If Barack Obama were running as a Republican...

[littleninja]

Platforms are irrelevant.

Don't you know anything about politics?

 

[Slowlane]

She's 10... you are disgusting to make this kind of joke.

She must have hit a nerve?

 

[killallhippies]

Do you support Sen. Obama in his run for POTUS?

after reading this thread how could you not?

 

[WolfMann63]

Says the side that gave us the SwiftVets, Karl Rove, Andy Martin and Jerome Corsi.

The RWs are vastly worse than the LWs in this regard, both in sheer volume of smears employed and the proportion of them that are lies.

And I think you know all that perfectly well, Karen.

Thank you, I couldn't have put it better myself.

 

[LadyFunkenstein]

She must have hit a nerve?

Are you hinting at something? Spit it out. Be a man and say it already, stop beating around the bush.

I think that sex jokes about 10 year old children are out of line.

Now what are you getting at exactly by this "hit a nerve" comment? Because I haven't a clue.

Type it out in black and white for me.

 

[LadyFunkenstein]

LOL

Very cute...

.... coming from the insecure itinerate sales girl.

Lately, your threads remind me of Doll_Parts’.

Yet you read my threads, that's how smart you are. Too stupid to pass them by.

Like I said... ripped away that fig leaf.

 

[Slowlane]

Are you hinting at something? Spit it out. Be a man and say it already, stop beating around the bush.

I think that sex jokes about 10 year old children are out of line.

Now what are you getting at exactly by this "hit a nerve" comment? Because I haven't a clue.

Type it out in black and white for me.

Easy. There is something about her post that upsets you much more than the face value of the post. So, something about it either hit a nerve (not necessarily based on anything personal) or.....what?

 

[RightField]

Says the side that gave us the SwiftVets, Karl Rove, Andy Martin and Jerome Corsi.

The RWs are vastly worse than the LWs in this regard, both in sheer volume of smears employed and the proportion of them that are lies.

And I think you know all that perfectly well, Karen.

I think moveon.org, huffingtonpost and barack's own misdirection have much more volume and no truth. They've been attempting to downplay McCain's heroism:

[Quoted from some blog...not my own words] Contrast the absence of smears from the McCain camp with some of the outlandish remarks made by high-ranking Obama supporters. In April, West Virginia Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV said that because McCain “was a fighter pilot, who dropped laser-guided missiles from 35,000 feet,” and “was long gone when they hit,” the Arizona senator who spent five and a half years in a Vietcong tiger cage having his arms repeatedly broken didn’t really understand the carnage of war. “What happened when [the missiles] get to the ground?” Rockefeller asked a crowd at an Obama rally. “He doesn’t know. You have to care about the lives of people. McCain never gets into those issues.” That the great-grandson of John D. Rockefeller would impugn the wartime experience of John McCain is especially rich, given that the only “battle” Rockefeller has seen is when he hunts wild game at his 80-acre ranch in Jackson Hole, Wyo.

Rockefeller’s smear was the first salvo in a pattern of attacks meant to insinuate that McCain’s Vietnam experience not only shouldn’t count as meaningful “experience,” but rendered him psychologically unfit for presidential office. In May, Iowa Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin said of McCain, “Everything is looked at from his life experiences, from always having been in the military, and I think that can be pretty dangerous.” Over the weekend, retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark said that McCain is “untested and untried,” and elaborated that, “I don't think getting in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to become president.” Clark, you may remember, ran for president in 2004 on his record as a career military officer, so his comment, which he has not retracted, was not just morally offensive but self-discrediting.

The smears didn’t stop there. On Monday, Obama foreign policy adviser Rand Beers unfavorably compared McCain’s POW experience with “the members of the Senate who were in the ground forces or who were ashore in Vietnam,” and who “have a very different view of Vietnam and the cost ... than John McCain does because he was in isolation essentially for many of those years and did not experience the turmoil here or the challenges that were involved for those of us who served in Vietnam during the Vietnam War.”

It’s curious how anyone could argue that a man with such visceral understanding of the capacity for what America’s enemies will do to our men and women in uniform doesn’t fully appreciate the cost of war. But even more troubling is the unmistakable pattern of these smears, all of them unsubtly alleging that McCain is an unhinged, mentally unstable warmonger who would deploy soldiers capriciously because he hasn’t truly experienced the horrors of ground battle. Indeed, the claims of these four men — and the short period of time in which they were all uttered — are so similar in tone that one would be foolish not to at least consider the possibility they were coordinated by the Obama campaign. [End of Blog]

If you want to talk about Kerry and the Swiftboaters...the most damaging advertisement run by the Swiftboaters was Kerry's own testimony in front of congress. Kerry was the one who screwed up, the Swiftboaters merely brought it back to light.

What smears have you heard from Republicans? Highlighting Obama's meager experience isn't a smear...it's merely a factual consideration for voters to ponder. Don't get me wrong, I like Obama and if he were running on a platform of trimming government, lowering (really lowering) taxes, fixing social security and getting government out of the way of the individual creativity of our citizens, I'd be voting for him.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Imagine, for a moment, what it must be like for the dude (fiancé?) of Bristol Palin? Holy shit! Must be great going over to visit the Palins these days!

The thread is about the media. Clearly, the Obama campaign has made it clear that the baby topic is off-limits. But the media see this as a way to somehow discredit McCain and Palin.

Everyone knows, after all, parents have complete control over the sexual habits of their teenage children. Well, at least Democratic parents certainly do!

The media is in the tank for Obama and is too stupid to realize that they are, in fact, hurting his campaign by making this into the big media story of the week. Obama doesn't want it; Biden doesn't want it; McCain doesn't want it; Palin doesn't want it. But since the New York Times has become a cheap tabloid, not much above US Weekly Magazine, there's no stopping what they think is a masterful stroke at discrediting the immoral and loathsome candidates running for President and Vice President for the Republican Party. I'm sure they are very pleased with themselves.

Since they like Obama so much, the least they could do is to listen to his admonitions about this. But no, they are much to smart for that.

Look, you're being paranoid. Biden didn't get this kind of scrutiny when he was announced because he's been 35 years in the Senate and he's a thoroughly known quantity. And almost nobody outside Alaska knew anything about Sarah Palin a week ago, and she's being named to be a heartbeat away from taking over the presidency for a septuagenarian, so of course any story about her is News and any embarrassing or scandalous story about her is Big News, just automatically, and quite properly and legitimately. And whatever the newshounds find is what they find. They didn't put it into Palin's life, she did that herself.

And it would be exactly the same if the party labels were reversed. I don't recall the press going easy on Bill and his wandering cock. They did make out Ken Starr to be even worse -- but he was.

This was the first important choice McCain had to make as a candidate and he fucked it up. He chose someone who is not only unqualified but ethically dodgy. Worse yet, he did for the worst possible reason, to cross the line between pandering and whoring to the radical right. That's just how it is, and it's no use trying to blame it on the liberal media.

 

[Slowlane]

Look, you're being paranoid. Biden didn't get this kind of scrutiny when he was announced because he's been 35 years in the Senate and he's a thoroughly known quantity. And almost nobody outside Alaska knew anything about Sarah Palin a week ago, and she's being named to be a heartbeat away from taking over the presidency for a septuagenarian, so of course any story about her is News and any embarrassing or scandalous story about her is Big News, just automatically, and quite properly and legitimately. And whatever the newshounds find is what they find. They didn't put it into Palin's life, she did that herself.

This was the first important choice McCain had to make as a candidate and he fucked it up. He chose someone who is not only unqualified but ethically dodgy. Worse yet, he did for the worst possible reason, to cross the line between pandering and whoring to the radical right. That's just how it is, and it's no use trying to blame it on the liberal media.

And this changed your mind, right? You were going to vote for McCain before, right?

 

[LadyFunkenstein]

Easy. There is something about her post that upsets you much more than the face value of the post. So, something about it either hit a nerve (not necessarily based on anything personal) or.....what?

So, you don't think I can have the honest opinion that jokes about children being raped (because a 10 year old can't consent to sex no matter what twisted world you live in) is off limits unless I've been perhaps raped as a ten year old myself, or have a ten year old who was raped?

And so because I actually would speak out against it, I must be personally upset about it?

Are you being serious here? Because honestly, you are making me a bit nauseous. I don't see eye-to-eye with you politically, but recently I found myself under the impression that you might be reasonable.

If this kiddie sex jokey thing is a-ok to you, I think I should go back to not talking to you much. Because that's just wrong, and if you can't see it, that's your prerogative... but you just aren't someone I'd want to interact with on a social level. Not even online.

But you and karen can trade child-rape jokes all you want. Free speech and all that, I bow out.

 

[Slowlane]

So, you don't think I can have the honest opinion that jokes about children being raped (because a 10 year old can't consent to sex no matter what twisted world you live in) is off limits unless I've been perhaps raped as a ten year old myself, or have a ten year old who was raped?

And so because I actually would speak out against it, I must be personally upset about it?

Are you being serious here? Because honestly, you are making me a bit nauseous. I don't see eye-to-eye with you politically, but recently I found myself under the impression that you might be reasonable.

If this kiddie sex jokey thing is a-ok to you, I think I should go back to not talking to you much. Because that's just wrong, and if you can't see it, that's your prerogative... but you just aren't someone I'd want to interact with on a social level. Not even online.


But you and karen can trade child-rape jokes all you want. Free speech and all that, I bow out.

It wasn't a joke. She was trying to make a point and you are WAY overreacting. And, just to point out, if she were impregnated by a boy in her age range no law would have been broken. Your rape line is over the top.

 

[killallhippies]

It wasn't a joke. She was trying to make a point and you are WAY overreacting. And, just to point out, if she were impregnated by a boy in her age range no law would have been broken. Your rape line is over the top.

as was karen's ridiculous non-point.

 

[LadyFunkenstein]

It wasn't a joke. She was trying to make a point and you are WAY overreacting. And, just to point out, if she were impregnated by a boy in her age range no law would have been broken. Your rape line is over the top.

My saying that 10-year-old-girls-fucking-"jokes"-are-wrong isn't over the top. I wouldn't make that "joke" in person, and therefore I wouldn't do it on the internet either. But I realize most folks aren't like me.

If you think that's ok, and obviously you do, enjoy the thread. There's nothing more for me to say to you.

 

[LadyFunkenstein]

as was karen's ridiculous non-point.

Again, it isn't like you and I are buddies at all... damn that bitch has these idiots totally snowed. Hats off to her, in a sense, to be so horrible and objectionable, yet get complete fucking morons to think she is making a legit point.

 

[cutebrowngirl]

as was karen's ridiculous non-point.

Seconded

 

[KingOrfeo]

And this changed your mind, right? You were going to vote for McCain before, right?

I don't have to be a convert to criticize. But all this -- and I'm not talking about the baby thing, that's trivial, I'm talking about Palin's record in public life -- is going to change a lot of voters' minds, and against McCain.

 

[Slowlane]

as was karen's ridiculous non-point.

I'll agree that Karen could have used better taste.

 

[Slowlane]

My saying that 10-year-old-girls-fucking-"jokes"-are-wrong isn't over the top. I wouldn't make that "joke" in person, and therefore I wouldn't do it on the internet either. But I realize most folks aren't like me.

If you think that's ok, and obviously you do, enjoy the thread. There's nothing more for me to say to you.

Sometimes you're OK. Other times you're too hot headed for your own good.

(Shrug)

 

[WolfMann63]

as was karen's ridiculous non-point.

Thirded. I don't find a whole lot offensive, but that was pretty tacky and tasteless.

 

[Slowlane]

I don't have to be a convert to criticize. But all this -- and I'm not talking about the baby thing, that's trivial, I'm talking about Palin's record in public life -- is going to change a lot of voters' minds, and against McCain.

No it's not, because this is a presidential election not a vice-presidential. If it weren't for all the controversy about Palin 90% of the voting public would have no idea who the VP nominees are. There may be a few who will change but it will be on both sides - a wash.

You prove my point. You are going to vote for for Obama no matter what. So, Palin is of no interest to you unless there is a way to use her to help Obama.

 

[cutebrowngirl]

Sometimes you're OK. Other times you're too hot headed for your own good.

(Shrug)

Lol. Naked b00bs can be pretty distracting, eh?