Create new topic
Printable version (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)| Author | Message |
McCain wants to suspend campaign, reschedule debate Shock Doctrine, anyone?
| |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Why is he always telling Obama what to do? Who is he, Grandpa fucking Tumbleweed? | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
i don't even think this is a bad idea. but the right way to do this would have been for the two campaigns to work it out and announce it together.
| |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
IrresistibleB1tch said: i don't even think this is a bad idea. but the right way to do this would have been for the two campaigns to work it out and announce it together.
this way, it looks like yet another stunt. It IS a stunt...
McCain = Racetrack Spiderman. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Brilliant move on McCain's part. "...I will go to the animal shelter and get you a kitty cat. I will let you fall in love...with that kitty cat. And then on some dark, cold night I will steal away into your home...and punch you in the face!" | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
2the9s said: IrresistibleB1tch said: i don't even think this is a bad idea. but the right way to do this would have been for the two campaigns to work it out and announce it together.
this way, it looks like yet another stunt. It IS a stunt...
McCain = Racetrack Spiderman. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
lazycrockett said: Brilliant move on McCain's part.
politically, or in a "country first" sort of way? | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
It's totally a headline-grabbing, poor-me, I'm-down-in-the-polls stunt. I hope the public sees through this crass ploy. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
lazycrockett said: Brilliant move on McCain's part.
John McCain = the Serious Candidate. Country First. Welcome to the New World Odor and
the Mythmaking Moonbattery of Obamanation. Chains We Can Bereave In LIBERALISM IS A CONSPIRACY THEORY | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Efan said: It's totally a headline-grabbing, poor-me, I'm-down-in-the-polls stunt. I hope the public sees through this crass ploy.
Besides, in an economic crisis I think most people want John McCain as far away from Washington as possible. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
McCain is growing more and more desperate.
| |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
IrresistibleB1tch said: 2the9s said: It IS a stunt...
McCain = Racetrack Spiderman. “Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us.”
-Calvin & Hobbes ![]() | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
HiinEnkelte said: lazycrockett said: Brilliant move on McCain's part.
John McCain = the Serious Candidate. Country First. Actually, his motto should be "ME first!" He's been a crybaby all week because the press has been focusing on the economy instead of him. So he found a way to inject himself into the headlines. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
HiinEnkelte said: lazycrockett said: Brilliant move on McCain's part.
John McCain = the Serious Candidate. Country First. Not Brilliant, it's just politics. Unless your standards for McCain are so low that this passes for brilliance. It's not Country first. Its politics first. All the time he's spent in the Senate and now there's a priority issue? The first? Really? It smacks of desperation by a campaign trying to stop the steamroller. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
HiinEnkelte said: lazycrockett said: Brilliant move on McCain's part.
John McCain = the Serious Candidate. Country First. Agreed. It also makes no sense for them to debate foreign policy (which is the topic of the first debate) when all anyone's thinking about is the economy. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Efan said: HiinEnkelte said: John McCain = the Serious Candidate. Country First. Actually, his motto should be "ME first!" He's been a crybaby all week because the press has been focusing on the economy instead of him. So he found a way to inject himself into the headlines. Why can't he do two things at the same time? Multitasking anyone? | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Genesia said: HiinEnkelte said: John McCain = the Serious Candidate. Country First. Agreed. It also makes no sense for them to debate foreign policy (which is the topic of the first debate) when all anyone's thinking about is the economy. A debate can easily be rescheduled. It take probably less than 3 days to get everything set up. All you need is 2 podiums, a couple of chairs, water, an audience and tv crew. "...I will go to the animal shelter and get you a kitty cat. I will let you fall in love...with that kitty cat. And then on some dark, cold night I will steal away into your home...and punch you in the face!" | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SUPRMAN said: McCain is growing more and more desperate.
What do you mean "put off the campaign"? Like nothing regarding the bailout debate is going to be partisan. Like McCain is going to demonstrate that he can get something done in Washington if he can only focus instead of minding his V.P selection. We all know the campaign won't stop. He wants to be able to create a flag pin out of Obama campaigning. He really wants to stop Obama's fundraising. Although McCain has spent decades doing next to nothing in the Senate, I guess this week will be the most important in the history of the Republic. McCain doesn't have to ask Obama to stop campaigning. He can do so unilaterally. If I were Obama I would lay out a plan and promise to be there to vote but I would not stop campaigning. And when McCain's slurs started I would remind him how much time he's had in the Senate to fix issues that he's ignored until he wanted votes. that would be another option. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
HiinEnkelte said: lazycrockett said: Brilliant move on McCain's part.
John McCain = the Serious Candidate. Country First. OMG, that's the second most hilarious thing I've heard you say lately apart from the "gay people have the same rights as straight people when it comes to marriage" nonsense. lawd. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
apparently, Obama suggested a joint announcement this morning, McCain agreed, but then went out on his own with this. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
edit | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I agreed Obama was the one who suggested this idea and even Msnbc and CNN confirmed this.
| |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
maybe they could switch the VP debates to this friday then... | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I feel the debate should go on and they can just easily switch the topic on economy. Damn it American wants to know which one of the guys have better offer and ideas of being president. If McCain cannot handle multitask he should resign as R nominee. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Genesia said: HiinEnkelte said: John McCain = the Serious Candidate. Country First. Agreed. It also makes no sense for them to debate foreign policy (which is the topic of the first debate) when all anyone's thinking about is the economy. Maybe someone should tell Palin she has no need to meet with foreign heads of state then. 2009: Mermaids and Dolphins... | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Imago said: HiinEnkelte said: John McCain = the Serious Candidate. Country First. OMG, that's the second most hilarious thing I've heard you say lately apart from the "gay people have the same rights as straight people when it comes to marriage" nonsense. lawd. what i said was true and accurate. we cannot begin to debate an issue seriously, if right off the bat it is framed in orwellian perversions of language, "gays aren't allowed to marry, blah blah.." a person has always been able to enter into the marriage contract/covenant regardless of sexual proclivities/attraction/orientation/identification. It is about redefining marriage, and why the/our traditional system of kinship invidiously discriminates and is so arbitrarily arranged that it is the responsibility of the government or judges to impose a new definition and a restructuring of marriage. but no one is or has been excluded based on his or her sexual identity. just because i am straight, they do not allow me to marry my best male friend. okay, back to the topic. Country First! Welcome to the New World Odor and
the Mythmaking Moonbattery of Obamanation. Chains We Can Bereave In LIBERALISM IS A CONSPIRACY THEORY | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
HiinEnkelte said: Imago said: OMG, that's the second most hilarious thing I've heard you say lately apart from the "gay people have the same rights as straight people when it comes to marriage" nonsense. lawd. what i said was true and accurate. we cannot begin to debate an issue seriously, if right off the bat it is framed in orwellian perversions of language, "gays aren't allowed to marry, blah blah.." a person has always been able to enter into the marriage contract/covenant regardless of sexual proclivities/attraction/orientation/identification. It is about redefining marriage, and why the/our traditional system of kinship invidiously discriminates and is so arbitrarily arranged that it is the responsibility of the government or judges to impose a new definition and a restructuring of marriage. but no one is or has been excluded based on his or her sexual identity. just because i am straight, they do not allow me to marry my best male friend. okay, back to the topic. Country First! But you are allowed to marry the person you love, fuck, and build your life with. That is what we are asking for. Your sick perversion of the issue isn't humorous. 2009: Mermaids and Dolphins... | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
HiinEnkelte said: Imago said: OMG, that's the second most hilarious thing I've heard you say lately apart from the "gay people have the same rights as straight people when it comes to marriage" nonsense. lawd. what i said was true and accurate. we cannot begin to debate an issue seriously, if right off the bat it is framed in orwellian perversions of language, "gays aren't allowed to marry, blah blah.." a person has always been able to enter into the marriage contract/covenant regardless of sexual proclivities/attraction/orientation/identification. It is about redefining marriage, and why the/our traditional system of kinship invidiously discriminates and is so arbitrarily arranged that it is the responsibility of the government or judges to impose a new definition and a restructuring of marriage. but no one is or has been excluded based on his or her sexual identity. just because i am straight, they do not allow me to marry my best male friend. okay, back to the topic. Country First! So in other words you would rather enshrine discrimination. It would not be a new definition of marriage. As has been discussed here previously marriage has undergone a lot of changes. And sex same sex couples are excluded not based on any rational basis but fear that heterosexuals will lose a target of discrimination. I guess you prefer people ignore their vows and any supposed sanctity attached to the ceremony to marry someone of the opposite sex and simply cheat to be with whom they really love but obtain all the privileges and status of marriage. You are too kind. But let's not pretend it isn't discrimination based on whom you love. I can ONLY love and marry someone of the opposite sex? Screw you. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SUPRMAN said: HiinEnkelte said: what i said was true and accurate. we cannot begin to debate an issue seriously, if right off the bat it is framed in orwellian perversions of language, "gays aren't allowed to marry, blah blah.." a person has always been able to enter into the marriage contract/covenant regardless of sexual proclivities/attraction/orientation/identification. It is about redefining marriage, and why the/our traditional system of kinship invidiously discriminates and is so arbitrarily arranged that it is the responsibility of the government or judges to impose a new definition and a restructuring of marriage. but no one is or has been excluded based on his or her sexual identity. just because i am straight, they do not allow me to marry my best male friend. okay, back to the topic. Country First! So in other words you would rather enshrine discrimination. It would not be a new definition of marriage. As has been discussed here previously marriage has undergone a lot of changes. And sex same sex couples are excluded not based on any rational basis but fear that heterosexuals will lose a target of discrimination. I guess you prefer people ignore their vows and any supposed sanctity attached to the ceremony to marry someone of the opposite sex and simply cheat to be with whom they really love but obtain all the privileges and status of marriage. You are too kind. But let's not pretend it isn't discrimination based on whom you love. I can ONLY love and marry someone of the opposite sex? Screw you. if i could screw myself, then i just might want to marry myself. joke aside, i'd be happy to debate this in its own thread. but not here. Welcome to the New World Odor and
the Mythmaking Moonbattery of Obamanation. Chains We Can Bereave In LIBERALISM IS A CONSPIRACY THEORY | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
2the9s said: IrresistibleB1tch said: i don't even think this is a bad idea. but the right way to do this would have been for the two campaigns to work it out and announce it together.
this way, it looks like yet another stunt. It IS a stunt...
McCain = Racetrack Spiderman. I aaree. It is all a stunt. McCain doesn't even know anything about the economy, but now it wants to act like he really cares? Man, please. They should just go ahead and do the debates. Because either way, McCain is toast. McCain can delay the beat down or get his butt kicked on Friday. Forget McCain! Do the debate on Friday. “When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a Communist.” Brazilian bishop Dom Hélder Câmara | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Create new topic
Printable version (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)