[bball2223]

Originally Posted by Talkhard

I used to think the election cycle was too long, but now I'm starting to see the wisdom of it. The more we learn about Obama, the more phoney and hypocritical he looks. By the time November rolls around the entire country may be revulsed by this slick huckster named Barack Hussein Obama.

So what happens if he gets elected? Plus he couldn't get any more hypocritical than Georgia Bush.

[MARIS61]

Ever get a sweet deal from that car salesman you went to school with?

Get a free sandwich at your Dad's Deli?

Your linked post provides even less indication of impropriety (and by that I mean none at all).

[blazerboy30]

Originally Posted by It's_GO_Time

Also it is clear that Obama stands for a lot of specifics (if you want one example it's not hard to figure his specific plan about the war) . . . I get you not believing him, but he does take a definte postion on many topics . . . surprised you don't see that.

What is his specific plan? The "plans" I have heard him talk about have changed drastically over just the last few months.

Please discuss, in detail, some of these "a lot of specifics" that Obama stands for.

[blazerboy30]

Originally Posted by MARIS61

Ever get a sweet deal from that car salesman you went to school with?

Get a free sandwich at your Dad's Deli?

Your linked post provides even less indication of impropriety (and by that I mean none at all).

Did the "sweet deal" from a friend total more than the $11,000 gift limit? If not, then there is absolutely no problem. If it did, then I should pay taxes on it.

Did Obama's friend pay the taxes on this gift? Because I'm sure it was for more than $11k.

[hoojacks]

Thats it, I'm voting for the warmonger.

[barfo]

Originally Posted by maxiep

Barfo, if you disagree with my contention, please detail for me that for which Sen. Obama stands. I've looked and there doesn't appear to be a there there.

No offense, but I think you have blinders on on this. Certainly he stands for things. For example, he's against overturning Roe v. Wade. McCain is for overturning Roe v. Wade. Both of them have specific positions on that issue. He's against the gas tax holiday that McCain has proposed. He's proposed $50 billion in stimulus spending in the short term. How are those not specific positions?

Also, you've shown yourself to be quite intelligent. You may believe of me what you wish, but there's no way I can believe that you don't see the real issue with Johnson and Countrywide. It's inside baseball at its worst.

I see that as an issue for Johnson. Not for Obama, because Obama is not Johnson.

"You know a person who did something bad" is just not a good political argument. Everyone knows someone who did something bad.

barfo

[maxiep]

Originally Posted by HB

Lol and when I say what about Mccain? You say your an independent. I never hear about Mccain's associates being under scrutiny.

This man in question is not getting paid by Obama, he wont be in any shape or form involved with Obama's administration, he is helping vet whoever is going to become his Vice president. Its a volunteer position, I dont see how this makes him a friend. I watched Fox News yesterday for the first time in ages, and this crap reminded me why I dont watch that channel. They try to make a big deal out of nothing and turn a blind side to Mccain's wrong doings. Why haven't they talked about all the lobbyists involved with Mccain's campaign. How about Charlie Black who has worked for dictators all around the world, who are very much anti-America, heck if you want to go into the whole mortgage crises issue here's a nice tidbit for you



Still I think Mccain and his camp are playing a dangerous game, after all the Keating 5 can be brought up at any time

McCain's involvement with Keating and Lincoln Savings and Loan should have resulted in the Republican Party telling him his career was over and them finding someone new to represent Arizona. The fact the Republicans nominated him is a disgrace. In the aftermath of the Keating Five probe the Democrats, to their credit, sent that exact message to DeConcini, Cranston and Riegle (although their ages helped). The only Democrat to defy the party was John Glenn, and his stature as an one of the Mercury Seven left him largely immune from Party pressure.

Before I moved to DC, I was a "good government" idealist. After spending seven years of my life there, I share the same sentiment expressed in Lisa Simpson's essay "Sesspool on the Potomac".

All of that being said, Obama's comparison was weak at best. McCain wasn't using Countrywide as a punching bag. This is the danger of proclaiming that you're going to be a new kind of politician--you have to walk the walk. If you proclaim a higher standard, you have to live up to it. History shows Obama is no different than McCain, except he's more slavish to his party's principles.

[HB]

Once again, Johnson is not involved in Obama's policies, not involved in his administration, not getting paid by Obama, and most importantly Obama had nothing to do with Johnson's misdeeds. So yes I dont consider it a big deal. Obama is the one running for president, not his associates. Show me Obama's dirty laundry and then we can get into this whole change or no change issue

[maxiep]

Originally Posted by barfo

No offense, but I think you have blinders on on this. Certainly he stands for things. For example, he's against overturning Roe v. Wade. McCain is for overturning Roe v. Wade. Both of them have specific positions on that issue. He's against the gas tax holiday that McCain has proposed. He's proposed $50 billion in stimulus spending in the short term. How are those not specific positions?

Do you really believe that he stands for absolutely nothing? I'm certain he stands for white dress shirts and a high fiber diet. Assume a trace of hyperbole when you see a statement with an absolute in it. I'm certain he has a vision, but he doesn't have the first idea how to get there except for the government to do it.

Originally Posted by barfo

I see that as an issue for Johnson. Not for Obama, because Obama is not Johnson.

"You know a person who did something bad" is just not a good political argument. Everyone knows someone who did something bad.

barfo

Obama is asking us to elect him based on his judgment. How has his judgment been with who he's associated himself with back in Chi-town? Heck, he didn't even bother to ask my friend's position on NAFTA before he made him his chief economic advisor--it burned him badly in Ohio. He's put together a search committee of one utterly unqualified person (sorry Mrs. Kennedy-Schlossberg, but it's true) and a person who received a sweetheart deal from someone with whom he was in the position to award business. Worse yet, that company has been one of Sen. Obama's favorite whipping boys.

I, for one, question his judgment.

[HB]

So maxiep, are you saying associates determine who a person is? Lets just say I buy into what you said above, shouldnt there be more scandals involving Obama. Where are the memos of the black panther meetings he attended? Where are the bank transactions of money laundering he is involved with? Where are the articles or proof that he hates America?

If he really is good friends with all the shady characters the right likes to publicize, dont you think Obama would have some time of rap sheet by now?

[maxiep]

Originally Posted by HB

So maxiep, are you saying associates determine who a person is? Lets just say I buy into what you said above, shouldnt there be more scandals involving Obama. Where are the memos of the black panther meetings he attended? Where are the bank transactions of money laundering he is involved with? Where are the articles or proof that he hates America?

If he really is good friends with all the shady characters the right likes to publicize, dont you think Obama would have some time of rap sheet by now?

I do agree that the people with which you surround yourself mirror who you are as a person. It says a lot about who you are as a person and who you judge to be okay with which to associate. The problem with Obama is that he can't admit who he really is--and I don't mean someone with traditional leftist policies--but a typical pol. Why did he associate with the likes of Rev. Wright, Tony Rezco and Bill Ayres? Because they helped him get elected and they had access to a power base he wanted.

When I criticize Barack Obama, it's not because he's hiding what he intends to do, any idiot can see that the role of government in our lives would dramatically increase. I criticize him because he's hiding who he really is: he's not "post-partisan", "post racial" or an agent for change. He's the same old, same old.

[MARIS61]

Originally Posted by maxiep

I do agree that the people with which you surround yourself mirror who you are as a person. It says a lot about who you are as a person and who you judge to be okay with which to associate.

With that kind of narrow criteria you must not think much of prison guards, policemen, our armed forces, psychiatrists who work with the criminally insane...and of course McCain, who associated with the North Vietnamese for several years when we were at war (albeit illegally) with them.

ACTIONS speak much louder than associations.

[maxiep]