You keep missing the point, ike. What I'm saying is that what you perceive to be dishonesty is actually only tenacity. A virtue, not a fault. Appearances can often be deceiving in politics . . . and Obama is an excellent politician. A glib tongue, a smiling face, and a confident charm can mask many faults. Nobody is perfect and the more polished the facade, the more I tend to wonder if it is distracting me from something less perceptible. It's "drawers", you nutty Obamarista. :grin:
Bush has been doing tenacious spin for 8 years and I've really had enough; I welcome a little translucence and simplicity. Appearances can be deceiving, but its probably fair to assume they're all trying to look as fresh and clean as possible. So those that look the freshest and cleanest probably are. How long have Clinton and McCain had to polish their images?
First, all Republicans agree with Bush in some areas and disagree in others. That is not self-contradiction. The important thing about his votes is not the percentage of times he has voted to support Bush, but the reasons for his vote. So "call him out" all you want. I am sure that will cause him to lose a lot of sleep. McCain did not vote against bill to provide economic assistance to New Orleans. So I don't know where you get off saying he has done nothing to help New Orleans. He has never said he is against diplomacy (those are your words). He said he would meet with Hamas but under certain conditions. What he is opposed to is unconditional negotiations. He seeks the endorsement of the religious right just as Obama seeks the endorsement of unions and other special interests. That does not mean he will change his values for the sake of the religious right. He has never supported amnesty which is amounts to automatic citizenship (like Reagan did in 1986). What he has favored is a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, but that path would involve a fine for being here illegally and they would have to go through the normal procedure for attaining citizenship. But before that his allowed he now favors sealing off the border. This last part does represent a shift in his thinking. As for as the You Tube joke, you have to consider the source. In addition, the truth rarely comes out in 10 sound bites offered by You Tube. His explainations for the positions he takes were cut off at the quick. No full articulation of his views were allowed by those sound bites. I am sure if you saw the program in its entirety that fact would be obvious. His only significant change of view came over the immigration issue. First of all, the term "amnesty" is being used very sloppily by all parties. What is being proposed now is not amnesty. Amnesty was what Reagan did in 1986. But aside from that, he once favored allowing a path to citizenship for illegal aliens at the same time or before a fence is built. He has now changed his position and feels the fence should come first.
First of all, I have not seen any statistics that indicate people equate articulate speaking with lucid thought. Those that do are making a huge mistake. Bush is not an articulate speaker; but it would be a huge mistake to assume that for that reason he is not intelligent. You don't get to be governor of a state and President of the United States by being stupid. Secondly, McCain is not inarticulate. He is just not an emotional speaker. Also, he uses his smile as a means of transitioning between thoughts, much like Reagan used the word "well." As a result, sometimes that smile can seem artificial and arkward. So he is not at his best with structured speeches. But he shines when it comes to speaking in a group setting, such as a town hall meeting.
I didnt post it for him to lose sleep, you must have lost some, you felt the need to shoot back. The proof is their, whether you want to realize it or spin it your way. He is a flip flop and a liar. He said he was behind every measure for the investigation into New Orleans. but TWICE he VOTED AGAINST creating the commission to investigate why the levies failed to work. Those words are from his mouth, not anything I said. He said it. Watch the video again.
Does research really need to be conducted for this? Whether right or not, I don't think its a far stretch to assume a lot of people equate the two. Most don't think Bush is all that smart. I don't think he'd be president if his name weren't Bush.
and i would submit that at least mccain has voted on tough issues, something mr obama has repeatedly failed to do, both in the state and u.s. senate. i imagine this is an effort at appeasing all involved. RealClearPolitics - Articles - The Ever-'Present' Obama he'll have to do more than vote "present" as potus. i guess voting present makes you neither a "flip-flop" or a "liar"
It's not a statistical thing, it's a perception thing. Who do you think was smarter? Andy or Gomer? Obviously. Fortunately we have Dubya's record to go onto judge his intelligence and he's definitely, in his own words, a C student. We need better than that. McCain was fifth from the bottom of his Naval Academy class. He needs to show some smarts. Blind resolve isn't going to cut it in this election--we've seen what that got us. We need to see some mental agility, especially from a codger in his 70's. It depends on how smart his keepers are . . . and Rove and Cheney are smart. If he were running against Gomer Pyle or Les Miles, he'd be fine. But he's running against an effective, articulate and eloquent orator in Barry O'Bama. Perception is what I'm referring to. Nixon was smarter than Kennedy, but Kennedy won because he was more articulate and appeared to have a better grasp of the issues than Nixon, whether he did or not.
This response makes no sense, he has voted on tough bills (see Obama-Lugar legislation). If you want McCain fine because you are a republican, but at least admit that the guy isnt the straight talk express like he claims to be. I can admit that he doesnt have as much legislative experience as McCain.
the article alludes to the fact that time after time, instead of voting yes or no vote he voted present, so that the yes or no vote wouldn't come back to haunt him with various special interest groups. insofar as mccain, at this point i see him as the lesser of 2 evils. we'll know more when they pick vp's. i personally thought romney offered the best solution for the gop and the country. i agree that mccain is hardly the straight talk express. then again neither is obama.
