New McCain ad

[Ninja]

What do you guys think? Will it be effective?

[youtube]55Kc9TR-Rbk[/youtube]

 

[AVG-JOE]

If the point is to show McCain as a typically nasty politician of the late 20th century... Mission Accomplished!

Seriously? I don't think it will sway any truly undecided voters either way. Waste of money.

-Joe

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

Funding troops is one of the big reasons Kerry got rolled back on his heels.

It's what ultimately lead to his lame, "I was for it before I was against it" defense.

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

If the point is to show McCain as a typically nasty politician of the late 20th century... Mission Accomplished!

Seriously? I don't think it will sway any truly undecided voters either way. Waste of money.

-Joe

Optomism on Iraq is trending upwards.

Amerians don't like a coach who forfeits in the middle of a winning streak.

 

[Silence]

Not really cuz McCain voted against funding too as Obama pointed out.. it was a question of timeline disagreements not about funding the troops

 

[CA95380]

I've said it before, I will say it again. McCain has Viet Nam imbedded in his brain, and is never going to get over it. It's sad ... but it is the truth.

So, folks ... if you are ready for 4 more years, possibly eight, of war. Then McCain is your man. It's as simple as that.

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

Not really cuz McCain voted against funding too as Obama pointed out.. it was a question of timeline disagreements not about funding the troops

Nice spin except:

McCain believes in the mission and its successful outcome.

ergo

if he votes against a particular bill it's because it's polluted.


Obama can't make that claim because he wants to surrender to a beaten enemy who has no possible way of winning except if liberals like you and Obama GIVE them their victory.

 

[Silence]

I find it incredibly disgusting that McCain continue to run attack ads instead of talking about what HE WILL do for this country....

He does this because we already know what he'll do... more of the same

 

[AVG-JOE]

Optomism on Iraq is trending upwards.

Amerians don't like a coach who forfeits in the middle of a winning streak.

So is pessimism on nasty politicians. Shall we call it a draw?

-Joe

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

I find it incredibly disgusting that McCain continue to run attack ads instead of talking about what HE WILL do for this country....

He does this because we already know what he'll do... more of the same

More tax cuts?

More dead jihadis?

 

[Silence]

Nice spin except:

McCain believes in the mission and its successful outcome.

ergo

if he votes against a particular bill it's because it's polluted.


Obama can't make that claim because he wants to surrender to a beaten enemy who has no possible way of winning except if liberals like you and Obama GIVE them their victory.

talk about spin!!

Obama wants to surrender to a beaten enemy? hmmm does General Petreaus also want to surrender since he won't declare victory either?

Despite Gains, Petraeus Cautious About Iraq | Newsweek Iraq War | Newsweek.com

There is no victory to be had for American Troops in Iraq... the war shouldn't have ever happened and the insurgents in Iraq will never give up. We should hand the country of Iraq over to its government and go fight the real war on terror in afghanistan.

 

[Otter_Creek]

That was mean spirited? You need to check out the adds running on msnbc against McCain, Down right disgusting.

That was just a "We don't need a child in the white house" reminder.
I hope you heed it.

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

talk about spin!!

Obama wants to surrender to a beaten enemy? hmmm does General Petreaus also want to surrender since he won't declare victory either?

Despite Gains, Petraeus Cautious About Iraq | Newsweek Iraq War | Newsweek.com

There is no victory to be had for American Troops in Iraq... the war shouldn't have ever happened and the insurgents in Iraq will never give up. We should hand the country of Iraq over to its government and go fight the real war on terror in afghanistan.

Where's the part where Petreaus is wringing his hands declaring all is lost? You also overstate caution to interpret his statement to mean an insurgency cannot be beaten. That's absolute horseshit because history is chock-full of insugencies that have been crushed.

You're also accusing Petraeus of throwing away lives on a strategy you claim he doesn't think is working.

Good ol' libs and their "General Betray-Us".

Fuck all y'all.

 

[CA95380]

I find it incredibly disgusting that McCain continue to run attack ads instead of talking about what HE WILL do for this country....

He does this because we already know what he'll do... more of the same

Silence

You hit the nail on the head!

War, and him winning, is all that McCain thinks about! I am convinced of that.

 

[Missourian]

Holding Senator Obama responsible for a terrible decision on the war is equivalent to holding Senator McCain accountable for voting with Bush 90% of the time.


Are you all saying you want to give Obama a pass on what little record he has?

What do you guys think? Will it be effective?

[youtube]55Kc9TR-Rbk[/youtube]

I think it will be extremely effective.

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

War, and him winning, is all that McCain thinks about! I am convinced of that.

The corallary being:

Surrender, and him winning, is all that Obama thinks about!

 

[AVG-JOE]

Holding Senator Obama responsible for a terrible decision on the war is equivalent to holding Senator McCain accountable for voting with Bush 90% of the time...

If we take a look at the crap-for-legislation both of these guys had to yea or neigh on in just the last 4 years, we would probably agree that holding candidates to their voting records is subjective at best.

If legislators had a 'line item' vote - yea for this, and neigh for that, it would be different. I understand why they may have their names subscribed to legislation that is embarrassing later.

I also understand why a negative ad can truthfully say "So and So voted against funding food for the starving puppies of disabled veterans", seeing as the next line of the bill was to fund a necrophilia study.

Until we rid congress of the lobbyist infestation, legislative voting records need to be studied carefully and in context and taken with a grain of salt.

-Joe

 

[DiveCon]

If we take a look at the crap-for-legislation both of these guys had to yea or neigh on in just the last 4 years, we would probably agree that holding candidates to their voting records is subjective at best.

If legislators had a 'line item' vote - yea for this, and neigh for that, it would be different. I understand why they may have their names subscribed to legislation that is embarrassing later.

I also understand why a negative ad can truthfully say "So and So voted against funding food for the starving puppies of disabled veterans", seeing as the next line of the bill was to fund a necrophilia study.

Until we rid congress of the lobbyist infestation, legislative voting records need to be studied carefully and in context and taken with a grain of salt.

-Joe

well, i for one, would LOVE to see a constitutional amendment that forces congress to put each item in a bill on its own for an up/down vote on its own worthiness
this idea of tacking on something for agriculture into a military bill, just so it can get passed is insanity

 

[AVG-JOE]

well, i for one, would LOVE to see a constitutional amendment that forces congress to put each item in a bill on its own for an up/down vote on its own worthiness
this idea of tacking on something for agriculture into a military bill, just so it can get passed is insanity

I knew we had more in common than not, Dive!

Ain't America cool!

-J

 

[DiveCon]

I knew we had more in common than not, Dive!

Ain't America cool!

-J

i dont give the congress people a break for this, because they dont HAVE to do it, and it SHOULDN'T require a special constitutional amendment to get them to actually do their jobs