Bill Kristol IN THE TANK FOR OBAMA!

[JohnnyBz00LS]

He joins the chorus of conservatives speaking the truth about McCain.....

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/13/opinion/13kristol.html

Kathleen Parker says Palin should step down.........

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-092608-kathleen-parker-column-link,0,889134.column

George Will.........

http://www.mlive.com/grpress/business/index.ssf/2008/09/george_will_lashes_out_against.html

Charles Krauthamer " Here were Republicans -- the party that controlled the White House for eight years and both houses of Congress for five -- wildly cheering the promise to take on Washington. I don't mean to be impolite, but who's controlled Washington this decade?"

David Frum:
"The Palin choice looks cynical. .. If it were your decision, and you were putting your country first, would you put an untested small-town mayor a heartbeat away from the presidency?"

LOL, life must really SUCK for McCain supporters, getting abandoned by their own party blowhards. Looks like the only ones sticking w/ McPalin are the real whackos like Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly......... oh and a few here at LvC. :bowrofl:

 

[Calabrio]

Kristol says that McCain has been let down by his campaign managers.
I don't think anyone would disagree with that.

The Kathleen Parker article you posted is nearly a month old and she is expressing a different sentiment now.
http://townhall.com/columnists/KathleenParker/2008/10/04/sarah_palins_bridge_to_somewhere

The George Will article is a month old as well. You're right, he doesn't like her. But he's an inside the beltway guy who has been moving further and further out of touch with the core of the party for some time now. He's still an excellent writer and intelligent man, but most people disagree with him on this issue.

And Frum is just wrong. He's also another elitist beltway Republican who is completely out of touch. I'm not familiar with his work, so I'm not sure why you're holding him up as an example. He wouldn't be getting any attention from the media right now if not for his critical assessment of Palin.

Krauthamer is another guy who was down on Palin after the two poorly received TV interviews, but has changed his position following the debate.

Would you like me to post a list of the Democrats who aren't supporting Obama? Any of us can. Perhaps you're a little surprised that within the Conservative Right of this country we actually have opinions and don't walk in complete lock step with the party leadership? Of course, the GOP isn't presenting McCain as though he were the Messiah, as though we should avert our eyes in the presence of "The One."

I say all this knowing that you're a lightweight who lacks the substance to argue any position he supports. Instead, you're just going to lay a mine here and then run off, looking for some more dishonest or misleading nonsense on the fringe lefty websites you love to borrow from.

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

Would you like me to post a list of the Democrats who aren't supporting Obama? Any of us can. Perhaps you're a little surprised that within the Conservative Right of this country we actually have opinions and don't walk in complete lock step with the party leadership?

PLEASE, go ahead, I have not doubt that there are many Dems who have complained about and spoken against Obama. Typically because hes NOT liberal enough and won't stop talking about issues and go on a character attack against McCain. What an SOB!! But then again, if you do, then YOU would be admitting that the "Liberal Left" of this country have differing opinions and "don't walk in complete lock step with the party leadership", who in this instance leans towards the center.

Of course, the GOP isn't presenting McCain as though he were the Messiah, as though we should avert our eyes in the presence of "The One."

No, the GOP is presenting McCain as the one who was initially despised by the party, but when they realized all of the other wackos in their party running for the nomination were un-electable, picked him as the "Great White Hope".

I say all this knowing that you're a lightweight who lacks the substance to argue any position he supports. Instead, you're just going to lay a mine here and then run off, looking for some more dishonest or misleading nonsense on the fringe lefty websites you love to borrow from.

Really Calabrio, personal attacks are not becomming of you, leave that to those like Brian, Shag and David "Percy Wetmore" Fossten who have cemented their reputations on the "attack when losing" philosiphy.

 

[StincolnLincoln]

Lmao!!!!!

 

[Calabrio]

PLEASE, go ahead, I have not doubt that there are many Dems who have complained about and spoken against Obama. Typically because hes NOT liberal enough and won't stop talking about issues and go on a character attack against McCain.

To the contrary- I was speaking of the Hillary supporters and old school Democrats who have made their way over to the McCain campaign in recent years.

As for Obama being "not liberal enough." This is an important point, one that frustrates me to know end. He is effectively presenting himself as this centrist candidate. It astounds me that he's aloud to do this completely unchallenged. There is nothing in his political history, political associations, his attributed writings, or anything that indicate that he's a Democrat candidate positioned slightly to the right of Bill Clinton.

But then again, if you do, then YOU would be admitting that the "Liberal Left" of this country have differing opinions and "don't walk in complete lock step with the party leadership", who in this instance leans towards the center.

Actually I would argue that the center left is becoming increasingly alienated by the rest of the Democrat party. That the lunatics are now running the asylum over there. Groups like Moveon.org, Dailykos, and anything else that Sorros can sink money into are steering that ship in a dangerous direction. Yet despite this, with the aid of the MSM, Democrats are still presented as the "center" party.

The notion that Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid are "centrist" is insulting.

No, the GOP is presenting McCain as the one who was initially despised by the party, but when they realized all of the other wackos in their party running for the nomination were un-electable, picked him as the "Great White Hope".
That's not an accurate depiction of events. It doesn't even resemble what happened.

McCain was never picked as the "Great White Hope."

But the way the media handles McCain is another telling example of the bias in the press. I know people who actually though supporting McCain would be a good thing because he had so much cross-party support and such a positive relationship with the press. The reality has always been, the affinity for McCain wasn't because of who he was, it was because they loved the story of a Republican that was a thorn in GWBs side.

It's incredible the ugly partisan attacks that are being directed from the left right now,DESPITE the fact John Kerry actually attempted to score political points by floating the idea he'd like to select McCain as his VP.

Yet now the party and the media act as though he were some radical candidate.

Really Calabrio, personal attacks are not becomming of you, leave that to those like Brian, Shag and David "Percy Wetmore" Fossten who have cemented their reputations on the "attack when losing" philosiphy.

You responded, and in doing so, proved me wrong on that point.
I incorrectly anticipated you'd drop a post and run off, just to provoke a response. I was wrong, so I retract the statement.

 

[fossten]

Really Calabrio, personal attacks are not becomming of you, leave that to those like Brian, Shag and David "Percy Wetmore" Fossten who have cemented their reputations on the "attack when losing" philosiphy.

This just proves that you haven't been paying attention. If you had, you would have noticed that I no longer use personal attacks, and haven't for a long time. Except maybe when being attacked by lowlifes such as you.

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

To the contrary- I was speaking of the Hillary supporters and old school Democrats who have made their way over to the McCain campaign in recent years.

As for Obama being "not liberal enough." This is an important point, one that frustrates me to know end. He is effectively presenting himself as this centrist candidate. It astounds me that he's aloud to do this completely unchallenged. There is nothing in his political history, political associations, his attributed writings, or anything that indicate that he's a Democrat candidate positioned slightly to the right of Bill Clinton.



Actually I would argue that the center left is becoming increasingly alienated by the rest of the Democrat party. That the lunatics are now running the asylum over there. Groups like Moveon.org, Dailykos, and anything else that Sorros can sink money into are steering that ship in a dangerous direction. Yet despite this, with the aid of the MSM, Democrats are still presented as the "center" party.

The notion that Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid are "centrist" is insulting.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this point. Apparently you don't consider FOX as part of the MSM? Rupert Murdoch likes to think they are.

That's not an accurate depiction of events. It doesn't even resemble what happened.

McCain was never picked as the "Great White Hope."

But the way the media handles McCain is another telling example of the bias in the press. I know people who actually though supporting McCain would be a good thing because he had so much cross-party support and such a positive relationship with the press. The reality has always been, the affinity for McCain wasn't because of who he was, it was because they loved the story of a Republican that was a thorn in GWBs side.

It's incredible the ugly partisan attacks that are being directed from the left right now,DESPITE the fact John Kerry actually attempted to score political points by floating the idea he'd like to select McCain as his VP.

Yet now the party and the media act as though he were some radical candidate.

The media is reacting primarily to McCain's change of character from the 2000 campaign, and even the "early '08" campaign, to the current '08 campaign he is running now. At first he WAS a "maverick", standing up to his party, promising he'd run a "clean campaign", fighting BuSh on the tortue issue, etc. Back then I actually LIKED McCain, and was disheartened that initially it looked like he wouldn't have a chance at the GOP nomination. BUT, as time went on, McCain stopped being that "maverick" and began embracing many of BuSH's positions, and it wasn't until THEN that he started gaining ground on the other GOP contenders. The more he acted like BuSH, the more the core GOP party liked him, and the more turned-off those outside of the GOP base dis-liked him. It is no wonder he is being branded "BuSH III". He abandoned HIS core values to adopt ones that appease the GOP core. "Country First" my arse, more like "McCain First". The only solstice I have in McCain's nomination is at least he isn't the other guys, and he IS the best the GOP party has to offer, but that's not saying much IMO.

Additionally, the attacks the McCain campaign has waged on Obama have been more personal than policy, while the attacks on McCain from the Obama campaign have been primarily on policy and very little personal ("erratic"). Exactly the opposite of what McCain promised. Excuse me for being like the majority of voting Americans, I'm sick of personal "guilt by association" attacks and desire more debate on issues.

You responded, and in doing so, proved me wrong on that point.
I incorrectly anticipated you'd drop a post and run off, just to provoke a response. I was wrong, so I retract the statement.

:Beer

 

[Calabrio]

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this point. Apparently you don't consider FOX as part of the MSM? Rupert Murdoch likes to think they are.

I do consider them part of the mainstream media, and the closest thing to fair reporting available in a mainstream outlet.

My point still stands.

The media is reacting primarily to McCain's change of character from the 2000 campaign, and even the "early '08" campaign, to the current '08 campaign he is running now. At first he WAS a "maverick", standing up to his party, promising he'd run a "clean campaign", fighting BuSh on the tortue issue, etc. Back then I actually LIKED McCain, and was disheartened that initially it looked like he wouldn't have a chance at the GOP nomination. BUT, as time went on, McCain stopped being that "maverick" and began embracing many of BuSH's positions,

NOTHING CHANGED accept the credible threat he posed to Democrat tyrany. Nothing. McCain has been constantly right on the issues he's right on, and he's steadfastly wrong on the ones he agrees with you on.
Nothing has changed.

and it wasn't until THEN that he started gaining ground on the other GOP contenders. The more he acted like BuSH, the more the core GOP party liked him, and the more turned-off those outside of the GOP base dis-liked him. It is no wonder he is being branded "BuSH III". He abandoned HIS core values to adopt ones that appease the GOP core. "Country First" my arse, more like "McCain First". The only solstice I have in McCain's nomination is at least he isn't the other guys, and he IS the best the GOP party has to offer, but that's not saying much IMO.

You're speaking purely out of ignorance.
He's absolutely consistent. The only thing that changed was the fact he became a genuine threat to a Democrat Presidency. When he was just mucking up the chances of Bush winning, or presenting himself as a thorn in the side of the administration, the media loved him. Not for who he was, but as a tool to undermine Bush.

His policies HAVE NOT changed.

Additionally, the attacks the McCain campaign has waged on Obama have been more personal than policy, while the attacks on McCain from the Obama campaign have been primarily on policy and very little personal ("erratic").

Absolutely untrue and dishonest.
First of all, attacking Obama on specific policy is very difficult because he, like Kerry, will say ANYTHING. So if you hammer him on a specific, he's simply refer to another time when he contradicted himself to wiggle out of it.

And secondly, it is not a personal attack to take issue with a political unknowns history with radicals. This is critical for the public to know and understand.

Furthermore, Obama has the luxury of avoiding the majority of the "personal" attacks because he's able to leave that to his surrogates and the media to do it for him. Whether it's the late night comedians doing it for him, or the journalist going through Sarah Palin's garbage looking for something.

The impression you're making is that McCain and Palin aren't being attacked on a personal level because it's not coming from Obama's mouth directly. First off, he is launching personal attacks. And second, his hitmen are doing it viciously for him.

Exactly the opposite of what McCain promised. Excuse me for being like the majority of voting Americans, I'm sick of personal "guilt by association" attacks and desire more debate on issues.

It's not "guilt by association."
Its guilt by action. Showing demonstrable patterns of behavior, identifying his political and philosophical foundation. These are critical things to know. Where did he come from, what shaped his ideology. Who's shoulders has he been riding on to account for this rocket to super stardom.

This isn't guilt by association.
This is critically important stuff.

 

[fossten]

Additionally, the attacks the McCain campaign has waged on Obama have been more personal than policy, while the attacks on McCain from the Obama campaign have been primarily on policy and very little personal ("erratic"). Exactly the opposite of what McCain promised. Excuse me for being like the majority of voting Americans, I'm sick of personal "guilt by association" attacks and desire more debate on issues.

Yeah, Obama doesn't do personal attack ads. He only attacks McCain for being old, for having had cancer, for being unable to use a computer because of his war injuries, and for having a wife who owns a lot of real estate.

Great point, Johnny, you win the ignorance award again.