McCain's campaign has reaching a new low....

[rn79870]

Here is a cite for an article by CNN quoting comments from McCain's team ripping Obama for not visiting a U.S. military hospital in Landstuhl, Germany. The hospital they are referring to houses American troops injured in Iraq.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITI....html

It's interesting that Obama gets slammed for not visiting the hospital, yet had he visited the hospital, he would have been slammed for using the injured troops as pawns for political gain. This was really no win situation for Obama here. Attacking Obama for this is really grasping for straws.

Note to McCain's team. I would really like to hear more about what McCain believes than negative attacks on Obama.

When a campaign is reduced to negative comments about the opponent, I tend to believe there is nothing positive to say about the attacking candidate.

[smockers83]

I agree and disagree. I agree in that I don't understand the reasoning behind putting Obama down besides for possible political gain, I mean the guy isn't the president. But I disagree in that I would also not assume that Obama would be put down for visiting the troops.

[telcoman]

Here is a cite for an article by CNN quoting comments from McCain's team ripping Obama for not visiting a U.S. military hospital in Landstuhl, Germany. The hospital they are referring to houses American troops injured in Iraq.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITI....html

It's interesting that Obama gets slammed for not visiting the hospital, yet had he visited the hospital, he would have been slammed for using the injured troops as pawns for political gain. This was really no win situation for Obama here. Attacking Obama for this is really grasping for straws.

Note to McCain's team. I would really like to hear more about what McCain believes than negative attacks on Obama.

When a campaign is reduced to negative comments about the opponent, I tend to believe there is nothing positive to say about the attacking candidate.

McCains campaign is on the ropes and he knows he is sinking. He arrived in Manchester New Hampshire last week with no cameras and one reporter. McCain was whining about all the press coverage Obama was receiving in Europe. While the press showed Obama addressing 200k people in Berlin McCain was photographed in a cheese isle.

The American people will decide in 100 days whether they are ready for change or want more pain of the failed policies of Bush which McCain represents.

McCain also opposed making MLK a holiday. Why would any African American or any minority for that matter want to vote for him?

Telcoman

[smockers83]

The American people will decide in 100 days whether they are ready for change or want more pain of the failed policies of Bush which McCain represents.

Seriously, just stop. Just stop. McCain isn't running to be a representative of Bush. No two people are alike. People are upset over all of these insinuations, comparisons to Bush, and assumptions, not just on the McCain side but the Obama side as well, and people are leaving the forum because of this crap. Instead of discrediting someone without any effort, learn a little about them before you speak.

And its also not the McCain camp that is complaining about coverage. America is complaining about the Obama coverage as well, from both sides of the spectrum. People on both sides want to know more about McCain but the media isn't letting them.

[wingFeather]

NObama in 08

[srellim234]

Not that I've got a lot of respect for either candidate, but I would have a lot more respect for McCain if his campaign had acknowledged the other two military hospital visits Obama HAD made in the last week overseas and THEN criticized him for the one he cancelled instead of making some non-believable complete condemnation of Obama on this issue. In fact, Obama makes regular trips to Walter Reed and has made other visits as well. The McCain campaign is showing it's desperate and will fabricate anything or stretch any truth to get elected.

I'd like to know more about the Pentagon raising its concerns about the visit on Wednesday, AFTER Obama's senate staff was already back in the U.S. How much, despite their claim to not be involved in politics, was the timing of the Pentagon's concerns directed behind the scenes by the executive branch? All the while allowing McCain the "plausible deniability" that he was involved in any of it.

And sorry, too, Senator Obama, but you are a paid, sworn U.S. Senator whose obligation to the American people is to be a senator first, a political candidate second. What are you doing as a U.S. senator overseas without any of your senate staff with you? You sent them ALL home early? Very irresponsible.

[wingFeather]

Let's see here... Obama is associating with crowds of anti-Americans? On my (tax) dollar?

Yeah, I really want him running the country

Am I the only one who sees the brown-nosing & foolishness of all this?

[srellim234]

Let's see here... Obama is associating with crowds of anti-Americans? On my (tax) dollar?

?????

Where in the world is that coming from? Are you suggesting the American troops in Bagdad and Afghanistan are anti-American? The Israelis?

Most of the funding for the trip was paid for by campaign money. And I see a lot of anti-American government policy sentiment when reading foreign journalism, not anti-American. Those crowds were not anti-American.

[skylndrftr]

I see him working to do the right thing and build relationships with othe rcountries across the world.

What exactly are McCain's plans, all we here about are these non-sequitor attacks that McCain then disavows. The media doesn't cover him because theres nothing to cover. He exists solely in his own existence hes not running for president, he has no plan and now plans, he just takes cheap shots.

I would call what McCain is doing foolish, I would also call it embarrassing to this country

[smockers83]

It is impossible to stuff 4 years of planning of anything that will happen in the future, which you can't really plan for anyway, into one campaign. This is why you hear people on both sides chastising each other for not having a plan, because Obama doesn't have a plan either. Its ludacris. You cannot plan and make concrete decisions until you are in office, but beforehand you can have stated goals and what you'd like to do. If I were to ask you for your plan for your own life for the next four years, you couldn't do it. So why ask the same from men who plan on leading a whole country?

The media doesn't cover him because theres nothing to cover. He exists solely in his own existence hes not running for president, he has no plan and now plans, he just takes cheap shots.

Completely unfounded and untrue. You only believe this because all you see is what you see in the media. This is the problem of media coverage. No one really knows about McCain like they do about Obama because of it.

Also, Obama didn't use our tax dollars to go overseas. Its campaign money, money he raised. C'mon now. The only tax dollars that were probably used were the request for security details.

[heliochrome85]

thats for that insightful post. You know what i want to hear more about? I want to know why McCain did not support the GI bill? does anyone know?

[heliochrome85]

i thought he turned down federal funding. wouldnt that mean that his trips etc are paid for by his donors? not the tax dollars?

[rn79870]

And its also not the McCain camp that is complaining about coverage. America is complaining about the Obama coverage as well, from both sides of the spectrum. People on both sides want to know more about McCain but the media isn't letting them.

I think you, like all of us are willing to listen to McCain's plans. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that he has any, instead, as I pointed int he OP, he's got nothing left but to fight a campaign based on negative comments and slams.

I'm sorry, but even if I was undecided, I'd never vote for a guy that had nothing to add to a campaign other than criticising his opponent. Perhaps McCain's lack of positive campaigning is what's giving the country the impression that he is simply offers more of what Bush provided. Is that a fair assumption?

[smockers83]

thats for that insightful post. You know what i want to hear more about? I want to know why McCain did not support the GI bill? does anyone know?

I'm not sure exactly, but it had to with something about health care. Not that he would disagree with health care for troops and vets, but probably the way it was being funded or something. That's what I remember from a small tid bit I saw on it.

[skylndrftr]

helio...

everytime that gets brought up we get called koolaide drinkers. Facts are becoming less and lessa part of McCain's campaign

McCain has been in politics since Obama was in high school. Its easy to call media bias. Its a lot harder to show it. They showed McCain in the cheese aisle, attacking Obama. They showed him at another town hall....attacking Obama.

nd when he got called to task on his veterans voting record, he called another veteran a liar when in fat the man was dead right about McCains voting record.

[smockers83]

I'm sorry, but even if I was undecided, I'd never vote for a guy that had nothing to add to a campaign other than critiquing his opponent. Perhaps McCain's lack of positive campaigning is what's giving the country that he is simply more of Bush? Is that a fair assumption?

But you show exactly the problem right there. While Obama was in Europe, McCain was in NH and what not campaigning. We don't really know what he talked about because no one covered it except to take quotes for use later on and report about the unfair coverage. McCain has otherwise praised Obama for other things.

[heliochrome85]

i dont consider myself a koolade drinker. i hate the democrats just as much as i hate jerry fallwell and the religious right. they both have ruined this country, taking the level of debate to a new low. im sorry, i DONT CARE what your religion is. I DONT care if you wear a flag pin or not. I dont care if your dad was a muslim. What i do care about is whether you are fit for the job. McCain supporters, although not necessarily McCain himself, try to paint him as a glorious war hero, who loves the military, and has strategic and tactical experience. That is simply not the case. When Ret. Gen. Wesley Clark made that remark, youd have thought he had burned an american flag. Its disgusting. What is your definition of what makes a good president? What are your criterea and how do you achieve those qualties? If after asking yourself those questions, you dont have an answer, then you probably shouldnt be allowed to vote. Voting is for those who step up to the plate. Its not a game.

For me Sen. Barack Obama works. For others Sen. John McCain works. For others Nader works. I just dont understand how after so much campaigining people can still be on the fence...

[srellim234]

For me Sen. Barack Obama works. For others Sen. John McCain works. For others Nader works. I just dont understand how after so much campaigining people can still be on the fence...

...because for me, none of the above works. I'm still undecided because I'm not finished looking at third party candidates besides Nader and deciding who I can vote FOR.

[rn79870]

Sometimes I wish that were truly an option. Unfortunately, voting for a 3rd. party candidate is a wasted vote. I would agree that we really need more than 2 major parties, with that would come real choice.

[Marenta]

I'm starting to think that Mickey Mouse is another viable candidate again this time around.

The state of the union is so wretched, if they just openly placed the feces in the paper bags and lit it on fire in front of the doorsteps, I'm sure most of the American population would come to appreciate the candor that the candidates were acting with. I can't deal with this slimy two-faced forked-tongue poltik anymore.

[srellim234]

Sometimes I wish that were truly an option. Unfortunately, voting for a 3rd. party candidate is a wasted vote. I would agree that we really need more than 2 major parties, with that would come real choice.

as I've stated before, IT IS NOT A WASTED VOTE. To reach your goal, you have to start somewhere.

Even if I vote one of the two major parties as a vote against the other, whichever candidate got my vote takes it as a vote FOR him and sees it as a supportive mandate for his policies and ideas. In that respect, a vote AGAINST someone is really the wasted vote, perpetuating the same flawed system you rail against. If a Democrat or Republican gets in with less than 50% of the overall vote they can't claim a mandate as they do now. So start boosting the third parties.

A third, or fourth, or fifth party can't become major unless you are willing to vote for them and make them major.

[smockers83]

as I've stated before, IT IS NOT A WASTED VOTE. To reach your goal, you have to start somewhere.

Even if I vote one of the two major parties as a vote against the other, whichever candidate got my vote takes it as a vote FOR him and sees it as a supportive mandate for his policies and ideas. In that respect, a vote AGAINST someone is really the wasted vote, perpetuating the same flawed system you rail against. If a Democrat or Republican gets in with less than 50% of the overall vote they can't claim a mandate as they do now. So start boosting the third parties.

A third, or fourth, or fifth party can't become major unless you are willing to vote for them and make them major.

Exactly right on.

[rn79870]

as I've stated before, IT IS NOT A WASTED VOTE. To reach your goal, you have to start somewhere.

Even if I vote one of the two major parties as a vote against the other, whichever candidate got my vote takes it as a vote FOR him and sees it as a supportive mandate for his policies and ideas. In that respect, a vote AGAINST someone is really the wasted vote, perpetuating the same flawed system you rail against. If a Democrat or Republican gets in with less than 50% of the overall vote they can't claim a mandate as they do now. So start boosting the third parties.

A third, or fourth, or fifth party can't become major unless you are willing to vote for them and make them major.

I disagree, once any candidate wins, they assume their platform was endorced by the American public. It doesn't matter that many of their "supporters" were voting against the other guy, and not necessarily for them.

Voting for a 3rd. party candidate is a wasted vote because none of the viable candidates look at it as anything but a vote their opponent didn't get. To that end, they thank you. Any message you intend to send by voting for a candidate that really has no chance of winning is lost once the vote is counted. If you can't support a candidate, then your only option is to vote against the one who offends you the least.

But you are right, we need a strong 3rd. or 4th. party.

[rn79870]

Marenta.I deleted your last post becasue it was argumentive for the sake of being argumentive. If it was directed to anything, or anyone in this thread I would have left it, but it wasn't.

[Marenta]

Fair enough, you're the moderator. I'm not. They're the candidates. They're both bad. They're both good. We're all going to end up paying for the decision in the end. If there were a 3rd or 4th party (other than a cartoon or comic book character) to vote for, I'd do it.

Have either of them picked a VP yet?

Please god I hope it's not Mitt Romney for McCain, I just might not vote Republican this time.

[rn79870]

They're both bad. They're both good.

True, very true.

Have either of them picked a VP yet?

No, that's the final hurdle. I hope it's not Hillary for Obama. That might change things much here.

Please god I hope it's not Mitt Romney for McCain, I just might not vote Republican this time.

Actually, I would have rather seen Mitt than McCain (for good reasons, not a slam).

[srellim234]

rn, you and I are going to have to agree to disagree on this one. It's also a matter of optimism vs. pessimism. I'm willing to try to make it change by doing something about it instead of just complaining about it.

[Marenta]

Actually, I would have rather seen Mitt than McCain (for good reasons, not a slam).

Eh.. there is something very specific about him, that I will not go into, about why I do not like him. I would rather have Huckabee than Romney. I really do not like Romney's personal character, it's just a feeling, something about him doesn't sit well with me.

[rn79870]

That's fine, we'll probably disagree about other things too. I congratulate you for being part of the process, whereby you earn the right to complain if the country takes a wrong turn. Those who don't bother to vote, or otherwise get involved, don't deserve the right to complain.

[smockers83]

Voting for a 3rd. party candidate is a wasted vote because none of the viable candidates look at it as anything but a vote their opponent didn't get.

Not necessarily, it could also be a vote taken away from them as well. But that's two-party elitism there. The only way to get a third party into the system in this day and age and be a major player is to have one of the major parties collapse or the public voting a 3rd party in.