Looks like McCain has one-upped Kerry on the doublespeak. ( Flip-flopper McCain )

There is no doubt that McCain is an asshole. There is also no doubt that Obama is an even bigger asshole.

The people that run the web site to which you linked, Brave New Films , are professional leftists. I wouldn't expect them to make any videos favoring McCain. Not in a national election against a Democrat.

Most of their partners loved McCain when he was undermining Republicans, but now he is their enemy. Who are Brave New Films partners?....

That pretty much says it all.

Madman, your statement has nothing to do with the content of the video. The video is nothing but clips of McCain himself. You can't blame the lefties for what comes out of McCain's mouth, although I'm sure in your twisted little mind you blame them for every last thing in the world that is contrary to your beliefs.

Oh wait, I forgot that deflecting attention away from the actual issue to something irrelevant is RNC election strategy.

He just had a change of heart. Intelligent people are allowed to change their mind. Isn't that what the Dems said about Kerry's flip flopping?

Which statement are you referring to? The statement where I call McCain an asshole or the statement saying the people that made the video are professional leftists? Both are true.

There are propaganda outlets on the right making exactly the same flip flop videos about Obama. You don't see me posting any of them, although I'm sure in your twisted little mind you blame them for every last thing in the world that is contrary to your beliefs.

We can each play childish games and post videos from professional propaganda outlets and argue over the contents. The key words being "professional propaganda outlets".

I don't start threads with stuff from professional political propaganda outlets as the impetus.

That MAY be true. However, you are sure willing to state what you believe to be "facts", regardless that they are YOUR OPINIONS, not facts. To wit:
That my friend is YOUR opinion, not fact. But by you interjecting this into this thread, you are simply trying to sway others with your "I'm right" attitude. What you are implying is simple - "Oh, Obama is an even bigger asshole, therefore you have to vote for (grandpa) McCain because he's less of an asshole." It's the lesser of two evils, in you mind.

I'd be willing to bet that there are just as many people reading this thread that would could state the exact opposite - that (grandpa) McCain is a bigger asshole that Obama. Believe it or not, there's people that actually LIKE Obama, despite your views!

Just opening your mind a bit...

How is that opening anyone's mind? It is called arguing on the internet about politics. Yes we all realize not everyone agrees with us.

As for McCain and Obama. They are both complete douchebags.

No, that's what Romney said about himself.

I think you, and maybe some others, have a problem differentiating declarative statements of fact with statements of opinion. It's sort of understandable where politics is concerned because there is a certain emotional investment involved with most people's political thinking.

If I make a declarative statement of fact, I am more than happy to back it up. I often do. If challenged, I have always been happy to comply.

If I make a statement claiming one candidate is a bigger asshole than another, that is clearly a matter of my own opinion.

Quote:

I'd be willing to bet that there are just as many people reading this thread that would could state the exact opposite - that (grandpa) McCain is a bigger asshole that Obama. Believe it or not, there's people that actually LIKE Obama, despite your views!

I don't doubt that there are people that like Obama. I have never implied that there wasn't. We do afterall have you and the guy that started this thread. Right?

However, your statement that there is just as many people who like Obama reading these threads as those that like McCain is a bit presumptuous on your part. About half of Democrat voters in the primaries aren't voting for Obama.

Unless you have done some scientific polling of everyone who reads these threads then we are basically talking about YOUR opinions.... not fact.

Just opening your mind a bit...

If there are as many Obamaniacs on this board as Gonzo claims.... maybe you can explain what the messiah meant by these comments he made yesterday....

"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK. That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen.".... Barack Obama

WTF??

Under an Obama leadership, exactly what country am I going to have get permission in order to turn my thermostat above 72 degrees?

Who's fucking business is it what type of SUV I drive? Who's business is what the hell we eat?

Is this the "change" this scumbag has been talking about?

So much for freedom.

It's called fascism.

actually, it's called socialism.

He's an asshole sir. They're all assholes

No, it is progressive fascism. Socialism is to nice a word for it. It is totalitarian malarchy of the worst sort.

Point being that roughly 5% of the world population here in the US has traditionally consumed about 25% of all the world resources and now the other 95% are waking up, making a little more money and buying cars and eating twice a day instead of five times a week. I don't think you'll have to ask some country for permission to turn up your thermostat, you'll just continue to need the dough to pay the bills for the choices you make.

Free markets rock, right?
http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUSN1641147020080516

Wow...talk about being specious...

Obama is spot on. He's not saying everyone is going to have give up anything.

The point he is making - American's can't expect other nations to say OK to being screwed out of resources just for us.

It has NOTHING to do with telling you what SUV you can drive, or what temp you can have your house at, or what you eat.

You may hate Obama, Madman...but at LEAST stop the intellectual dishonesty, Madman.

What a pile of BS. You're the one being intellectually dishonest. Extremely dishonest with left wing bullshit talking points sprinkled on top.

What the hell are we screwing any country out of? Last time I checked, WE PAY FOR THE THINGS WE USE.

We are paying over 120 something dollars for a barrel of oil. We are NOT screwing anyone else. We are making them rich.

The only people being screwed are those being screwed by their own socialist leaders like Hugo Chavez. Canada is a big supplier of energy to the US. They aren't screaming that we screwing them. In fact they want to sell us more energy. It makes them more prosperous. However people like Obama and his cronies are actively doing their best to keep as little energy as possible from coming to the US market.

Obama is not spot on. He is full of shit. He is talking about control. Control he and his enviro-totalitarian friends would like to institute.

You are forgetting that California has been floating an idea about government thermostat control. The idea is not going to go away. It is going to keep coming back and stronger every time. Especially with anti-freedom and anti-growth people like Obama.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/16/us/16brfs-THERMOSTATPL_BRF.html

Who isn't?



Tell me...by paying $120/bbl, how are we making non-oil producing nations rich? How are we making Spain rich? France? Germany? Etc etc.



Really? So when he says we should lead by example...that's saying he's going to control it? RIIIIGHT. Whatever.

You really should stop taking things out of context. You are better than that and you know it.

Yes, free markets do rock. Unfortunately the agricultural market in the United States IS NOT a free market.

Congress is also currently passing a bill that will make that even worse.

Since the fall of the Soviet Union, free market capitalism has raised the standard of living for the largest amount of humanity in the shortest period of time. That should be something to be celebrated. It's one of the biggest milestones in all of human history.

Instead we get nothing but left wing propaganda like free markets are bad and this country is somehow bad and we need to feel guilty about something. There is nothing we need to feel guilty about. That free market capitalism has raised much of humanity from the despair of less than a generation ago.

Yet anti-freedom, anti-growth, and quasi-socialist hacks like Obama want to turn the clock back on the very free market capitalism that has recently been one of mankind's biggest triumphs.

First off, I never said I was a "Obamaniac". Nor did I imply it. The fact is I'm not. Nor am I a Hillary supporter or a grandpa John supporter. I don't really like any of them.

That being said though, what I described was an observation on my part. That's all. An observation that apparently is in violation of MM's point of view. So thanks MobyCat for at least saying that Obama is spot on for stating that we cannot expect other countries to not have the resources we demand and not get pissed off at us. That's not a fair attitude. It's arrogant. And that is why we, as Americans, have a bad reputation in this world. As a society, we are arrogant and believe that with our money we can tell anyone else how they should live. If that means they have to suffer at our expense, too bad. We come first.

As far as MM's comments - what can I say except that MM is just plain wrong. I don't have any problems differentiating between declarative statements of fact and statements of opinion. The problem comes in when someone tries to make a "declarative statement of fact" only to have it pointed out that it is opinion, not fact and then have the person making the statement backstroke on what he said saying it WAS opinion, despite that he meant it to SOUND like it was factual. For example, on one point MM claims that:

Which is what I pointed out to begin with:
While what I was referring to is what he said as:

Yet somehow I was wrong for pointing out what he admitted to? The fact is, when you start by saying that "There is no doubt...", you are clearly trying to get others to accept what you are about to say as fact. It goes like this, you say there is no doubt so others won't disagree with you. Then when it is pointed out that your "there is no doubt" may be wrong, you get all offended because someone saw through your guise.

That is what REALLY happened here.

Secondly, when I said:

I will stand by it. The question is not whether it is true. Opinions cannot be proven true or false, that's why they are called OPINIONS. They are not necessarily based on fact. They are based on what a person FEELS about a subject. The question is what are the people's opinions. I never said that it was fact. Nor did I imply it as such. That's why I said "I'd be willing to bet". I could be wrong, but based on my views, I BELIEVE it could be true.

Finally, when MM states:

I may have been being a bit presumptuous. When the votes are counted in November, we'll see then who is being presumptuous.

The last sentence though is just plain misleading. Your intent was to show that there are many people that don't like Obama in an effort to show that I am wrong. So let's look at the facts. The Democrats are still running a very tight race (while I'll admit that Hillary is losing ground, but that's beside the point here). Therefore both Hillary and Obama are each getting about half of the votes since they are the only two in the race. Well that and the fact that in most states, only Democrats can vote in the Democratic primaries. The result is that it wouldn't be as tight of a race as it is otherwise. So while you say that about half of Democrat voters aren't voting for Obama in a clear attempt to discredit him, the same can be said against Hillary; about half of the Democrats in the primaries aren't voting for her either! So while what you said is essentially true, it is misleading at best.

I guess what I'm saying is that whether you like it or not, there will be people that disagree with you and what's more, trying to take the "I'm right and you're wrong" attitude won't sway voters. Well maybe the ones that aren't smart enough to make up their own minds. But the rest of us, which is MOST of us, we see through your tactics.

And yes, you are willing to show research to prove your points. I credit you for that. I've done the same when needed. However, what we are talking about here is opinion and reasoning. And that is all. There have been no facts given here and no one should represent what they are going to say as fact unless it IS fact. Elections aren't based on fact. They are based on opinion. The candidate with the best national opinion is the one that will generally win. The facts won't be known until AFTER they are in office. (For better or worse... )

What do those countries have anything to do with anything we are discussing?

All are also trading partners of this country in many other market sectors.

Lead by example how? In what area? Explain.

Nothing Obama said had anything to do with leadership. It had everything to do with limiting freedom of choice. That IS NOT leadership.

Should we be forcing people to pay $8 a gallon for gas? Is that yours and Obama's idea of leadership?

Should we be rationing resources to be a "leader" in yours and Obama's mind?

Wow...you REALLY like to dance around the issue.

Let me guess...you are one of the people complaining because Obama is against the "gas tax holiday" bullshit?

Let's get past useless debating about opinions and what not. Let's get to the red meat here.

Obama is not spot on. What countries are mad at us for demanding resources from them? Are these supposed countries not selling those resources on the open market? Are we forcing these so-called countries to only sell to us at lower than market value prices, therefore somehow exploiting these countries?

You say American come first. Can you name any country on earth that doesn't act in their own interests?

Can you name any other country on earth that does more for it's fellow man than the United States of America?

Yeah, but just think of the savings to the country's coffers if John McCain is elected. No more expensive secret service hanging around, no expensive doctors to care for his health, no funerary costs in case the President dies in the White House.

A man who cannot be killed has some obvious benefits.

The federal gas tax holiday won't do much for the price at the pump. It's only 18 cents.

Now if you are talking state and local gas tax "holidays", that could help people in many states because those taxes are very high in some states. It's high in my state and city. None of these are within Obama's or federal government control.

However Obama did use a "gas tax holiday" for political purposes a number of years back in the Illinois State Senate.

I complain about Obama because there is so much that is wrong with him, but in the context of this thread, he and his political allies are the people who want to keep this country energy deprived. They actively keep this country from it's very own energy resources. The goal seems to be a certain future of extremely high energy prices and energy rationing.

No. We're subsidizing their infrastructure and giving them tax breaks in order to have the privilege of buying their product at a price based upon their whim.