BS: Popular Views on Obama

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 02:14 PM

BB - We're hearing too much about your whole damned presidential campaign, period! No wonder people in the USA are getting sick of it. ;-)

Here's your problem. You have a national campaign that lasts over a year. That's insane. Do you know how long national election campaigns last in Canada? 6 weeks.

No one would be getting sick of hearing about Obama, McCain, Hillary Clinton or anyone else if your society had had the sense to limit their election campaigns to a reasonable length of time.

Really, man, you are living in a country that is to a certain extent (politically speaking, I mean) out of its mind. You just don't realize it, because you take the way it is for granted.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 02:32 PM

"Aren't you ashamed of being so obdurate and insensitive?"


                I ain't neither one of them things!

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 02:40 PM

That's exactly what Chongo always says! Have you considered joining the APP, Rig?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 04:05 PM

The APP? Can't say that I have. Does that stand for Apes Phor Pobama?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 04:08 PM

American Primate Party...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 05:41 PM

Does the Smirking Chimp belong to that?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 05:59 PM

Belong to it? He's the party leader! He's the APP's candidate for President of the United States. What rock have you been hiding under that you don't know that?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 06:53 PM

I guess I just thought there was no way he could run for another term!

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 08:25 PM

Different smirk, different chimp.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Barry Finn
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 10:43 PM

I couldn't agree more LH, I've been sick of this long term campain for the onset. It's taken away from the business at hand & kept the nation's eye focused far from where it should be & the negativity, spin, hype & flip flopping is enough to one want to dump the whole process. They should say what they've got to say, debate it & get on with the elections. What pain & suffering, why would a human put themselves through all that for a yr. Well, MaCain must miss the mistreatment but what's Obama's reason, he's at least got a head on his shoulders & no peach stuck in his cheek.
Did I just say that?

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 10:55 PM

The only reason Obama or any other candidate would put up with it is because they have no choice. That's how it's been set up. I would think that any normal human being who ran for president would be totally heartsick, disgusted, and disillusioned with the entire process by the time the primaries ended, let alone by election day.

Rig - You are confusing George W. Bush with Chongo Chimp! I think you should know what Chongo's campaign slogan is:

"This time let's put a REAL chimp in the White House!"

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 10:57 PM

Barry:

Why, I believe you did!! Fancy that!!!

:D


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Ron Davies
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 05:07 AM

''Aren't you tired of hearing about John Mccain?".   Gee, I wonder what the answer would be to that.

As I said, it's nice to know that some things, like the totally evidence- and logic-free postings of the CEO of Smears R Us, can be relied on.

And please, don't bother to cite another poll.

Any thinking person should know how much credence to give them--for the reasons I cited, among many others.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 06:28 AM

The campaigns are too long? What about poor Hillary? She's been campaigning for President since 1998 at least! She didn't help Gore or Kerry much. Will she help Obama? Not wholeheartedly I don't think.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 08:26 AM

"Will she help Obama?"


                   Not if she's smart. Her campaign is now making noises to the effect that she would have won Iowa if Edwards would have fessed up earlier, and that Obama, then, would not have won the election.
                   At the same time, she is telling her supporters what they need to do to enter her name for consideration in the convention, so it doesn't look like she did it herself.
                   She wasn't ruthless enough during the primaries, but maybe she'll make up for it now. Maybe the Democrats will still have an opportunity to win this thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 01:46 PM

The announcement of drilling in ANWAR and more offshore drilling would bring down the price of crude in the oil trading market.

______True

______False

Any body got the guts to answer?

If the price of gas at the pump drops 40 cents or more between now and September 11 will you give credit to the Democratic Congress for not drilling?

______True

______False

This is yes or no question which is calculated to give credit to a bunch of assholes for not doing anything.

My answer is no because it has already started dropping beginning with Bush's action. If the democratic congress does nothing it will probably continue to drop.
If the democratic congress shows renewed opposition to offshore drilling and/or drilling in ANWAR, it will probably reverse or elimante the trend.

Some how you want to give credit to Congress for GWB's actions.

Maybe you want to say "thank you congress for not counteracting what GWB did".

Now maybe you have the courage stop sidestepping my much simpler and straightforward question.

It is designed to explain why the price of gas will start dropping upon the decision to drill even if the new oil will not come online years from now.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 02:32 PM

If she doesn't get to run this time (and she still might, you never know)...watch for Hillary in 2012! ;-)

I'm bettin' that she and Chongo will be facing off for the White House.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 03:22 PM

You can't have Hill without Bill's big nose gettin' into everything. ;D

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 03:47 PM

Sawz:

I think you are misattributing the recent lowering of price. If it has anything to do with drilling in ANWAR it is because the world is overly populated with people like yourself who are not very good at math.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 04:18 PM

From Fox:

"Barack Obama's campaign is rolling out a number of centrist Republicans who are endorsing the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee over Republican rival John McCain — in a show of his ability to win cross-over votes.

A conference call Tuesday featured former Iowa Rep. Jim Leach, former White House intelligence adviser Rita Hauser and former Rhode Island Sen. Lincoln Chafee, who represented his state as a Republican, but switched to become a Democrat so he could vote for Obama in the primary.

"I'm convinced that the national interest demands a new approach to our interaction with the world," said Leach, adding that Obama offers the leadership to do that.

Leach lost his bid for another term in office in 2006. He was a foreign service officer before being elected to Congress and served as head of both the International Relations and Banking committees.

Leach predicted that a lot of Republicans and independents are going to be attracted by Obama's campaign.

The Obama camp also pointed journalists to reports that Fairbanks, Alaska, Mayor Jim Whitaker, a Republican, also has announced his support for Obama.

Obama's GOP supporters' criticisms of McCain are familiar ones — that he'd represent four more years of Bush-Cheney policies, particularly in foreign affairs. Hauser complained that McCain's statement on Georgia was "bellicose" in threatening to kick Russia out of the Group of Eight industrialized nations, and that Obama's statement was much more appropriately internationalist.

They also reversed a line McCain has used against Obama. While McCain has said Obama wants to put party before country, Hauser and Leach said that in supporting Obama, they were putting country before party.

..."

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 05:41 PM

Sawzaw,

The price at the pump always goes down in August and September. But if if you are going to give anyone credit, it has to be Obama. After all, he's the one responsible for the rise.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 09:43 PM

"...former Rhode Island Sen. Lincoln Chafee, who represented his state as a Republican, but switched to become a Democrat so he could vote for Obama in the primary."



                   And we all remember when George W. Bush smirked when he talked about "Linc Chafee," when he wanted Chafee to do something for the administration, and now, after having been driven from office by the Right-Wing-Religious-Wackos, Chafee is finally striking back.

                   Who can blame him?

                   But there are still Republicans out there who remember President Eisenhower, and it's not very propable that they will be voting for Obama.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 09:50 PM

Not without a good dose of your best props.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 11:23 PM

Amos: "people like yourself who are not very good at math"

You do the math and let me know what the results are. Otherwise I will be forced to assume that you are the one who is not very good at math.

"If it has anything to do with drilling in ANWAR" Who said it had anything to do with ANWAR? Would tha announcement of allowing drilling in ANwar lower the price of crude on the trading market or not?

Do you have the courage to answer the simple true or false question I posed or would you prefer to sit on the sidelines, claim superior knowledge and question the questioner?

Thought so.

Jack: To be fair you are correct about the seasonal price of gas in the past but gas usage usually peaks in July. This year gas usage has gone down all year yet crude oil prices kept climbing and started dropping when Bush announced the end of the ban on offshore drilling.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 11:38 PM

The answer, you antagonistic supercilious meretricious snipe-bucket is that if "We are drilling in ANWAR" were announced, it might enthuse the markets temporarily, shifting the price down on an imaginary basis. But it would do nothing to correct the fundamental supply and demand equation.

But, I tell ya what, buddy. I have had enough of your sneering passive-aggressive illogic. Go practice your dark arts on someone else. I neither want nor need them.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 11:59 PM

Explain to us mathematically challenged underlings how increasing the supply of oil does "nothing to correct the fundamental supply and demand equation"

Explain to us the fundamentals of the oil futures market. Explain why the anticipation of the severity of shortages causes prices to increase.

That is unless your are "too good" to back up your rhetoric, pompous verbiage and rock solid judgment with some knowledge of what the hell you are talking about.

Here is the question for you to sidestep again:

Would the announcement of allowing drilling in ANWAR lower the price of crude oil on the trading market or not?

______YES

______NO

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 12:46 AM

I'm gonna hedge and say "maybe". ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 06:38 AM

Amos,


"you antagonistic supercilious meretricious snipe-bucket"


"But, I tell ya what, buddy. I have had enough of your sneering passive-aggressive illogic. Go practice your dark arts on someone else. I neither want nor need them."




Actually, from your recent attacks on those who disagree with you ( rather than the facts that they present,) you DO need SOMETHING.

You are begining to act a lot like Martin Gibson.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 06:51 AM

Washington Post:


"The Great Energy Confusion
By Robert J. Samuelson
Wednesday, August 13, 2008; Page A15

Forget about a candid national conversation on energy. As John McCain and Barack Obama campaigned last week, that much seemed clear. To lower oil prices (which were already dropping), Obama proposed releasing 10 percent of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. This is an atrocious idea. The SPR was intended as insurance against a catastrophic loss of oil from wars, embargoes, terrorism or natural disasters. It should not be manipulated cynically for political advantage. Earlier, McCain suggested suspending the 18.4-cents-a-gallon federal gasoline tax; that was another bad and expedient idea.

No doubt Obama and McCain want to relieve Americans' discomfort at the pump. The trouble is that Americans should feel discomforted. We want a return to cheap, secure oil; we want painless pathways to lower greenhouse-gas emissions. These are fantasies; they should not be indulged. "

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 06:53 AM

Washington Post:

"Erasing The Race Factor
Obama's Best Hope Is To Face the Issue Directly

By Peter Beinart
Wednesday, August 13, 2008; Page A15

Barack Obama has a problem. He really, really doesn't want this campaign to be about race. He wants it to be about change, President Bush, the economy, gas prices, Iraq, Afghanistan -- almost anything else. But it is going to be about race, at least in part. That's the lesson of recent weeks, when the McCain campaign brought up race (on the pretext that Obama had brought it up first). The Obama campaign tried desperately to change the subject but couldn't. Once the chum was in the water, the media sharks went wild.

Obama should take that as a warning. Race will be central to this campaign because McCain needs it to be. He simply doesn't have many other cards to play. And it will be central because every time Republicans light the match, the press will create a forest fire. Race is just too titillating to ignore. The history of post-Vietnam presidential elections is littered with Democratic nominees who thought they could run on policy and ignore symbolism. This year, the symbolism will be largely racial. Obama can't avoid that. He needs to control the race debate instead.

Already, there is reason to believe that race is weighing Obama down. A survey this year by CBS and the New York Times found that 94 percent of respondents would vote for a black presidential candidate. But when asked if "most people" would, the number dropped to 71 percent. Notre Dame political scientist David Leege estimates that 17 to 19 percent of white Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents will resist voting for Obama because he is black. That's far more than the percentage of Republicans who may vote for Obama because he is black. And it's a major reason that this election -- despite Obama's myriad advantages -- remains close. "

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 10:10 AM

You can announce today, twerp, and you won't see a drop of oil for seven to ten years. If you don't see the differencve between announcing and producing, it explains a lot.

A.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 03:39 PM

Amos:

More news from the real world:

"A new report from Wall Street research house Sanford C. Bernstein says that California actually could start producing new oil within one year if the moratorium were lifted. The California oil is under shallow water and already has been explored. Drilling platforms have been in place since before the moratorium."

Here is the question for you to sidestep again:

Would the announcement of allowing drilling in ANWAR lower the price of crude oil on the trading market or not?

______YES

______NO

Amos is ignoring news and in only listening to opinions, via anti-Bush RSS feeds. That is a sure path to the perpetuation of ignorance.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 03:46 PM

What the hell is ANWAR? I thought it was a Muslim name for men, but I've never seen it all written in caps before.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 06:04 PM

>>>"A new report from Wall Street research house Sanford C. Bernstein says that California actually could start producing new oil within one year if the moratorium were lifted. The California oil is under shallow water and already has been explored. Drilling platforms have been in place since before the moratorium."

A report from the real world would include whether or not California would have a say in the matter, it very unlikely that they would jeopardize their number one industry for a few more barrels of oil.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 06:58 PM

Jack - Frankly I don't think off shore oil drilling would have any affect on the cultivation of marijuana.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 07:29 PM

Excellent point, Rig! ;-)

Meanwhile, what do people named Anwar feel about all this?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 08:30 PM

Don't encourage him Hawk.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 09:05 PM

It's a typo. It should be spelled ANWR: Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.


Sawz, you just bllunder on in defiant ignorance of the point that I was making.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 12:58 AM

I concede I made a mistake in the spelling of ANWR.

Now are you going to continue to bllunder on to avoid answering a simple question?

"you won't see a drop of oil for seven to ten years" Read and listen very carefully. The question was will it cause the price of crude to drop, not when the oil will be available.

Would the announcement of allowing drilling in ANWR lower the price of crude oil on the trading market?

______YES

______NO

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 07:48 AM

It might. It could cause speculators to look for another scam to put their money into. But by the time you finally get the oil, people will be on to other things, hopefully.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 08:14 AM

If there is ever an announcement on releasing ANWR for drilling the price of oil for that day, for delivery in three months from that day, will do one of three things. Rise, fall or stay the same. There will almost certainly be other news that day which will undoubtedly have more effect. For instance, if John McCain has got us in a shooting war with Russia by then, I doubt even you would notice the oil market.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 11:51 AM

Wall Street Journal opinion:

"The Obama Tax Plan
By JASON FURMAN and AUSTAN GOOLSBEE
August 14, 2008; Page A13

Even as Barack Obama proposes fiscally responsible tax reform to strengthen our economy and restore the balance that has been lost in recent years, we hear the familiar protests and distortions from the guardians of the broken status quo.

Many of these very same critics made many of these same overheated predictions in previous elections. They said President Clinton's 1993 deficit-reduction plan would wreck the economy. Eight years and 23 million new jobs later, the economy proved them wrong. Now they are making the same claims about Sen. Obama's tax plan, which has even lower taxes than prevailed in the 1990s -- including lower taxes on middle-class families, lower taxes for capital gains, and lower taxes for dividends.


Overall, Sen. Obama's middle-class tax cuts are larger than his partial rollbacks for families earning over $250,000, making the proposal as a whole a net tax cut and reducing revenues to less than 18.2% of GDP -- the level of taxes that prevailed under President Reagan.

Both candidates for president have proposed tax plans. But they are starkly different in their approaches and their economic impact. Sen. Obama is focused on cutting taxes for middle-class families and small businesses, and investing in key areas like health, innovation and education. He would do this while cutting unnecessary spending, paying for his proposals and bringing down the budget deficit.

In contrast, John McCain offers what would essentially be a third Bush term, with his economic speeches outlining $3.4 trillion of tax cuts over 10 years beyond what President Bush has already proposed and geared even more to high-income earners. The McCain plan would lead to deficits the likes of which we have never seen in this country. It would take money from the middle class and from future generations so that the wealthy can live better today.

..."

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: beardedbruce
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 03:05 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 06:09 PM

Yes, whoever's running Barack Obama is probably right about tax cuts.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 06:31 PM

Just can't talk straight, hey, Rig? Gotta be smarmy or snarky or snide.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 09:55 PM

This is a political discussion in America in 2008. The only guy still in the ball game who is talking straight is Ralph Nader, and look where it's gotten him.

             I would think acknowledging that the guy who has his hand in Obama's back is right on taxes would be a plus for his side.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 10:50 PM

"They said President Clinton's 1993 deficit-reduction plan would wreck Amos steadfastly refuses to allow any historical precedents to enter into the discussion unless he thinks it will help him prove his assertions.

"They said President Clinton's 1993 deficit-reduction plan would wreck the economy. Eight years and 23 million new jobs later, the economy proved them wrong."

Ahhhh, Maybe I am one of those people that is poor at math but 1993 plus 8 add up to 2001 so it must have been in 2001 that the economy proved somebody was wrong. The economy was in recession and proved that Clinton was wrong.

Clinton's plan did wreck the economy.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 11:20 PM

Yes. As has been shown on this forum many times, and no doubt will be shown many times again. You are very poor at math.

The Clinton Left office in January 2001, the recession occurred after September 2001. The Bush people blamed it on Clinton. But they blamed everything on Clinton.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 11:27 PM

"He was countering McCain's assertion that drilling would help lower gas prices today,"

The mere announcement of drilling lowers the price of crude oil on the trading market and therefore gas prices. This has been proven recently.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 11:43 PM

OK smart guy, show the proof. I don't even remember any recent announcements of drilling.