Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Obama did great, but McCain hit the home runs

page: 5
6
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by walkinghomer
 


From Warren himself:

townhall.com...

“That's just sour grapes,” Warren said. “They both did fantastically well. The only question he knew, I gave them the first question and I was changing the questions within an hour [before the forum began.] I talked to both of them a week before the debate and told them all the themes. I talked personally to John McCain and I talked personally to Barack Obama. I said, 'We'll talk about leadership, talk about the roles of government,' I said I'd probably have a question about climate change, probably a question on the courts. I didn't say, 'I'm going to ask which Supreme Court justice would you not [nominate]. They were clearly not prepared for that.”




posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by theblunttruth

McCain has impressed me time and time again, he has this aura of conviction and experience that is vital for a president. Not only this but he comes across as a genuine person (as far as politicians go). .

[edit on 18-8-2008 by theblunttruth]


I have not been a big fan of the "Bush all over again" "McBush" line of attack on Senator McCain. I think it is an easy slam and not wholey accurate. BUT in this forum I could not help see the parallels. The surity and conviction that McCain showed appeals to people, just as Bush came across in 2000. It's comforting to a people unsure about their nations future. The truth is that the issues aren't simple. We have seen the quality of "conviction" in President Bush turn to blind arrogance and it has cost us dearly. I'd rather have have a POTUS who has built conviction after careful thought and consideration. Get everyone's perpective, consider everyone's views carefully and with empathy and then make a decision with conviction. You would be suprised how everyone, even those who disagree, backs that decision and passionately executes directives once they feel as if they have been heard and respected.

Obama offers a better quality of leadership.

I think both candidates had the questions in advance.
Obama said something concerning the "Orphans" question like "I Cheated and did some research on this issue before the forum." So I think niether candidate was giving unprepared answers entirely.

I think McCain listened to Obama's answers in the limo rather than go into the building and spend time in the "cone of silence". I am not sure I fault him. It was important for him to do very well and I am sure his campaign managers made the choice for him to stay in the Limo until the last minute and prep/listen to Obama's answers.

[edit on 18-8-2008 by maybereal11]

[edit on 18-8-2008 by maybereal11]



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by AndrewTB
 


Um, McCain cheated. Obama had to respond to questions he didn't know were coming. McCain not only heard the questions he heard Obama's response. He had time to memorize responses to the questions he already heard. In fact... sometimes he answered a question before it was done being asked!
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Krieger
 


How do you know this?



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Dronetek
 


In the link I provided. Read it.

Also a one line post isn't good.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 03:40 PM
link   
In most "games", "cheating" results in a loss. Now whether or not you believe that Mccain cheated in this forum, that is for you to decide.

I watched both canidates and despite all this talk about cheating etc, I STILL agree with Mccains stances on the issues talked about.

Issues such as abortion, gay marriage, does not bother me as a good president will do much better things then allow/disallow the following.

Obama wants to increase taxes. This is horrible! Do you all not realize that this will only make the current situation worse? You tax the rich (company owners), they lose profit. When they lose profit, they increase prices.

Now, what this will do is make the AVERAGE AMERICAN (middle class, and lower class), pay more for goods...while the companys will be paying more taxes to the GOVERNMENT and have INCREASED PROFITS from the average american by increasing their prices. It is a loss to the American people, and a gain to the government and the companys.

Something I also found funny is that when Obama was asked if he believes evil exists, and what he wants to do with it, he could not say destroy it as much as he wanted to. If he had said destroy it, that would contradict him on most of his positions regarding the war.

Also, this upsets me slightly, but what most of you are doing is what any new station is doing...just knocking down the other canidate. The BEST we can do is TRUST each canidates stance on a subject and pick which one we believe is better. Expressing our thoughts on whether Obama or Mccain is evil, a new bush, a muslim, etc should not be allowed in these threads. Those issues have been discussed plenty and all it is now is members forcing their opinions on one another.

Each of us believe the other canidate lies, and to put in simply, is full of bologna.

My question to all of you is, do you support increasing taxes or are you against it? Issues like THIS need to be looked at.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Krieger
McCain not only heard the questions he heard Obama's response.

In fact... sometimes he answered a question before it was done being asked!


I'm far from being a McCain supporter, but how is that cheating?



Sometimes the people on this site really scare me.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by FritosBBQTwist
 


I rather my taxes increase than the fruits of this nation send across seas to die for an unjust war. No more War. Do you know how much money is being wasted on Iraq ? What if we could have used that money here on AMERICANS. Maybe there wouldn't be a need to raise taxes.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by FritosBBQTwist

Obama wants to increase taxes. This is horrible!


Of course, he wants to give everyone in America "free" health care, but where do you think the money for the healthcare is going to come from? It just doesn't come from thin air.

Hasn't he actually proposed he wants to increase spending 600 billion dollars yearly on health care alone? We already spend more than 600 billion on health care, so Obama will bring health care spending to nearly 1.2 trillion dollars annually. 1.2 trillion divided by 400 million Americans is $3,000 a year in taxes YOU will have to pay on JUST health care alone! And don't forget the millions of Americans like leeches on welfare and illegal immigrants that don't pay taxes - so the honest taxpayer like you will even pay MORE then $3,000 a year.


This is why liberalism sucks, I don't see how anyone can support liberalism. The very meaning of the word "liberal" is "more", and when we are talking about liberal government spending money, that means they want to spend more money. And the hilarious part is liberals criticize Bush for spending too much money, but liberals will spend and waste 10x as much money and send the nation into bankruptcy.

Again remember, liberal = MORE. A liberal stance on war is MORE WAR. A liberal stance on spending is MORE SPENDING. A liberal stance on illegal immigration is MORE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. The list goes on.

How can anyone honestly vote a liberal into office and not hate theirself?

Oh that's right, all anyone cares about is gay marriage and abortion. Liberal stance on gay marriage = more gay marriage. Liberal stance on abortion = more abortion. These are trivial issues that should not effect your voting though.

Is it going to really matter if you can/can't marry your gay lover or abort your baby, if you don't even have a country to do it in, any way? When this nation goes bankrupt, it's all over. For good. No one is going to bail us out this time like they did in the great depression.

There are FAR, FAR more pressing and important issues to vote on than gay marriage and abortion.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by walkinghomer
reply to post by FritosBBQTwist
 


I rather my taxes increase than the fruits of this nation send across seas to die for an unjust war. No more War. Do you know how much money is being wasted on Iraq ? What if we could have used that money here on AMERICANS. Maybe there wouldn't be a need to raise taxes.


The war is not a lovely scene and I agree it has been built on lies...yet I feel that it still had done many good deeds (yes - I know there are bad ones mixed in - I accept that).

Keep in mind, just because you are voting against Mccain and for Obama does not mean you are voting for the whole conflict in the middle east to end...Obama supports war, just not in the same country/countries as Mccain. With that said, I would also prefer someone with a military backround when dealing with a WAR (go figure - I must be crazy).

Mccain is MORE of a pro-war man then Obama, but his policies at home are also much better IMO (such as the taxes).

My point - Obama doesnt mean the end to the war, just a shift in direction (and that shift doesnt mean pulling the troops back to the U.S for the most part).

Also, the troops sign contracts to basically give their life to the army...for what they sign in they better be aware of what they are getting into. Not saying that makes the troops deaths OK - but keep in mind they were not drafted...



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 04:28 PM
link   
Also thanks for the replies...I have usually been just a watcher here at ATS and it just irritates me when arguements come up about the same old not regarding the stances each canidate takes on policies.

Yay for on topicness. Now, back on topic...



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 05:25 PM
link   
Um, ITS CHEATING IN EVERY SENSE OF THE WORD!

THE ONLY REASON MCCAIN SEEMED TO DO SO WELL WAS BECAUSE HE GOT THE QUESTIONS IN ADVANCED, UNLIKE OBAMA, AND HAD TIME TO REMEMBER RESPONSES! HE ANSWERED SOME QUESTIONS BEFORE THEY HAD FINISHED ASKING IT!

In any school this would get you a big fat F. Hell in college if you did this on an exam you'd be thrown out!

You Neocons scare me. He clearly cheats and you're celebrating the fact he cheated!

Also, MCAIN HAS PROCLAIMED HE WILL RAISE TAXES TO PAY FOR A WAR WITH IRAN! So either way we have higher taxes. One will use the money on America, the other will give more to Halliburton to Murder US Troops overseas.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Krieger
Um, ITS CHEATING IN EVERY SENSE OF THE WORD!

THE ONLY REASON MCCAIN SEEMED TO DO SO WELL WAS BECAUSE HE GOT THE QUESTIONS IN ADVANCED, UNLIKE OBAMA, AND HAD TIME TO REMEMBER RESPONSES! HE ANSWERED SOME QUESTIONS BEFORE THEY HAD FINISHED ASKING IT!

In any school this would get you a big fat F. Hell in college if you did this on an exam you'd be thrown out!

You Neocons scare me. He clearly cheats and you're celebrating the fact he cheated!

Also, MCAIN HAS PROCLAIMED HE WILL RAISE TAXES TO PAY FOR A WAR WITH IRAN! So either way we have higher taxes. One will use the money on America, the other will give more to Halliburton to Murder US Troops overseas.


You need to come back down to earth.

I'm not a neocon, I'm a conservative, first and foremost, so I don't appreciate being called a neocon in a derogatory way.

How was McCain "answering questions in advance"? I have a feeling you are exagerating a wee bit here. Was he cutting the moderator off before he was finished asking the question? If so, what's wrong and cheating about that? Are you telling me you have never cut someone off while talking to another person? That is what happens in any conversation, any at all. Perhaps you just don't get outside enough and socialize.

Anyone got a youtube video of these debates? I want to see this "cheating" for myself.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by FritosBBQTwist

Obama wants to increase taxes. This is horrible! Do you all not realize that this will only make the current situation worse? You tax the rich (company owners), they lose profit. When they lose profit, they increase prices.


OMG - irrespective of which man is placed in office do you really believe we can just wish ourselves out of this fiscal hole Bush has buried us in?

If so, spit in one hand and wish in the other and tell me which one fills up first.

We're going to have to purchase our way out of the impeachable fiscal irresponsibility that has occurred.

no
way
around
it



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall

OMG - irrespective of which man is placed in office do you really believe we can just wish ourselves out of this fiscal hole Bush has buried us in?

If so, spit in one hand and wish in the other and tell me which one fills up first.

We're going to have to purchase our way out of the impeachable fiscal irresponsibility that has occurred.



That makes zero sense whatsoever. Bush overspends, puts us in debt, so the answer is to spend more?

Typical liberal answer to everything: Spend, spend, spend.

Here's an amazing idea, how about getting rid of some of the thousands of federal branches of government that we don't need and are just wasting money, and use that recovered money to pay off the debt.

Guess something as simple is that is something a politician would never think of!



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ADisbeliever


Typical reading-challenged response.

I didn't say anything about "spending" more. The belly-ache was that Obama was speaking of raising taxes. My response was that either man will have to raise taxes IF they intend to get us out of the debt we are currently in.

Monosyllabic translation: we can't get out of debt if we don't buy our way out of it...

that means we have to hand our dough to the man to pay off the debt...

don't care what the man's name is.

***
multi-syllabic option turned back on:

Stuff your political hatred else where. I'm a Republican.

[edit on 8-18-2008 by Valhall]



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 06:59 PM
link   
As I stated in my earlier posts, please leave the "cheating" remarks in the other thread. There is no PROOF for these statements so you cant say it is TRUE. As someone said before, its an "idea" you have, so dont force it upon others like fact.

Now, whether he "cheated" or not, can you atleast debate WHAT THEY SAID, no matter how well or poorly they spoke it?

Im not here for a "it doesnt matter, he flip flops" remark, as BOTH candidates do. All Im asking for is a simple response to how increasing taxes on the rich will help? To MY understanding, it will only make the companies lose profit, resulting in them raising prices. So the government profits, and the companies stay the same, while the American people lose.

I already explained this once and would appreciate it if someone responds to THIS without flippin the "omg he cheats" out.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
Typical reading-challenged response.

I didn't say anything about "spending" more. The belly-ache was that Obama was speaking of raising taxes. My response was that either man will have to raise taxes IF they intend to get us out of the debt we are currently in.

Monosyllabic translation: we can't get out of debt if we don't buy our way out of it...

that means we have to hand our dough to the man to pay off the debt...

don't care what the man's name is.

***
multi-syllabic option turned back on:

Stuff your political hatred else where. I'm a Republican.


Higher taxes results in higher priced goods, resulting in less spending, which will then have the same outcome as before, but with the people having less goods.

Of course they way you see it is that higher taxes = more money for them to pay off the debt...well, hate to break it to ya but many people cant afford it. Just from personal experience, money at the store, movies, and all that has made my family use the same amount of money for it, but just got alot less in return. That is what will happen if they raise taxes.

Less/lower taxes will do the same thing except the people will be able to get more goods for their buck. This will also allow more circulation of money, more growth, which is always good.

We get out of debt by stop wasting so much of the taxpayer money on crud, which I dont see happening for awhile, while my above statement will help rebuild the economy.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
My response was that either man will have to raise taxes IF they intend to get us out of the debt we are currently in.



No they don't. All they do is have to cut spending on the thousands of useless things they currently waste money on.
Raising taxes is not the only solution.


We could actually completely get rid of the income tax if we cut our spending back down to year 2000-2001 levels, and still pay off the debt at the same rate we are paying it off, with money left over. This is true.


Apparently you and many politicians have a hard time understanding this, so let me put it in an easier to comprehend form:

You owe a loan company $4,000. You have $4,000 in your wallet now that you could pay back the loan. But instead you buy a new widescreen HDTV for $4,000. Useless spending. So you say to your self "I have to work a 2nd job for I can pay back that $4,000 loan!" This is equivilant to the government raising taxes to get the extra money.

That 2nd job would not have been necessary if you had not wasted money on the widescreen HDTV. But because you wasted the money, the 2nd job (taxes) are now needed.

That $4,000 widescreen HDTV can be compared to the federal department "Ethics Office". Why do we need an "ethics office" that no doubt millions of dollars get wasted on? Or how about the federal department "Family Policy Compliance Office". Or how about "National Cemetery Administration". Why the hell do we need a "national cemetary administration"? Seriously.

These lists of federal branches/departments/officers might open your eyes:
www.americanfreemen.org...
www.lib.lsu.edu...




[edit on 18-8-2008 by ADisbeliever]



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 07:48 PM
link   
I actually don't need any eye-openers. I understand. I watched it happen. We went from a debt paid off and non-deficit operating status in 2000 to the worst debt and the highest deficit operation status we've ever had EVER, in 8 years. That's because we've got an egomaniac acting like the world's biggest "big-government" spender we've ever had in the White House.

I understand what caused that. I'm assuming when I look at your list of agencies and expenditures to cut that the war-machine fueled by false propaganda will be on the list, right? If not, that might actually be an eye-opener.

[edit on 8-18-2008 by Valhall]





new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join