Obama is turning into John Kerry

245

Comments

  • slightofjeff
    slightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    RainDog wrote:
    Thanks for the concern. To me, it seems like the Republicans are whining about anything and everything that comes their way, all along holding a knife behind their backs. Obama has a catch 22 - respond to the senseless attacks, and he "justifies" them. Don't respond, and they continue without scrutiny a la the Swift Boat Vets for Truth.

    If Obama loses, it'll be because Republicans vote in lockstep no matter what. That and, lets not kid ourselves here, because he's black.

    It couldn't be that Obama just isn't that good a candidate? No, never.

    The guy is obviously a fraud.

    Here is a pretty good article written by a Democratic strategist on why Obama has been struggling since the primaries. I kind of think it's pretty spot-on:

    http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2008/09/obama-polls-worry.php
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • YieldInHiding
    YieldInHiding Posts: 1,841
    inmytree wrote:
    pretty soon he'll be a lipstick wearing Muslim who won't wear a flag pin and throws away tiny American flags....

    I guess some folks:
    aren't the brightest bulb in the bunch...
    or a few sandwiches short of a picnic...
    or dumber than a box of rocks...
    or like a cat eatin' lemons - a sourpuss...
    or like school in the summertime - no class...







    ...they worry more about "idiotic metaphors" vs. looking at the issues....

    He wants to kill little babies too. :rolleyes:
    No longer overwhelmed it seems so simple now.
  • slightofjeff
    slightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    freindlyfired wrote:
    Other than change what is Obama promising with regards to the three most important issues facing america:
    Being able to afford to live...
    War...
    Money/big business in politics...

    He's offering change on his economic policy ... he was for ending the tax cuts for the rich, now he's for keeping them around awhile.

    He's offering change on his more drilling policy ... he's was totally against it, now he's sort of for it.

    He's offering change on his Iraq policy ... he was for an immediate withdrawal back in March, now maybe not.

    He's the candidate of change alright.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • catch22
    catch22 Posts: 1,081
    slightofjeff wrote:
    He's offering change on his economic policy ... he was for ending the tax cuts for the rich, now he's for keeping them around awhile.

    He's offering change on his more drilling policy ... he's was totally against it, now he's sort of for it.

    He's offering change on his Iraq policy ... he was for an immediate withdrawal back in March, now maybe not.

    He's the candidate of change alright.

    i like a president willing to listen to the people and accept criticism and adjust policy to make it reasonable and responsive to the american public.

    god knows, the current admin's tactic of ignoring common sense, public sentiment, and overwhelming reality in order to pursue blind ideological vision has worked out REAL well for us all :rolleyes:
    and like that... he's gone.
  • YieldInHiding
    YieldInHiding Posts: 1,841
    Thecure wrote:
    never said that he did say anything bad about palin. did i say that any where? just said that he is talking alot abotu palin which i don't think he should be doing as she is not the top of teh ticket. you get others to attack her and you go back to talking about the issues. that is what he did in the primaries and i think that is the reason that he won.

    YieldInHiding wrote:
    Okay, where did he say ANYTHING about her other than right after the nomination? All I've heard is his critique of McCain's policies. Show me where Obama has said anything about Palin. If it's "alot" as you say, it should be easy for you.

    How's it coming on this, thecure? Any luck?
    No longer overwhelmed it seems so simple now.
  • slightofjeff
    slightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    catch22 wrote:
    i like a president willing to listen to the people and accept criticism and adjust policy to make it reasonable and responsive to the american public.

    god knows, the current admin's tactic of ignoring common sense, public sentiment, and overwhelming reality in order to pursue blind ideological vision has worked out REAL well for us all :rolleyes:

    I can accept that. But I DO NOT want a president to changes his mind based on the daily polls, either.

    Truth is, you don't know what you are going to get with Obama.

    If you voted for him in March because he was the anti-war, tax-the-rich, no-more-drilling candidate ... I'd imagine you're feeling betrayed today.

    And if you're voting now for Obama based upon the things he's promising in this election, I'd imagine you're going to be pretty betrayed in January when he changes his mind again.

    No matter what, it's political idiocy. Kerry lost in '04 in part because Bush was able to portray him as a namby-pamby flip-flopper. And here comes Obama four years later ... flip-flopping. Even if it's all in good faith, and not (as I suspect) just to get elected, all this does is set the ball up nicely on the tee for the Republicans. Again.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • catch22
    catch22 Posts: 1,081
    slightofjeff wrote:
    I can accept that. But I DO NOT want a president to changes his mind based on the daily polls, either.

    Truth is, you don't know what you are going to get with Obama.

    If you voted for him in March because he was the anti-war, tax-the-rich, no-more-drilling candidate ... I'd imagine you're feeling betrayed today.

    And if you're voting now for Obama based upon the things he's promising in this election, I'd imagine you're going to be pretty betrayed in January when he changes his mind again.

    i'm voting for him based on the fact that he is not as far right as mccain and is going to get at least a more centrist political agenda on the table, even if he's willing to make compromises to get it to happen.
    and like that... he's gone.
  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    slightofjeff wrote:
    He's offering change on his economic policy ... he was for ending the tax cuts for the rich, now he's for keeping them around awhile.
    All he said is he wouldn't raise taxes blindly while in a recession - not that he's against repealing the tax cuts. In other words, he's not a "Go Fuck Yourself, it's my way or the highway" kind of politician.
    slightofjeff wrote:
    He's offering change on his more drilling policy ... he's was totally against it, now he's sort of for it.
    Once again, he's not a Go Fuck Yourself politician. The reason you have to squeeze "sort of" in your sentence there is because he's not for it. However, if the only way to get a comprehensive new energy policy passed is to appease the drilling pissers and whiners who fully intend to shut down all discussion of the issue if their little pet project isn't at least given attention, then why not discuss it?
    slightofjeff wrote:
    He's offering change on his Iraq policy ... he was for an immediate withdrawal back in March, now maybe not.
    Now this one is completely wrong. He has never been for an immediate withdrawal. His plan - from the time he entered the Senate - has always had a year and a half time frame for withdrawal. He has also - always - called for more troops in Afghanistan.
  • YieldInHiding
    YieldInHiding Posts: 1,841
    RainDog wrote:
    All he said is he wouldn't raise taxes blindly while in a recession - not that he's against repealing the tax cuts. In other words, he's not a "Go Fuck Yourself, it's my way or the highway" kind of politician.

    Once again, he's not a Go Fuck Yourself politician. The reason you have to squeeze "sort of" in your sentence there is because he's not for it. However, if the only way to get a comprehensive new energy policy passed is to appease the drilling pissers and whiners who fully intend to shut down all discussion of the issue if their little pet project isn't at least given attention, then why not discuss it?

    Now this one is completely wrong. He has never been for an immediate withdrawal. His plan - from the time he entered the Senate - has always had a year and a half time frame for withdrawal. He has also - always - called for more troops in Afghanistan.

    I don't think jeff learned in Texas that you don't bring a knife to a gun fight.

    Well said, dog.
    No longer overwhelmed it seems so simple now.
  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    YieldInHiding wrote:
    I don't think jeff learned in Texas that you don't bring a knife to a gun fight.

    Well said, dog.
    What can I say - It's hard being a blind follower hypnotized by pretty words. :)
  • slightofjeff
    slightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    catch22 wrote:
    i'm voting for him based on the fact that he is not as far right as mccain and is going to get at least a more centrist political agenda on the table, even if he's willing to make compromises to get it to happen.

    Look if you are a Democrat or a liberal, you should be voting for Obama. It would be foolish to try and convince anyone otherwise. Voting McCain would be completely contrary to your principles.

    But if you are voting for him thinking he's going to be a "centrist" or "compromise" candidate ... you've got another thing coming. He won in the primaries based on the extreme left-wing of the party ... not the middle. He's beholden to those people. And he has no incentive to "compromise" anyway -- his party has the majority in Congress.

    If "compromise" is really what you want -- I mean, really -- McCain is the better choice. If for no other reason than he'd be FORCED to compromise to get anything passed.

    He also has a decent record of working with Democrats, even when his party was the majority and he didn't have to. In fact, he's probably compromised TOO much for my tastes.

    McCain-Feingold is a fucking travesty.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    slightofjeff wrote:
    He's offering change on his economic policy ... he was for ending the tax cuts for the rich, now he's for keeping them around awhile.

    He's offering change on his more drilling policy ... he's was totally against it, now he's sort of for it.

    He's offering change on his Iraq policy ... he was for an immediate withdrawal back in March, now maybe not.

    He's the candidate of change alright.

    good points...I guess we should have someone who takes a stance and follows that same stance forever and ever and ever, never changing that stance despite new evidence or new facts....yeah, that sounds like it would be a smashing success...

    right...?
  • catch22
    catch22 Posts: 1,081
    slightofjeff wrote:
    Look if you are a Democrat or a liberal, you should be voting for Obama. It would be foolish to try and convince anyone otherwise. Voting McCain would be completely contrary to your principles.

    But if you are voting for him thinking he's going to be a "centrist" or "compromise" candidate ... you've got another thing coming. He won in the primaries based on the extreme left-wing of the party ... not the middle. He's beholden to those people. And he has no incentive to "compromise" anyway -- his party has the majority in Congress.

    If "compromise" is really what you want -- I mean, really -- McCain is the better choice. If for no other reason than he'd be FORCED to compromise to get anything passed.

    He also has a decent record of working with Democrats, even when his party was the majority and he didn't have to. In fact, he's probably compromised TOO much for my tastes.

    McCain-Feingold is a fucking travesty.

    oh, i get it. so when you think i'm a leftist, you tell me not to vote for obama because he won't change things. when i say i'm a centrist, you tell me not to vote for obama because he's leftist and will change too many things.

    mccain choosing palin and using karl rove convinces me he's not going to change or compromise. he wants 4 more years of the same failed policies.

    obama is an intelligent man, and if this election has shown anything it's that the democrats have as much trouble agreeing with each other as with republicans. so both candidates will struggle to gain any sort of consensus. i have more faith that obama will push for my views than mccain will. i am pretty centrist, with a slight left lean. obama won't be able to get a far left agenda. the republicans have filibustered everything so far, they'll hold up anything fringe-worthy. mccain is going to encourage more of this bullshit and this country does not need more of that.
    and like that... he's gone.
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,885
    inmytree wrote:
    good points...I guess we should have someone who takes a stance and follows that same stance forever and ever and ever, never changing that stance despite new evidence or new facts....yeah, that sounds like it would be a smashing success...

    right...?


    You have to admit, that was a great post though. Very clever.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    slightofjeff wrote:
    I can accept that. But I DO NOT want a president to changes his mind based on the daily polls, either.

    Truth is, you don't know what you are going to get with Obama.

    If you voted for him in March because he was the anti-war, tax-the-rich, no-more-drilling candidate ... I'd imagine you're feeling betrayed today.

    And if you're voting now for Obama based upon the things he's promising in this election, I'd imagine you're going to be pretty betrayed in January when he changes his mind again.

    No matter what, it's political idiocy. Kerry lost in '04 in part because Bush was able to portray him as a namby-pamby flip-flopper. And here comes Obama four years later ... flip-flopping. Even if it's all in good faith, and not (as I suspect) just to get elected, all this does is set the ball up nicely on the tee for the Republicans. Again.

    again, great points...

    McCain has been steadfast in his positions...never wavering or "flip-fopping"...now he's running as the "change" candidate...

    Also, with McCain, we do know what we'll get....4 more years of the same bushshit...yippee!!!
  • slightofjeff
    slightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    inmytree wrote:
    good points...I guess we should have someone who takes a stance and follows that same stance forever and ever and ever, never changing that stance despite new evidence or new facts....yeah, that sounds like it would be a smashing success...

    right...?

    That's not preferable, either. I'd like a leader who can sense changes on the ground and adjust to them.

    But what has happened in the past few months that has caused Obama to flip-flop on all these issues?

    The economy was already in the shitter when he promised to raise taxes.

    Oil prices were already sky-high -- maybe even higher than they were now -- when he said he was against new drilling.

    The war in Iraq was still an "illegal occupation" when he promised to end it immediately.

    It's pretty obvious to anyone paying attention that he's saying whatever will stick against the wall and will get him elected. At some point, you have to have principles.

    Obama, as far as I can tell so far, has none. His principles are whatever the latest poll numbers tell him they should be.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • slightofjeff
    slightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    inmytree wrote:

    Also, with McCain, we do know what we'll get....4 more years of the same bushshit...yippee!!!

    Don't know if you've been following ... but the McCain = Bush argument really isn't sticking.

    Better to find a new one.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • catch22
    catch22 Posts: 1,081
    slightofjeff wrote:
    Obama, as far as I can tell so far, has none. His principles are whatever the latest poll numbers tell him they should be.

    imagine that... a leader of a democracy listening to the will of the people!
    and like that... he's gone.
  • ofthegirl75
    ofthegirl75 New Jersey Posts: 315
    Vince wrote:
    How did he screw up? He said nothing wrong. Jesus fucking christ!!

    What is wrong is that the Republicans are resorting to distortion and swiftboat politics. The difference between Kerry and Obama is that Obama is not going to sit there and let the Republicans get away with it. The only people who lose in this squabble is the American people.

    What is idiotic are the people who fall for this and the people who sit by and let the Republicans get away with their slime ball tactics.


    DISTRACTION! All of it. The man defends himself against BS and they spin it to again bash him when it was stupid BS to begin with.
  • slightofjeff
    slightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    catch22 wrote:
    oh, i get it. so when you think i'm a leftist, you tell me not to vote for obama because he won't change things. when i say i'm a centrist, you tell me not to vote for obama because he's leftist and will change too many things.

    Obama really isn't a good candidate, period. He made his mark with a couple of nice speeches, but I don't think he's been able to close the deal with anyone.

    If you are a leftist, he's the guy you want to vote for, though. Unless you're willing to go third-party.

    You can vote for him as a centrist, too. But he's not going to "work for compromise," because he doesn't have to. So if that's your sole reason for pulling the lever for him, you'll probably be disappointed.

    Contrary to popular belief, and probably contrary to some of the verbiage I've used on this thread, I'm really not trying to tell anyone who to vote for. I think most people already have their minds made up, whether they know it or not. And if they changed their minds based solely on what some anonymous yahoo on a Pearl Jam message board said, I would feel sorry for them indeed.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do

Categories