I am posting in a forum, not employing a strategy.

• Obama in a lawsuit to prove his - citizenship.......just keeps getting better!!!
  • And McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone. - You've been out of the loop for a while...sm
    • I know you're grasping at straws but McCain - is legal kiddo........SM
      • Grasping at straws would be challenging - O's citizenship twice and losin both times. nm
        • Obama has been told this challenge will not - be dismissed by judge
          • Who told him? You? - Are you brave enough to cite your source? nm
            • Now here's the document and please take - the time to do your homework
              • DONT OPEN the above document, it contains - a computer WORM.
              • I thought so. How seriously do you think anybody takes - a source called obamacrimes.com? Try this one....
                • She probably never reads anything weightier - than checkout-stand tabloids.
      • But the bigger question remains: - Are YOU?
        • Aah, typical response from an O lover.... - we got proof, you don't!!!
          • There is no proof. Birth certificate has been - submitted, certified and the suit dismissed.
            • First of all, no it has NOT been dismissed... - judge won't allow it....second
              • I am posting in a forum, not employing a strategy. - Cite a source so we can have a real conversation.
                • sm - sm
                • It is still on the docket slated for a court date - are you just lazy or what?
                  • This proves that Phil Berg is a hardhead who - can't take "no" for an answer on a...sm
                  • Are you deaf? - show me the source, but.....
          • stereotyping is ignorant - .
            • Stereotyping is generalizations or assumptions - facts being shown here......nm

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Attack your opponents strong points.  Read many posts below that ham-handedly attempt to use this tactic.  Throw in a cup of "sour grapes" and NOW your cookin'.  Go Ron Paul!  Split the vote!

Can the super-rich former governor of Massachusetts - the son of a Fortune 500 C.E.O. who made a vast fortune in the leveraged-buyout business - really keep a straight face while denouncing "Eastern elites"?

    Can the former mayor of New York City, a man who, as USA Today put it, "marched in gay pride parades, dressed up in drag and lived temporarily with a gay couple and their Shih Tzu" - that was between his second and third marriages - really get away with saying that Barack Obama doesn't think small towns are sufficiently "cosmopolitan"?

    Can the vice-presidential candidate of a party that has controlled the White House, Congress or both for 26 of the past 28 years, a party that, Borg-like, assimilated much of the D.C. lobbying industry into itself - until Congress changed hands, high-paying lobbying jobs were reserved for loyal Republicans - really portray herself as running against the "Washington elite"?

    Yes, they can.

    On Tuesday, He Who Must Not Be Named - Mitt Romney mentioned him just once, Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin not at all - gave a video address to the Republican National Convention. John McCain, promised President Bush, would stand up to the "angry left." That's no doubt true. But don't be fooled either by Mr. McCain's long-ago reputation as a maverick or by Ms. Palin's appealing persona: the Republican Party, now more than ever, is firmly in the hands of the angry right, which has always been much bigger, much more influential and much angrier than its counterpart on the other side.

http://www.truthout.org/article/the-resentment-strategy

For the upcoming elections both this year and 08, do you think democrats should

(a) aggressively lay out their agenda, which includes backing of security recommendations of the Sept. 11 Commission, a pay-as-you-go budgeting plan to end deficit spending and for deeper restrictions on lobbying activities.

OR

(b) Wait and allow the republicans party finish demonstrating their failures, i.e., rising gas prices, war policies, etc.

I was reading the article below and thought I'd ask the liberals for their point of view.

George Will –

1. "McCain loses his head." 


2. "McCain childish, shallow, unfit for presidency."


3. "McCain in a Glass House." 


4. "McCain flustered rookie playing in a league too high."


5. Compares McCain to the ultimate drama queen (Queen of Hearts from Alice in Wonderland) /"off with his head" mentality after McCain says that Chris Cox of the SEC should be "decapitated."


6. "…McCain showed us his personality this week and made some of us fearful." 


7. "McCain shows he's not presidential."


8. VP pick "female Sancho Panza." 

Charles Krauthammer –

1. McCain VP pick "near suicidal."


2. "Bush Begat McCain."


3. McCain's "hidden agenda:  To kill the United Nations."


4. McCain has "Tempted fate one time too many."


5. "McCain is going down."


6. "Obama will be president."


7. "McCain's 100-year war."


8. "How many Hail-Mary's can one man throw?"

Ross Perot –

1. McCain's "classic opportunist, always reaching for attention and glory." 


2. Perot weighs in on the POW issue after paying for Carol McCain's medical bills following her horrible car wreck:  After he came home, he walked with a limp, she [Carol McCain] walked with a limp. So he threw her over for a poster girl with big money from Arizona [Cindy McCain, his current wife] and the rest is history." 


3. McCain, "unusually slick and cruel."


4. Cindy bails John out of gambling debts.

William/Bill Kristol –

1. Time for McCain to fire his entire campaign.    


2. McCain campaign is "stupid, pathetic, flailing."


3. "Palin represents a cancer on the Republican Party.  She is not even close to being qualified for the office she's seeking."


4. McCain has "derangement syndrome."


5. McCain should "stop unveiling gimmicky proposals every couple of days that pretend to deal with the financial crisis."

Joe McCain (John's brother) –

1. Pleading with campaign advisors to change strategy:  "Let John McCain be John McCain."


2. Loosening the tight (campaign) message control is needed because it has become "counter-productive"  and "counter-intuitive."


3. The campaign needs to make new ads that show John "not as crank and curmudgeon."


4. Decision to clamp down on press contact with intimates of the Arizona senator is "causing gangrene."

Ed Rollins –

1. McCain's prospects on winning the presidency have "vanished."


2. "You have to go give an alternative on the economy,"  To do otherwise could "give the Democrats not only the White House but sweeping congressional victories and a potentially filibuster-proof super-majority in the Senate." 


3. Has voiced his concern over a possible Obama "landslide."

I'm past convinced but time will tell just how politically motivated *Iraqi freedom* is to this administration.  How much you want to bet nobody gets it? 

I agree with Murtha, now that we have relieved Iraq of the Saddam regime the mission sould be getting our soldiers home safely.  But its not that easy with the new wave of terrorism that replaced Saddam's regime as a result of the war.

I still say though we have our own battles to fight at home and need to accelerate training what Iraqi men are willing to fight for democracy and do what we can to restore their infrastructure and get out.  With the right enthusiasm (or upcoming congress elections) it can be done.  ~Democrat

------------------------

Murtha Details His Exit Strategy

Jan. 13, 2006

CBS) Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., believes the vast majority of U.S. troops in Iraq will be out by the end of the year and maybe even sooner. In his boldest words yet on the subject, the outspoken critic of the war predicts the withdrawal and tells 60 Minutes correspondent Mike Wallace why he thinks the Bush administration will do it

“I think the vast majority will be out by the end of the year and I’m hopeful it will be sooner than that,” Murtha tells Wallace, this Sunday, Jan. 15, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

“You’re going to see a plan for withdrawal,” says Murtha. He believes Congress will pass it because of mounting pressure from constituents tired of the war that could affect the upcoming midterm elections.

The political situation will force President Bush to accede to Congress, he says. “I think the political people who give [the president] advice will say to him, ‘You don’t want a democratic Congress. You want to keep a Republican majority, and the only way you’re going to keep it is by reducing substantially the troops in Iraq,’” Murtha says.

The president has said publicly that any decision regarding Iraq would be based on the situation there and not on Washington politics.

Murtha rejects the president’s argument that the war on terror is being fought in Iraq. “The insurgents are Iraqis – 93 percent of the insurgents are Iraqis. A very small percentage are foreign fighters….Once we’re out of there, [Iraqis] will eliminate [foreign fighters],” says Murtha.

“[President Bush] is trying to fight this war with rhetoric. Iraq is not where the center of terrorism is,” he says. “We’re inciting terrorism there....We’re destabilizing the area by being over there because we’re the targets,” Murtha says.

When Wallace challenges him by saying, “General Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, says your comments are damaging recruiting and hurting the troops,” Murtha responds by saying it’s the military’s own fault. “[Troops] are rotated [into Iraq] four and five times. They have no clear mission,” says Murtha. “One of the problems they have with recruitment is [that] they continually say how well things are going and the troops on the ground know better.”

President Bush has said there are only two choices in Iraq: victory and defeat. And he has implied that Murtha is a defeatist. Murtha, of course, disputes that.

There have been 13 servicemen from his Congressional district killed in Iraq. Could the families of those dead be offended? Wallace asks.

“Well, I hope [those families] understand,” says the Vietnam combat veteran. “It’s my job, my responsibility, to speak out when I disagree with the policy of the president of the United States,” says Murtha. “All of us want this president to succeed…I feel a mission here, with my experience, that I have to help the president find a way out of this thing.”

more like a place for a few reasonable posters from each side and one poster who does not give opinions but responds to nearly every post with a wordy, judgmental, and oftentimes incomprehensible mish-mash of distortions, innuendo, and self-congratulatory statements. Give her a break folks.  She always uses the same moniker (except when she is defending her own statement with a different moniker) so she is easy to open/close or skip over.

Remember - every village has one.  Maybe she is the one missing from Texas.

I just realized that participating in a forum is the most frustrating thing one can do.  One can never win, only lose.

Look, how GP is now treated by many of you.  I think she is a very nice, eloquent lady, whose comments I really enjoy to read, no matter how long they are.  And I do not like long posts, in general.

I agree with GP - let the new president catch his breath and breathe a little, without being stalked.

respectful.  I don't care what your political affiliation is.  This board has gotten quite foul and I will start banning people from posting if the tone doesn't change.  There is nothing wrong with posting in a respectful and kind manner.  If you don't like the President, fine, but do not post slurs on this forum about the President and do not post hate America posts.  If these simple requests are too much to bear then go post somewhere else.

You tell 'em GP!!

And then saying they can only talk about pets they don't have any more, not their current ones!  Or a car enthusiasts forum where people can only speak of vehicles they used to own, not what they currently drive. 

What's the point in this forum, then, to only talk about the future or the past, not the present?  How ridiculous!

and what I saw was that when asked the question when is someone rich?  He was unprepared to answer.  He was off his talking points and tried to answer it.  To him, one has to make 5 mil a year to be considered rich.  He realized quickly what a boner he had made, smiled and said that would become a joke.  The joke is how many people still consider repubs to be concerned with anyone but the wealthy.  They are it rich; you should be too. If you are not, you are on your own.

that it's ignorant and very dangerous.)  Look at where all the hysteria has been leading some of McCain's supporters.  Suddenly there's a tangible threat of violence from these people, and it started sounding like a lynch mob.  That mentality seems to be far to pervasive on MT Stars.

What is it about this issue that makes you people think that anyone finds YOU to be a threat to the point where you are all suddenly retreating and saying you won't post here any more???????????

The problem is with the breach of security on this site.  Unless you're the owner/moderator/administrator, this does not apply to you personally.

This issue should have been brought to the forefront on the company board a week ago when this incident happened, but I guess too many people were shocked by the blatant lack of ethics and the not so subliminal message that if anyone says anything negative about this company, your ISP will be tracked, and at that point, I, along with probable others, was afraid to post anything further.