Politics: Sorta Black guy v Sorta Old Guy

by **Bob Loblaw** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 08:02:32

mpmcgraw wrote:BARACK OBAMA

BARACK OBAMA

BARACK OBAMA

BARACK OBAMA

BARACK OBAMA

btw i lol'ed my self to sleep last night when I saw on one of those issues sites that mccain wants to build a 700 mile long fence along the u.s. mexican border.

why dont we just kick ourselves in the balls throw a few billon dollars in the gulf and give a few million illegal immigrants jobs and just save the time.

If we could get Lost's smoke monster to protect it, we may be in business. . . .

by **Bob Loblaw** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 08:11:31

dajafi wrote:
Phan In Phlorida wrote:
Bob Loblaw wrote:
philliesphhan wrote:
Phan In Phlorida wrote:There will be more, and it will get uglier (clue: Obama's brother might be a B-I-G problem. If you don't know what I'm referring to, you eventually will). If you thought it was bad during the primaries, just wait.

You mean that he has a brother in China?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/17/opinion/29cohen.html

Not that one. Abongo.

Oooh--it even sounds Scary and Different!

PiP, know anything about Hillary's brothers?

Abongo "Roy" Obama who is a Luo activist and a militant Muslim who argues that the black man must "liberate himself from the poisoning influences of European culture."

"Abongo's new lifestyle has left him lean and clear-eyed, and at the wedding, he looked so dignified in his black African gown with white trim and matching cap that so me of our guests mistook him for my father," Obama wrote in Dreams From My Father.

by **jerseyhoya** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 16:13:12

What John McCain Underestimates

Halperin is good

by **drsmooth** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 16:34:51

jerseyhoya wrote:What John McCain Underestimates

Halperin is good

While I enjoy the "Major League v Little League" reference comparing the candidates' vote-generating technical infrastructure - and its prominent ranking - most of the rest is equalled or surpassed in insight by the typical poster here (this means you, too, mpmcgraw!)

Most here probably give McC more credit for under-underestimating Obama than Halperin does

by **Bucky** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 16:51:21

Warszawa wrote:
dajafi wrote:I don't know enough about this as I should, and presumably I'll address that at some point... but I've read that a straight tax on carbon would be more efficient than cap and trade. Certainly in terms of disincentivizing the behavior, that makes sense. But it might be too disruptive to the economy to get passed politically.

The real problem is that the Democrats are so invested in running against "the high cost of gas" that they miss the larger goo-goo point: it's only through the high cost of gas that we get to needed behavior change. Less driving, more transit usage (and better systems), higher-mileage vehicles and ginormous investment in alternatives are the necessary steps.

The Bush Republicans, "governing" only with an eye to keeping and expanding power, never were going to reach this conclusion. McCain certainly might, and Obama probably would.

I wish Obama would give one of his Kennedy like speeches and challenge this country to be completely off oil by say.... 2020. Then you won't have to worry about emmissions, the middle east, gas prices, carbon credits, etc. At least McCain has mentioned that he would make getting off oil a major priority in his administration. And am i wrong to think that creating alternative energy sources would create huge new economic windfalls?

I've been contempating this.....does anyone have any info on Mccain's proposal?? I'm betting there's a key word missing here....it probably really is:

"At least McCain has mentioned that he would make getting off foreign oil a major priority in his administration."

by **jerseyhoya** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 17:27:54

Bucky, as far as I know, he's mostly talking in platitudes at this point. One thing that has stood out is how much he emphasizes increasing our usage of nuclear power. Beyond that I think it's mostly the same old "more fuel efficient vehicles, renewable energy" stuff without much in the way of specifics. But he does seem to really care about it.

If I stumble across something that looks like an actual plan I'll post it. The best I did was this speech from last April.

John McCain's Speech On Energy Policy

by **dajafi** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 17:37:54

I wonder if one thing that might be good about the "town hall/Lincoln-Douglas" debate proposals now floating around is that they might impel Obama and McCain toward agreeing on/committing to certain things. In that situation I would think the urge to find points of agreement might be powerful, and these two guys aren't as partisan/ideological/dickish as most of their predecessor candidates anyway.

So a discussion--I'm not even sure it would constitute an argument--about nuclear power could fit in there somewhere. As it should.

by **dajafi** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 18:06:09

From the Daily Kos archives. I found this fascinating for all the little things he got wrong and, of course, the one big thing he got hugely right... bonus points for the implied guess that McCain would win for the Republicans.

Dec. 2006: "If Obama runs, he wins"

by **TheDude24** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 18:19:07

Bucky wrote:
"At least McCain has mentioned that he would make getting off foreign oil a major priority in his administration."

Hasn't bush said that too repeatedly, and then done little to make it happen?

by **Phan In Phlorida** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 18:58:57

dajafi wrote:From the Daily Kos archives. I found this fascinating for all the little things he got wrong and, of course, the one big thing he got hugely right... bonus points for the implied guess that McCain would win for the Republicans.

Dec. 2006: "If Obama runs, he wins"

Clark :?:

by **Laexile** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 21:59:56

TheDude24 wrote:
Bucky wrote:
"At least McCain has mentioned that he would make getting off foreign oil a major priority in his administration."

Hasn't bush said that too repeatedly, and then done little to make it happen?

Bush would argue that his efforts (exploring for more oil domestically, building new refineries, nuclear power) have been blocked by the Democrats.

by **pacino** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 22:24:24

Laexile wrote:
TheDude24 wrote:
Bucky wrote:
"At least McCain has mentioned that he would make getting off foreign oil a major priority in his administration."

Hasn't bush said that too repeatedly, and then done little to make it happen?

Bush would argue that his efforts (exploring for more oil domestically, building new refineries, nuclear power) have been blocked by the Democrats.

The first two are trying desperately to cling to a finite resource. LOLZ, try to argue that Bush

by **VoxOrion** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 22:54:36

^ that's some seriously lame joking.

WHY HASN'T BUSH REPLACED 245 MILLION GASOLINE DRIVEN CARS YET WHAT A FAILURE

by **pacino** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 22:56:40

not really, it is finite

there's also no point in starting a 4 page argument about drilling or about bush. both are pointless

there is nothing wrong with supply, and we get oil from canada moreso than any other nation. prices are fine, people need to deal with it and a short-term solution may need to occur, but that shouldn't effect long-term policy, which would be to develop land responsibly and delve into newer technologies

by **VoxOrion** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 23:06:37

Wait, if there's nothing wrong with the supply why is it relevent to comment on oil being finite?

You're trying to get out of a pointless statement with other pointless statements preceeded by a dismissive statement attempting to back away from a pointless observation.

Only Obama is allowed to do that.

by **mpmcgraw** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 23:07:08

yes pacino is all knowing.

resistance is futile.

by **VoxOrion** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 23:07:29

mpmcgraw wrote:yes pacino is all knowing.

resistance is futile.

There's no point in arguing it so lets just agree that pacino is right and move on.

by **pacino** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 23:10:09

VoxOrion wrote:Wait, if there's nothing wrong with the supply why is it relevent to comment on oil being finite?

You're trying to get out of a pointless statement with other pointless statements preceeded by a dismissive statement attempting to back away from a pointless observation.

Only Obama is allowed to do that.

there's nothing wrong if one really believes in this 'market' thing. people like to drive, prices go up. lots of oil is available elsewhere, not all that much here that wouldn't require a lot of exploratory drilling. i'm not sure why we need to drill here when we can import it from other countries while we develop better technologies at home. that's all i'm saying

and i thought putting an LOLZ in a comment made it pretty clear that it was a joke.

edit: not sure why it's too much of a stretch to actually believe that supply is fine in the short-term but finite in the long-term either, if i were to try and defend what i stated

by **pacino** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 23:10:25

VoxOrion wrote:
mpmcgraw wrote:yes pacino is all knowing.

resistance is futile.

There's no point in arguing it so lets just agree that pacino is right and move on.

thought you were better than feeding the troll

by **mpmcgraw** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 23:17:05

troll? serially?

I think we really have come full circle and you are just completely julio now.

Archived

Politics: Sorta Black guy v Sorta Old Guy