All Posts by DailyBuzz

. . . Kimbo Slice get worked over in only 14 seconds last night? By a stand-in no less. I hear Shamrock was cut trying to get a soda out of the machine.

www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php

Originally posted by Snapps

Originally posted by Ampallang

As for as the terrorist thing goes....I honestly think it might gain just enough traction to matter.  That might sound unreasonable but consider that "Obama is a muslim" rumor has been around, thoroughly debunked, and is still believed.  Not only that, apparently, the number of people believing it has increased.  People, for whatever reason, will believe a lie if they are exposed enough to it.

The problem is the timing. If they kept this up for the last four months it might of stuck but now when american is in such a economical mess it`s just to obvious.  The people who didn`t support Obama will love this but the Obama supporters will see it as a Mcfrail ploy just when mcfrail is getting pawned in the polls.

The timing and the atmosphere makes a difference. This tactic might have worked in a normal election, but with the current ills facing the nation, this 'guilt by association' game won't play well with those struggling to stay afloat each and every day. Smears work with people who have nothing better to worry about. When 80% of the country thinks we're heading in the wrong direction, they'd rather hear solutions to problems than personal attacks. Obama has been winning over voters with his proposed solutions.

In McCain's defense though, he hasn't been winning on issues anyway. He might as well pull stakes and give a last ditch effort. He really has nothing to lose.

Originally posted by Snapps

 Weaher it`s fact or not, it wont work. Unlike the Mcfrail supporters in this thread most americans will see this as nothing more than a republican/mcfrail desperate move to take the voters away from the real issues. It`s so predictable it`s not even funny.

Many americans will see this as a direct insult to their intelligence.

The lazy ones don't even have to infer it. The McCain camp said it outright:

"We're going to get a little tougher," a senior Republican operative tells the Post. "We've got to question this guy's associations. Very soon. There's no question that we have to change the subject here."

Originally posted by Praetoriani

I don't mean to offend, but how many topics about the US presidential elections do we really need? Wouldn't one suffice? Might as well call it the US Election Boards.

I'm really getting sick of all these anti-political posts. If you want to see other topics go start a thread about another topic.

If you aren't part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

Back on topic:

Obama would have to do something really stupid to lose this election. I mean REALLY stupid. Like, get caght in the Denny's restroom with a white chick.

Originally posted by xDarc

But none of it matters because it ain't gonna stick. 

You're right, it doesn't matter. The republican motto is "If you can't beat 'em, smear 'em".

I wonder what McCain was doing when all this stuff came up during the primaries. He was probably busy plotting a strategy to campaign against Hillary in the general election.

If this is McCain's 'hail mary', then he's truly fucked. He may well go down in history as running the worst presidential campaign ever. The moderates are going to roast his ass for running dirty.

Congrats Obama, you may win with 300 electoral votes.

Originally posted by Faxxer

on experience she BEATS Obama with Executive exp.  running a business, being mayor, being Gov. 

Your point is? She beats McCain on executive experience as well, so? It has been obvious since the primaries ended that executive experience wasn't the main concern for voters in this election. If it were, we'd be voting for either Mike Huckabee or Bill Richardson in November.

On spending,  she's conservative....   you REALLy want to acuse her of outspending Obama? are you shitting me?

She was mayor of 7,000 people for 7 years and left them $22 million in debt. As governor of Alaska she sought more federal earmarks (per capita) than any other state, while 85% of her budget was covered by oil revenue. This does not a conservative make.

On celebrity...  She's popular like Reagan was...and connects with the viewer like he did too.  NIcE!  I like it.

She's popular like Britney Spears and Paris Hilton (and yes, in some ways, Barack Obama).

As for the raling..  lol.  we rail against the attempt by many democrats to make Obama the next coming of Christ....ya, it's that bad.

At least the misguided Obama nuts have read the bible. You Palin nuts don't have a clue who she is. I suppose poor eyesight is a sign from god.

I sense . . . .desperation.

I sense . . . desperation.

I sense . . . . desperation.

www.youtube.com/watch

Originally posted by Ekibiogami

Originally posted by Faxxer

Originally posted by DailyBuzz

Originally posted by Faxxer

Every "bad" news about the war on terror is like a liberal cheering stump.  Why is that?  Do you want the terrorists to win?  

 

You will never understand as long as you believe the terrorists can lose.

I understand that a terrorist hates everything and i mean EVERYTHING I stand for.  this very forum would be shut down if THEY win.
 

you fail to grasp that they don't give a shit about how you think, believe, how well you go to church, or pray to a god or not...

They want you, me and everyone on here DEAD.  and they want what we have for themselves. 

YOU sir, don't understand the truth of this situation.  And you lack a basic understanding of FREEDOM also.

QFT tho in Buzzez defence i think he knows what freedom is, Its just not the exact same as what we think of it as.

These types of unilateral attacks only serves to create more terrorists than it eliminates. You do understand that our displays of aggression is what fuels their recruitment, don't you? The 'war on terror' cannot be won by the muscle of the US military. Although, we seem hell bent on proving it over and over again.

A must read site.

Originally posted by Warpriest02

and more have caught on http://thinkprogress.org/2008/10/03/palin-can-read/ all last night I noticed every time she gave a answer she would read off from that paper it was so obvious every answer she gave was scripted.

Since the debate allowed for follow-up questions, each had to take notes so they could remember specific points to rebut.

Nothing to see here, move along.

Originally posted by Faxxer

Every "bad" news about the war on terror is like a liberal cheering stump.  Why is that?  Do you want the terrorists to win?  

You will never understand as long as you believe the terrorists can lose.

Originally posted by Faxxer

Originally posted by DailyBuzz

And yet this was supposed to be a bad thing when conservatives wanted to charge Obama with being a "celebrity".

I really don't get it. McCain has spent his entire run leveling attacks against Obama, that he then later prescribed to in his own campaign. Is he actively trying to lose the presidency? I mean, trying to tap the energy and charisma of Obama is one thing, it's another when that makes you a walking contradiction.

 

---

This was pretty funny.

 

Oh yes, that link explains ALL of why you say what you say!  :P

The link was an unrelated, funny article, which is why I distanced it from my post. I'll use partitions from now, as not to confuse you in the future. I have no intention of diverting you from the substance. I simply want to offer a laugh when the opportunity presents itself.

The specifics of why I wrote the post are:

• lack of experience
• earmark spending
  
• celebrity
  

Railing against these have been cornerstones of the McCain campaign. At least they were, until he chose to steep his own campaign in all three.

Originally posted by Dekron

By that alone, Obama fails to meet your qualifications. He lacks any understanding of the issues. He is advised on everything he "knows" and he is guided on every bit of knowledge needed to "correct" the issue.

I am quite happy that someone, who is willing to listen to others (with extensive experience and intricate knowledge of issue specifics), is poised to assume control and lead us in a positive direction. It is not a sign of weakness to understand that others may be more informed than you are. It is,however, a sign of weakness to assume that you will make the right gut decision, and ignore the advice of those more informed than you are.

You need to look past this man's "glamor" and see that he is simply a puppet as was George W. Bush. Part of me hopes to hell Obama doesn't take the election because those who control him will guide him to reshape the United States into a disfigured scar of what was once a great country.

Bush was a leader, there is no doubt. I think you overlooked a key word in my statement though, the word "successful". Bush has rarely collided with knowledge and understanding during his presidency. He has simply had the ability to gather support for action. The action he implements is neither based on intelligence nor historical data. His judgment has been a failure of epic proportions.

This is the caveat in McCain's shift to the right. McCain has prescribed to the Bush campaign theme since 2000. Considering that McCain has no knowledge or understanding, he has chosen to hire the team that made gathering support the only objective. Watch for this in upcoming debates. He will speak to the republican base and offer no substantive changes from Bush's policies on the economy, Iraq, or health care. In doing so, he will continue to further alienate the moderates that have been burned by Bush policies.

This was written by John McCain in his autobiography:

“I make them [decisions] as quickly as I can, quicker than the other fellow, if I can. Often my haste is a mistake, but I live with the consequences without complaint.”

This method has been tried, and it doesn't prove beneficial to America as a whole. I, for one, do not want to live with the consequences his haste generates. I find myself fatigued from eight years of "decider" style leadership.

Originally posted by Zindaihas

She is a rock star, whether the left media wants to accept it or not.

 

And yet this was supposed to be a bad thing when conservatives wanted to charge Obama with being a "celebrity".

I really don't get it. McCain has spent his entire run leveling attacks against Obama, that he then later prescribed to in his own campaign. Is he actively trying to lose the presidency? I mean, trying to tap the energy and charisma of Obama is one thing, it's another when that makes you a walking contradiction.

This was pretty funny.

Originally posted by Dekron

This is a question open to everyone, but mostly to DailyBuzz or Falice as they are the most avid Obama supporters on this site. 

I find it insulting that you view my posts even remotely relative to Falice's troll threads with 7 words and a link. Although your chosen method is not the best way to garner a response, I'll throw you a bone out of pure diplomacy.

As far as qualifications go, it's about which policies work and which policies don't work. You can't extract politics from the equation, it's a political office for which they run. McCain is just as unqualified to be president as Sarah Palin. McCain has just been afforded more opportunities to prove it.

Qualities of a leader:

• An understanding of the issue
• The knowledge of what's needed to correct the issue
• The ability to gather enough support to turn knowledge and understanding into action

To me, that's the three basic qualities required to be a successful leader. If you were to trace my political affiliation back two years, you would find that I was a John Edwards supporter. I supported Edwards because he had understanding and knowledge. It was apparent pretty early on that Edwards lacked the ability to gather  enough support to win the primary. Hillary Clinton did not show understanding of the issue in regards to Iraq or foreign diplomacy, so i became an Obama supporter. Obama is the only candidate that has consistently displayed all three basic qualities.

Neither John McCain nor Sarah Palin have offered any indication that they can combine these three qualities. In my opinion they do not understand the issues we face, do not know what's needed to correct the ones they do understand, or the majority of the nation will not support their efforts.

I am not what you would call a "persuadable" voter. I am against nearly everything that McCain stands for, both domestically and internationally, just as I have been ever since Bush was elected. I don't find myself very receptive to the Bush platform, no matter whether it's Bush, McCain, or Palin trying to deliver it.

Sarah Palin did much better than I was expecting. She did not stand there with a blank stare, or just ramble off about six talking points during a single sentence (like she had done in previous interviews). However, simply proving that you are not completely brain dead does not constitute a qualified candidate for VP. Especially the VP to the oldest president ever elected, with a long history of serious health problems.

The VP debate drew many comparisons to the presidential debate, in that both had a new, young candidate up against an older, more experienced candidate. When this is the case, you automatically lean toward the more experienced candidate. The only way for the less experienced to win the debate is to list the points of contention and articulate how the new agenda they propose will solve the nations problems. Obama did this in the presidential debate and scored a decisive victory. Palin was unable to do this in the VP debate for one very important reason, McCain offers no substantive changes from the current administration.

Palin cannot win the debate on issues, because she does not have as deep a knowledge and understanding as Biden with all of his experience. Her only chance at a win is to win on change. She offers no change because McCain offers no change.

Sarah Palin did much better than many were expecting. Prior to the debate, many people didn't think she was qualified to work in a shoe store. Now that the debate if over, many people have discovered that they were wrong about her, and in fact, she may be qualified to be assistant manager of a shoe store.

If this is what constitutes a "win" for you, then I suppose you are right.

You mean "the dad" didn't just start beating them both when he found the spilled cereal?

Originally posted by Faxxer  - @10:37

I had not seen much of Biden before tonight and found him to be sincere and likeable. 

 

Originally posted by Faxxer - @10:25

Palin connected with the audience directly. Biden did not. biden comes off like an old used car salesman.