McCain wins Wisconsin and slams Obama: Includes video link (1 Viewer)

Pure Energy

Rethink Everything
Joined
Aug 24, 2002
Messages
10,950
Reaction score
10
Location
Somerset County NJ (via St. Mary Parish)
Offline
“Will the next president have the experience, the judgement, experience informs and the strength of purpose to respond to each of these developments in ways that strengthen our security and advance the global progress of our ideals?” McCain asked. “Or will we risk the confused leadership of an inexperienced candidate who once suggested bombing our ally Pakistan and suggested sitting down without preconditions or clear purpose with enemies who support terrorists and are intent on destabilizing the world by acquiring nuclear weapons? I think you know the answer to that question.”



http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/02/19/mccain-slams-obama-as-deceptive-inexperienced/
 

TPS

Guest
Joined
Aug 15, 2000
Messages
36,028
Reaction score
56
Age
56
Location
da boyah
Offline
McCain's speech was really weak. Again. He's disappointing as a public speaker. As Pat Buchanan was discussing, at least he changed up the people standing behind him, but that entire attack is weak. I thought Obama did a nice job answering both Clinton and McCain tonight both by reference and directly tying McCain's support of President Bush's failed economic policies loved by the filthy rich (and parrotted by their ignorant minions) and his comment about another 100 years war in Iraq. He basically leapfrogged Senator Clinton and is starting to play for keeps. We'll see if that can happen or not, but Clinton is now left needing 58% of the rest of the elected delegates. That's not going to happen. As reported by MSNBC and Todd's numbers from last week, even if Obama wins a couple more states, that's going to force her to win 65% of them. If he takes Texas, which is still a bit of a stretch at this point (Rove thinks he can do it FWIW), game over. Clinton is going to have to resort to either an entirely woman-themed campaign (heard the bit tonight about breaking through the ultimate glass ceiling) or go extremely negative and further risk upping her negatives among Democrats should she somehow wrest the nomination.

Hillary Clinton's campaign is in serious trouble. I don't know what the final numbers will be, but when I turned off Fox News, it was 57% - 42% (15% blowout). Michael Barrone noted that there were still plenty of votes to be counted in Milwaukee (black and democratic) and Madison (should be an Obama hotbed). :shrug:

TPS
 

Mamba

SR is my life!
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 21, 2001
Messages
11,912
Reaction score
4,826
Age
39
Offline
I thought Obama did a nice job answering both Clinton and McCain tonight both by reference and directly tying McCain's support of President Bush's failed economic policies loved by the filthy rich (and parrotted by their ignorant minions) and his comment about another 100 years war in Iraq.
The part of your quote I put in bold is the part I'm curious about. In politics, I know that perception can be just as important than reality (if not moreso), but do you actually think that's what McCain meant by the "100 years" comment? That we'll remain at war for 100 years? Or are you simply saying Obama did a good job of spinning the comment for his benefit?

The "100 years in Iraq" comment does not mean he thinks we may continue fighting in Iraq for 100 years. It simply means we'll set up a post there. That's standard practice. Everywhere we go, we set up a post. And if Obama or Hillary win the election and pull out of Iraq, we will still always have a post in Iraq, and thus, we could very well be there for many decades.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
3,021
Reaction score
242
Age
33
Location
Slidell, LA
Offline
The "100 years in Iraq" comment does not mean he thinks we may continue fighting in Iraq for 100 years. It simply means we'll set up a post there. That's standard practice. Everywhere we go, we set up a post.
Either way, I don't agree with either policy.
 

UK SAINTS

ALL-MADDEN TEAM
Joined
Aug 16, 2001
Messages
2,171
Reaction score
158
Age
55
Offline
McCain's speech was really weak. Again. He's disappointing as a public speaker.

TPS
Let's give McCain the presidency and Obama MVS (most valuable speaker).
 

CitySaint

SR is my life!
Joined
Apr 15, 2004
Messages
11,574
Reaction score
10,765
Offline
I thought McCain's speech was better than Obama's one. McCain just doesn't have the ability to put a good speech forward. Its kind of like the friend that everyone has who can't tell a good joke right. Its a good joke but the guy just can't tell the joke right.
 

LSSpam

Practice Squad
Joined
Jun 2, 2002
Messages
28,419
Reaction score
8,141
Age
38
Location
Oxford, MS
Offline
McCain's just not a good speaker. His strength, by far, are "Town Hall" type meetings where he speaks off the cuff for hours (in otherwords his "straight talk"). That also happens to get him in the most trouble but the people who love McCain do so because of his conversational ability.

As an orator though he's way behind Obama :shrug: Most are, but McCain draws a sharper contrast.

Fortunately Obama's recently gotten into the business of drawing his speeches out forever which is diluting the effect.
 

TPS

Guest
Joined
Aug 15, 2000
Messages
36,028
Reaction score
56
Age
56
Location
da boyah
Offline
>>The part of your quote I put in bold is the part I'm curious about. In politics, I know that perception can be just as important than reality (if not moreso), but do you actually think that's what McCain meant by the "100 years" comment? That we'll remain at war for 100 years? Or are you simply saying Obama did a good job of spinning the comment for his benefit?

How can you be curious about it? This is from early January. If you haven't seen it yet, I found it on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFknKVjuyNk

>>The "100 years in Iraq" comment does not mean he thinks we may continue fighting in Iraq for 100 years. It simply means we'll set up a post there. That's standard practice. Everywhere we go, we set up a post.

Yeah, that's pretty basic and was part of the point of why he brought in Korea, Japan, Germany and whatever. But it clearly also shows that McCain doesn't really have an answer except to say that we should stay there "as long as it takes." While I certainly agree with him, we're up to what 5 years now? No one yet has articulated exactly how we get to the point where we don't have to have a bunch of troops there. Shock and Awe was great. We won. Then what? Just as they didn't have a plan for what happened next (neocons most likely didn't think we needed one), they don't have a plan for our soldiers coming home. Check out some recent stats on the maimed, suicidal, ptss victims, etc. It's ugly. And they don't care. They used our soldiers as geopolitical pawns which is certainly within the rights of an Administration to do. However there are greater costs associated with those types of gambles. And just as what to do about our returning vets hasn't been addressed, what we're still doing there and at what point we'll be able to leave remains unanswered. That only works for x period of time. At some point, someone with some power needs to articulate our mission and define points of success. It's not just automatically fine that we stay there for an indefinite period of time. **** is getting old and raping the treasury to enrich friends of Dick Cheney and big oil. And if you don't believe me, as always, please feel free to follow the money. :17:

TPS
 

TPS

Guest
Joined
Aug 15, 2000
Messages
36,028
Reaction score
56
Age
56
Location
da boyah
Offline
>>Let's give McCain the presidency and Obama MVS (most valuable speaker).

Before the primaries, Obama and McCain were the two candidates I liked the most from the major parties. Both are individuals I could vote for (still would hope Bloomberg would get in the race and shake things up a little though). I will most likely be undecided until late October unless one of the campaigns annoys me or I see what I think are unfair or bogus campaign tactics. I could be happy with either guy as president, so it may come down to who I think articulates the better vision for the next 4 years. Clearly these last 8 years of shady politics and even more shadowy government can't end soon enough for me. I feel a lot like I did at the end of Governor Foster's reign of destruction on Louisiana. It didn't matter in 2003 whether Kathleen Blanco or Bobby Jindal won the governor's race. Either would be vastly superior to Foster's woefully inept administration. As it turned out, we got both of them. Blanco, except for Katrina, ran a very low-key but successful administration. She actually was a damn good governor by any measure of success (again outside of her part in Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath). So she leaves Bobby a $2B surplus, and we get a fresh start with a younger and more energetic guy. I didn't vote for Bobby the 2nd time, but I am happy he is our governor (despite a few early ethical hiccups). I will be satisfied with either McCain or Obama because it means these dudes are getting put out to pasture - hopefully.

TPS
 

Saintman2884

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
14,518
Reaction score
2,327
Offline
Steve, I think despite JMC faults, you cant just compare his speaking talents to Obama's becuase of nessesity their speaking to different audiences and have different styles. Is Obamat the better orator? Yes probably so. And as good as his plans sound, are they reachable? Is he maybe promising too much that is unreachable or not feasible.
I do think that if the Dems know what thier doing they will nominate Obama, he's their best chance. A buddy of mine explained it like this, their is a movement behind Obama to really change DC, it it more encompassing, a more united front then the ones that exists in Hillary' camp. IF Hillary gets nominated, they wont win the White House, Steve. it just wont happen, Hillary has too rumors and innneudos and maybe its fair or unfair, it exists.
The Dems need Obama to win the WH, bottom line, any thing else and they will lose. Obama's people do not like Hillary's people. Thats a perception that I see to be very truthful right now.
 
Last edited:

CitySaint

SR is my life!
Joined
Apr 15, 2004
Messages
11,574
Reaction score
10,765
Offline
I think the Dems will win no matter if it is Hillary or Obama. The dems have a momentum and wave of Dem voters coming out, the repubs seem to be pretty apathetic about McCain. They were much more motivated behind Bush when he ran.
 

Saintman2884

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
14,518
Reaction score
2,327
Offline
dont be so sure, City. A very liberal Demorat told me today here at South Alabama that their is some animosity between Obama and Hillary. He does not see Hillary winning the White House if she is nominated becuase too much is known about her, and that many Democratic voters have susipicions about her, she is too radical or too much like of a left wing version of Bush to get elected. in other words they dont trust her to do the job.

Obama if he is nominated will be more united in his campaign, and thats their best chance. Many people still like Mccain for his war record and POW status in Vietnam, that will give him some viability I think with voters. And Mccain despite what you have heard it not the same person W is. In fact Mccain privately has distanced himself from the Bush adminstration from what I have heard in speeches and comments over the past 7, 8 years
 
Last edited:

TPS

Guest
Joined
Aug 15, 2000
Messages
36,028
Reaction score
56
Age
56
Location
da boyah
Offline
>>Steve, I think despite JMC faults, you cant just compare his speaking talents to Obama's becuase of nessesity their speaking to different audiences and have different styles.

Well in the primaries, that's true. But you can still compare them. Obama is a far superior speaker than anyone else in the race. He just comes at you with passion for what he believes in, and I get the impression he realizes the long-shot it is for him to be where he is today. Even if he were to get blown out in the general election, he being the Democratic front runner with broad appeal says that America is headed in the right direction IMHO.

>>Is Obamat the better orator? Yes probably so. And as good as his plans sound, are they reachable? Is he maybe promising too much that is unreachable or not feasible.

I don't know. On Fox they made it a point to discuss his staking out very liberal positions. But he was also careful to note that people don't want government to do things they can do themselves. That's an important distinction.

>>I do think that if the Dems know what thier doing they will nominate Obama, he's their best chance. A buddy of mine explained it like this, their is a movement behind Obama to really change DC, it it more encompassing, a more united front then the ones that exists in Hillary' camp.

The thing he's got going for him is the lack of ties to lobbyists and saving his sharpest attacks for their influence in Washington. IMHO, that's a good thing. McCain also has a record of being not as lobby-friendly either so it's at least a little win-win with them being the major players. I honestly don't know if Obama could win in a general. I don't know if enough white people will get behind his message to do the trick. I don't even know if he can survive a campaign with all the nuts and supremacists out there looking to start race wars. You never know. His campaign is about hope. And if a black man can be one of the last 2 standing, you just have to marvel at the progress much of our nation has made.

>>IF Hillary gets elected, they wont win the White House, Steve. it just wont happen, Hillary has too rumors and innneudos and maybe its fair or unfair, it exists.

I don't know. I think people underestimate her as much as she underestimated the electorate. She's not going to get the chance IMHO.

TPS
 

Broad St. Saint

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Sep 8, 2003
Messages
4,227
Reaction score
2,172
Age
51
Offline
McCain asked. “Or will we risk the confused leadership of an inexperienced candidate who once suggested bombing our ally Pakistan http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/02/19/mccain-slams-obama-as-deceptive-inexperienced/
Yeah, right like bombing Pakistan is so crazy after they built fomented the Taliban and Al Qaeda that destroyed a big swathe of lower Manhattan.

It's like the Beach Boys once sang, bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Pakistan, bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Pakistan.
 

wamland

Sacrilicious
VIP Contributor
Joined
Sep 4, 2007
Messages
5,640
Reaction score
4,846
Location
Catonsville Md
Offline
“Or will we risk the confused leadership of an inexperienced candidate who once suggested bombing our ally Pakistan and suggested sitting down without preconditions or clear purpose with enemies who support terrorists and are intent on destabilizing the world by acquiring nuclear weapons? I think you know the answer to that question.”
Too bad Obama never said that:

"I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges... But let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. ... If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf will not act, we will."
Obama

and what happened a little while ago?

"In the predawn hours of Jan. 29, a CIA Predator aircraft flew in a slow arc above the Pakistani town of Mir Ali. The drone's operator, relying on information secretly passed to the CIA by local informants, clicked a computer mouse and sent the first of two Hellfire missiles hurtling toward a cluster of mud-brick buildings a few miles from the town center.
The missiles killed Abu Laith al-Libi, a senior al-Qaeda commander and a man who had repeatedly eluded the CIA's dragnet. It was the first successful strike against al-Qaeda's core leadership in two years, and it involved, U.S. officials say, an unusual degree of autonomy by the CIA inside Pakistan."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/18/AR2008021802500.html?hpid=topnews

Sounds a lot like what Obama said, doesn't it?

Obama has said from the very beginning that he wants change but in order to get there he will need to get the help of the American people. He has always stated not to expect to get him in the office and then wait for everything to get better.
McCain has said that he will make us all safer. He is playing up the fear once again, taking a page out of the GWB playbook. He would like us to let him make us safe and watch him drive us into another war and or off another cliff.

No thanks.

As far as talking to other leaders...you're darn right I want to talk with them. What is everyone so afraid of? What has ostracizing them gotten us? Not a thing.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)



New Orleans Saints Twitter Feed

Headlines

Top Bottom