My Photo

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    My Articles

    Blog powered by TypePad

    Become a Fan

    « Kaus & Wright on Obama & Ayers | Main | Show of Hands »

    October 19, 2008

    TrackBack

    TrackBack URL for this entry:
    http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c191353ef0105359a0ae4970c

    Listed below are links to weblogs that reference As Predicted...:

    Comments

    General Powell's endorsment was as eloquent and well thought out as I have ever heard.

    McCain has crossed over the line to where I have now lost any and all respect for the man. What a coward for not having the balls to address this issue directly and forcefully to Obama's face when he had the chance.

    Colin Powell's endorsement is irrelevant, as are his thoughts on Sarah Palin. Denouncing Palin as inexperienced and then endorsing someone with far less experience to be president is self-contradictory, not well thought out.

    Regarding the Ayers issue being the only one that McCain can count on to win him the presidency: nonsense. He has the tax issue on his side, an issue raised by Joe "the Plumber" Wurzelbacher, to which Obama gave a typically socialist answer. If Obama loses the election, it will be that ill-considered (but reveling) reply that Obama gave, as well as the shameless vetting of Mr. Wurzelbacher by a vicious liberal media upset that a mere American citizen would question The One, that brought it about.

    Oh, Mike, whatever the buzzword is this week, you parrot it.
    Here's some tonic for that:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nh_c5bbvmqc

    Colin Powell said: "Our great strength is in our unity and our diversity."

    Gee, never heard that one before. And you accuse me of parroting?

    And if Powell is so concerned with the "tone" of this campaign, where was he when the left started smearing Sarah Palin and her family? I'm not seeing much unity or diversity there.

    The "parroting" had to do with the socialism reference.

    As for defending Palin: are you stating it's the job of those in/previously in executive office? If so, where's Bush been? How about Cheney? Let's get Rumsfield in there.

    Had a good conversation today about the latter two; how they've been kicking around since Ford and their particular brand of conservatism could not get the traction they desired, not under Reagan, not under the first Bush. Not until W (...and talk about being in over your head) and the neocons did they get to do what they'd been wanting to do for three decades. Great job guys; way to run up that deficit while bringing down American credibility in everyone BUT the neocons eyes, and even they're leaving in droves, or trying to find purchase on what's left of their ideology. This is as plain as day, from Brooks to Buckley to Noonen to the red states going blue. Keep talking about how it's all about Obama and his inexperience and his terrorist allies and that pesky suspect middle name, but the pool of people that still swallow this stuff is becoming shallow, indeed, and I don't blame them for getting out and looking for better. And Palin ain't it.

    Did you note that the hard hitting interview of republican nominee McCain was on Fox News, the supposed biased network?

    Well, if Obama wins the presidency I'm interested in how every supporting him feels in a couple of years when they pay several thousand dollars more a year in taxes.

    "Great job guys; way to run up that deficit while bringing down American credibility in everyone BUT the neocons eyes, and even they're leaving in droves, or trying to find purchase on what's left of their ideology. This is as plain as day, from Brooks to Buckley to Noonen to the red states going blue."

    Ah, so it's all the fault of the "neocon" boogeymen, who like the "Religious Right" in the '90's and the "New Right" in the '80s "stole" conservatism from its rightful inheritors: who I am to believe are David Brooks, Peggy Noonan, and Christopher Buckley.

    Brooks, Noonan, Christopher Buckley, et al. would have me think that conservative America lives in a "cocoon" and that we should be worried about what the liberal intelligentsia thinks of us, lest conservatism slip into obscurity.

    Well someone forgot to tell that to the tens of thousands of Americans attending Palin rallies, the millions of Americans who live in red states and enjoy low crime, low taxes, having the freedom to drive what we want and smoke where we please, and having political leaders who share our values (Palin) rather than look down upon them (Obama).

    As for "neocon" foreign policy being unsuccessful, tell that to the millions of Iraqis and Afghans who today enjoy freedom where once there was only tyranny and suppression. Also consider the pro-American governments elected in such allegedly disenchanted nations as France, Italy, and Canada. Where's the decline of our credibility there?

    And consider that there have been *no* terrorist attacks on American soil since September 11, 2001.

    That's a rather odd definition of "failure" from my standpoint.

    Wait a minute...is Amy Poehler pregnant? pppppph.

    I thought the Palin dynamic added an extra cringy-ness to the end of the show when everybody is supposed to love everyone and hug. That was good.

    Kelly ~

    But can we depend on Obama to keep his word? That is his proposed tax plan. What will it be like a couple of years into an Obama presidency? Democrats historically enlarge government programs and they must tax citizens to pay for it. If they don't get enough from the rich they'll tap the middle class.

    I feel bad for McCain. He has made so many mistakes. The Bill Ayers thing is literally all they've got. That is sad, sad, sad. Now they have to resort to calling Obama a socialist. We know where that's going. I just wonder when the robocalls will flat out call him a communist black panther.

    oh and Brett, "If they don't get enough from the rich they'll tap the middle class."

    I'd rather they start with the rich than go directly for the middle class, as John McCain is proposing with a a tax cut for the wealthy. Who do you think is going to pay for that? You and me.

    How does the republican party convince people on the bottom of the economic ladder to think they should be against "spreading the wealth around" when those very people would clearly be on the receiving end, i.e. public assistance? Many of them are already.

    I grant there are factions of the world that are very grateful for American intervention and protection -- I misspoke there. But you must not mistake again, ever, that I am for big government; that I want anyone telling me where I can smoke and what I can drive and whom I am allowed to trust determined by some list drawn up by an ideologue. I'd also appreciate not being told who to hate. I'd also thank the government to keep their hands off my email, my phone, and my body.

    Nancy, the Frontline special may not be as much of an eye opener for you as it was for me, mostly because you probably took the time to read about him (which I admit I didn't until recently).

    McCain's biggest mistake was wanting to be president in the first place. He made a faustian bargain with republican party because of that ambition. Watching him explain the robocalls, you can see him flinching with anger and embarrassment and regret. After what he's been through with his party that he now has to sit there and defend tactics that were used against him, that he doesn't believe in, is sad and tragic. That is what throwing away your principles and "winning at all costs" looks like.

    Obama hasn't had a long enough career--he hasn't had enough time to be forced into an ideological corner like McCain has. But I think there are signs of similar trade-offs he's had to make, such as publicly condemning his pastor and severing ties with many in the black community. I don't think Obama is above it.

    Nancy, you are venturing into Jack Bodanski territory when it comes to 'objectivity' here. McCain's defense of the 'robo-calls' is perfectly legitimate. His relationship with Ayers is most definitely a legitimate issue, and those calls say nothing untrue about it. He said he'd "never do it himself" in reference to UNTRUE robo-call ads. That isn't the case here and you are disingenuous to suggest as much.

    As for Palin's performance on SNL, well...we all know what lens you were viewing it through. Jeez...can we just get this damn election over with already? 'Normal Nancy' was a lot more fun.....

    Normal Nancy - ha!
    A friend of mine emailed last week, wanting to know if the election was over yet.
    Gives me an idea...

    "it is only the Ayers question that can raise enough doubt to win McCain the election. You know it, I know it."

    I think the Ayres thing has hurt McCain much more than it helped him. When he and Palin amped up the Ayres stuff, they suffered in the polls. Yes, it rallies the hard right at the Palin rallies, but that's preaching to the choir.


    The comments to this entry are closed.