StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Darth Raptor wrote:

Durandal wrote:What possible contribution can these people make to a government controlled by the Democrats?

Keeping us honest? The Republican propensity for making shit up to slander their opponents suggests that they *should* be all over any real, serious corruption like white on, well, the Republican Party. Corruption and abuses of power are the biggest issues with a hypothetical Democratic monopoly. The Democratic platform might not need tempered by conservative ideology, but individual Democrats might need to be tempered by conservative viciousness.

Meh, that's the best I could come up with.

Darth Raptor wrote:

Durandal wrote:What possible contribution can these people make to a government controlled by the Democrats?

Keeping us honest? The Republican propensity for making shit up to slander their opponents suggests that they *should* be all over any real, serious corruption like white on, well, the Republican Party. Corruption and abuses of power are the biggest issues with a hypothetical Democratic monopoly. The Democratic platform might not need tempered by conservative ideology, but individual Democrats might need to be tempered by conservative viciousness.

Meh, that's the best I could come up with.

CmdrWilkins wrote:About the only thing I could forsee republicans doing in a positive sense right now i for the old fiscal conservatives uniting with the blue dogs to ignore the social issues, pass some reasonable budgets but also finally seperate the Republican party from the kooks (or at least help create a new center-right party while the Republican party moves hard to the right and leaves off being a major national influence). In an ideal scenario we would have a decent sized (but minority) center-right party of Blue Dogs and fiscal conservative republicans, a decent sized (majority) of progressive or center-left Democrats, a small hard right Republican party which can't field a viable Presidential candidate but have a few voices in Congress, and the still tiny Green and Libertarian parties to take the rest of the parties to the extreme.

Pulp Hero wrote:It looks like FOX news just got shutout from the Obama campaign again.

They had a talking head "interviewing" Biden:

Head: Sir, have you ever heard the quote, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" by Carl Marx? How is that different from Obama's views?

Biden:" Are you joking?"

After that even the circle jerk of pundits was criticizing the talking head (though they called a "victory" and that Biden was defeated by her "hard questions")

Crossroads Inc. wrote:Ok, watched the video and Wow... those "Question" should get that lady thrown out of any newes program anywhere ELSE in the world.

"Given that Obama is a Marxisit, how would his policy differ from Karal Marxist?
"Are you saying that Obama wont do anything? And Americas days as a World power are Over?"
"What do you say to people who say Obama wants to turn America into a Socialists country?"

I mean... WTF? is this a joke? I wanted to reach through the tv and slap this lady and say "THESE ARE NOT JOUNARLISTIC QUESTIONS!!!"

Naturally however, especially if you look at the titles of some of these posts on youtube, the Wacky Right see these "Hard hitting Questions" as a smashing blow to Biden, why, just look at:
" Real Reporter Asks Real Questions—Obama Campaign Angry—Barbara West..."

seriously WTF?

Guardsman Bass wrote: Assuming Biden has an academic knowledge of what Marxism actually is, he should have thrown that question back in her face - "Do you know what Marxism actually is?"

Or he could have just categorically said, "Barack Obama is not a marxist, in spite of blah blah blah".

CNN wrote:"You may recognize this famous quote," WFTV Anchor Barbara West told Biden on Thursday. "From each according to his abilities to each according to his needs, that's from Karl Marx. How is Senator Obama not being a Marxist if he intends to spread the wealth around?"

Biden laughed himself out of the unusually tough interview asking in response, "are you joking? Is this a joke?"

"No," responds West.

"Is that a real question?" Biden continues.

"That's a question." West said.

With a chuckle, Biden firmly tells West, "He is not spreading the wealth around. He's talking about giving the middle class an opportunity to get back the tax breaks they used to have."

"We think middle class tax payers should get a break, that's what we think," Biden added. "That's a ridiculous comparison with all due respect."

Obama has responded numerous times since his October 12 meeting with Joe Wurzelbacher in Toledo, Ohio that the conversation was taken out of context.

Since the final presidential debate in Hempstead, New York, 'Joe the plumber' references have been a common line of attack from Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin — telling voters — Obama plans to tax the American people.

Fleet Admiral JD wrote:Does anyone else feel like the Republicans are just incredibly frightened of the idea of losing some of their money and quite a bit of their authority? I mean like, scary, clinging-to-power-at-all-costs type of frightened.

McCain says Bush policy on economy is wrong

By MIKE GLOVER – 40 minutes ago

CLEVELAND (AP) — Republican John McCain promised to pivot from President Bush's economic policies and impose strict controls on government spending that would spur investor confidence and the stock market's recovery.

"I will protect your savings and retirement accounts and get this stock market rising again," said McCain, after huddling with economic advisers and pledging a break with Bush administration policies.

Aides said that McCain's call for cuts in the capital gains tax and tax breaks for seniors who invest would help the market rebound, a nod to the top issue on voters' minds little more than a week out from Election Day.

"A stronger economy with greater investor confidence would help turn the stock market around," said Tucker Bounds, a McCain spokesman. "That would help drive up stock prices and the market recover."

In his closing argument of the marathon election, McCain tread a thin line between bashing Democratic rival Barack Obama and making clear that he would steer a different course than the current GOP administration.

"We both disagree with President Bush on economic policies," McCain said. "My approach is to get spending under control. The difference between us is he thinks taxes have been too low, and I think that spending has been too high."

His most dramatic claim was a pledge to turn around a plunging stock market. Most of the progress he promised would come from the economic stimulus sparked by big tax cuts he's pushing, McCain said.

"I will create millions of jobs through tax cuts that spur economic growth," McCain said. The capital gains tax cut he's proposing would encourage investors, Bounds said.

Before he spoke, McCain met with economic advisers including former rival Mitt Romney and former Housing Secretary Jack Kemp. The event was designed to focus his message on the economic meltdown that has dominated the campaign and left him on the defensive. The downturn has helped boost Obama to a lead in the polls, both nationally and in key battleground states like Ohio.

"The difference between myself and Sen. Obama is my plan will create jobs, it's a difference of millions of jobs in America," McCain said. "My approach will lead to rising stock market prices, a stabilized housing market, economic growth and millions of new jobs."

Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton responded, "A day after John McCain said that he agreed with George Bush's economic philosophy, he continued to parrot the same failed policies that give billions to billionaires and big corporations while providing no relief at all to more than 100 million middle-class Americans."

McCain's meeting with economic advisers came as polls show him trailing Obama, with most Americans deeply worried about the direction of the economy. For weeks McCain has been seeking to distance himself from Bush and his economic policies and he made that break complete in the nation's industrial heartland. Obama has tried equally hard to tie McCain to Bush, repeatedly citing McCain's 90 percent support for Bush in Senate votes.

McCain opposed another economic stimulus package and said he would instead seek to bring spending under control. He made clear the advisers he met with would be part of his administration and it would steer a far different course than Bush.

McCain described an economic stimulus under discussion in Congress as "another $300 billion spending spree they are calling a stimulus plan."

"I would rather give the great American middle class additional tax cuts and let you keep the money and invest it in your future," said McCain.

McCain repeated his proposals to cut taxes for those who hold stocks for at least a year, and end requirements that force people to take money out of retirement accounts during the market's downturn.

He also said he would toughen rules governing the financial markets.

"I will demand complete transparency into the accounts and activities at all banks and insurance companies so they cannot take on the kind of risk that brought down the financial system," said McCain. "We will have strict rules of conduct on Wall Street and if they are broken, executives will be severely punished."

While he voted for a $700 billion rescue package for the financial sector, McCain said "the government will get out of the banking business fast" if he's elected.

Let me see if I have it right...

The Republican party keeps bringing up "Joe Plumber" this and "small-town pockets of 'real' America" that, taking the whole "folksy" image up to 11. And all the while they're giving tax breaks to the rich worth billions. Oh, and paying off those banks and bankers after the Wall Stree fiasco.

Obama wants to give tax cuts to the middle class, and I think return to taxing the really rich...

And Obama gets called a socialist, communist and Marxist?

How the hell do they get away with this shit? How do they get away with boasting about "Joe Plumber" and "small towns" and all that crap, while they screw over those same people in favor of the really rich??? And how can they cloud up the economic issue to he point that their "folksy" supporters don't realize they're being robbed, and believe that "spreading the wealth around a little bit" would be a BAD thing?

I can understand the sort of corruption that leads to pork-barrel spending; the idea is to be seen as "bringing home the bacon" to your state/district, so that they vote for you again... But how is it possible to both so thoroughly screw over the people you're trying to get votes from, AND (try to) villify the person who's policies would actually *help* them?

The National Republican Trust PAC, which aired one harsh anti-Obama ad that it also used to fundraise on Drudge and elsewhere, says it's putting $2.5 million behind this spot in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida.

The ad is exactly what many conservatives have been hoping would air for months: A Jeremiah Wright highlight reel, with a voice-over describing the pastor's long relationship with Obama.

"For 20 years, Obama never complained, until he ran for president," says the ad, which labels Obama, "too radical, too risky."

"This is the base giving a collective direction to where the campaign should have gone a long time ago," said Rick Wilson, the consultant who made it.

Garlak wrote:Let me see if I have it right...

The Republican party keeps bringing up "Joe Plumber" this and "small-town pockets of 'real' America" that, taking the whole "folksy" image up to 11. And all the while they're giving tax breaks to the rich worth billions. Oh, and paying off those banks and bankers after the Wall Stree fiasco.

Obama wants to give tax cuts to the middle class, and I think return to taxing the really rich...

And Obama gets called a socialist, communist and Marxist?

How the hell do they get away with this shit? How do they get away with boasting about "Joe Plumber" and "small towns" and all that crap, while they screw over those same people in favor of the really rich??? And how can they cloud up the economic issue to he point that their "folksy" supporters don't realize they're being robbed, and believe that "spreading the wealth around a little bit" would be a BAD thing?

I can understand the sort of corruption that leads to pork-barrel spending; the idea is to be seen as "bringing home the bacon" to your state/district, so that they vote for you again... But how is it possible to both so thoroughly screw over the people you're trying to get votes from, AND (try to) villify the person who's policies would actually *help* them?

Haruko wrote:R
The ad in question is embedded in that Politico page linked to above.

Anyone see this making any real difference?

I think this article from 2003 in the Exile makes a nice answer to the question

CmdrWilkens wrote:

Haruko wrote:R
The ad in question is embedded in that Politico page linked to above.

Anyone see this making any real difference?

Not a lick. PA is already so far in the bag for Obama that the 1 or 2 percent this could shift things won't have time to develop before the eleciton has come and gone. We have 7 days left and there just isn't enough time to shift things.

In the past, she said, “Alaska was conceding too much, and chipping away at our sovereignty. And Alaska—we’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs.”

ArcturusMengsk wrote:Anything McCain does from now 'till election day is irrelevant.