campaign less government and less control over the free market?
Less government and more control of the economic sector are mutually exclusive.

And really? You're digging back to the 90s to talk about sports players?

Keep reading that prompter, Sarah.

>> ^volumptuous:
>> :
McSame chose to do it, and probably did it with a smile on his face. Now he condones torture.


I don't even know how to reply to this. Sickening.