Quote:
Originally Posted by One Red Seat
I'm amazed. You actually are on topic. Given his long term association, these are valid topics of discussion. Instead, earlier, you tried the old political trick of avoiding this discussion all-together by falsely painting the other candidate as no different.
Sadly, the rationality didn't last long. Although that second sentence brings a question to mind. Is racism / bigotry OK as long as it doesn't preclude action? I hope the answer is "no".
Perhaps the issue was to counterweight your fluff and dither about how special Obama is, how transcendent he is, how intelligent he is, etc? That's all. Vote for the man if you agree with his politics. Don't get caught up in the cult of personality, which is what you were imploring people to do.
And, the original pencil comment was an obvious joke when you were trying to sell yourself as bipartisan. Given the language you use when describing liberal vs. conservative ideology, it's outright comedy to suggest such a thing. I thought a follow up joke was appropriate.
No, because he hasn't change his stance on issues, a stance that rated him the most liberal member of the Senate in '07.
[qoute=e1]Would ANY McCain association make you vote for Obama? No. No, because of Obama's stance on the issues. The more relevant question is, would a McCain association make me not vote for McCain? The answer is, yes. I'd find a third party candidate, most likely the libertarian party. I'm not afraid to vote third party, I did in '92 when I was 18 and I fell for a populist candidate. And I've voted for Democrats before, Clinton in '96. Have you ever voted for a Republican?
The weight I assign to issues has a lot to do with what's going on at the time. The #1 issue to me right now is national security, and I have little doubt that McCain will make the hard choices that he feels are the appropriate course of action despite party or public pressure to do the opposite. And, I trust his judgement on national security. I see Obama as an appeaser to public sentiment. The number #2 issue is the state of the economy. Obama's policies mirror those of Carter, and with a trend toward stagflation already occuring, the last thing I think we should be doing is implementing the policies of the last President to experience them. No, I think it makes far more sense to do what the President who pulled us out of it did. Perhaps thats just me though.
However, as I noted above, I'm not all about voting the party ticket. I've voted mixed ticket more than anything in the past. In '96, when I voted for Clinton, national security wasn't the issue that it was now. I agreed with downsizing the military while upgrading the equipment. I agreed with welfare reforms (although I think we need more), and the economy was in good shape. Those issues carried greater weight at the time, so they guided my decision.
What, the discussion about Wright and his reaction speech? Well, you know, it was hypocritical given his comments about his daughters post Imus. Unfortunately, we haven't had a chance to discuss that because someone was trying to tell us how Hagee / McCain was no different.
Someone like JHB can genuinely claim to have switched sides due to the race discussion, you cannot. [/e1]
Funny. So, my claim that this would hurt him with swing voters, proven by JHB switching his vote, is invalid because I wasn't going to vote for him in the first place? I swear, I couldn't make this stuff up. That was rich.
You are right, I wouldn't vote for him because of that. You see, I have this notion that if I want those things I should work for them instead of being beholden to some politician for them. And it is a bad thing that I feel more strongly about what I believe to be bad for the country than what baseball team I don't like? Weird tack you took there.
This is meaningless. There were people from both sides who either expected to be impressed or expected to be disappointed. I don't care what they think. I have my issues for the reasons I've communicated. Reasons that were, subsequently, dismissed out of hand.
|
These are all issues topics. I think we should also vote on issues. I think its fine if someone doesn't like obama because of his policy stances, and I have no doubt that you judge him accordingly.
That's why I get a bit miffed at the stuff about him being muslim, or about what his wife says about the first time she's been REALLY proud of her country, or about what his pastor says 5 days after 9/11.
It's all clap trap intended to take the issues off the table and to make people vote based on a visceral reaction based on someone's background, associations etc.,
Just as I don't assume that McCain is a homophobic bigot when Pastors Hagee and Parsley shake his hand, calling him a good conservative and then back him unequovically, I don't believe Obama is an ignorant racist for ONLY denouncing and repudiating the comments made by his now-retired and never-seen-on-the-campaign-trail preacher.
We've been over the policy differences and will agree to disagree. You're all about individualism and strong national defense and that's fine. I just wonder what strong national defense has gotten us? Preemptive attacks got us a leader without WMDs and then 12b a month in Iraq. Is that the individualism and low-federal spending you were looking for?
Given that McCain has "misstated" multiple times that Iran is training Al Qaeda--despite the fact that this isn't true and he has corrected himself--and given that he has been supporting a war with Iraq even long before 9/11 because he was absolutely sure that Saddam had enough biological weapons to destroy the world multiple times over, I don't have as much faith in his judgement as you do.
That said, it's a tough job and one where sometimes judgement is the best--and only--tool one has at their disposal.
PS: I wouldn't call it politically convenient for Obama to have been against the war when he ran for Senate in 2002. Given that most of the country supported it... just sayin'.
Otherwise, yeah, if you don't want to get into a spitting match about whose reverand or ardent supporter or sought after supporter said what, then let's stick to the issues. Otherwise, it is perfectly legitimate to show that McCain--and many consesrvatives in general--regularly court out the reactionary anti-islam, anti-gay, anti-evolution crowd. It's part of their "base".
I know you're not most of these things, but you have to admit that conservatives seek them out like the liberals seek out fringe left-leaning groups with some radical ideas.
And yes, the pencil comment was in good fun, but it wasn't respectful. You have a sharp tongue ORS (or finger tips??) and sometimes you--like myself--can come off as being condecending when you don't mean to. I still think you're a good guy, even if we disagree on just about any non-baseball related issue under the sun.
Thanks for sticking through this discussion all the way!