Obama: "It's like these guys take pride in being ignora

Galvatron · Post by **Galvatron** » 2008-08-07 12:28am

Oh, how I wish Kerry had hit back like this in 2004!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akjXqfvLu28

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2008-08-07 12:35am

Is this before or after Obama's switch on off-shore drilling?

ArmorPierce · Post by **ArmorPierce** » 2008-08-07 12:45am

I think that he just recently said it recently. It was just on the daily show (or colbert report).

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2008-08-07 12:59am

Fucking Beautiful

Feil · Post by **Feil** » 2008-08-07 01:11am

Shinova wrote:Is this before or after Obama's switch on off-shore drilling?

I wish I didn't have to ask... but is this satire, or did Obama manage to find room in our backs for another knife already?

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » 2008-08-07 01:13am

Feil wrote:
Shinova wrote:Is this before or after Obama's switch on off-shore drilling?
I wish I didn't have to ask... but is this satire, or did Obama manage to find room in our backs for another knife already?

It's actually not. He said that in order to get legislation that would fund and give tax credits to renewable and other alternate energy sources, he would be willing to make some compromises concerning offshore drilling. That's call bi-partisanship and that's what he's running on.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2008-08-07 01:17am

"It's like they take pride in being ignorant".

For Republikans, it's a badge of honour.

Oh, and Keith Olbermann gets the hammer out yet again.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2008-08-07 01:19am

Obama's position on off-shore drilling is, well, not really any change. "Okay. Sure. You got the permit for that section? Okay. Have fun." He shows no signs of forcibly overturning any state bans. So it's basically publicity.

For those crying 'Backstab', consider that in the same speech, he's also talking about yanking the giveaways to the oil companies, big breaks for renewables, and other real progress. The oil thing is ideal politicing: A position that means nothing because he can't enforce it.

Anyway, Big Oil's actions speak much louder than GOP rhetoric. They don't give a shit about more drilling. Bloomberg Link

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2008-08-07 02:36am

I am glad that we are having discourse on this, and that both guys are particularly good at this back-and-forth.

I wouldn't be surprised if they genuinely respect each-other.

Koolaidkirby · Post by **Koolaidkirby** » 2008-08-07 03:01am

CaptainChewbacca wrote:I am glad that we are having discourse on this, and that both guys are particularly good at this back-and-forth.

I wouldn't be surprised if they genuinely respect each-other.

Man, this election is so much more entertaining than the last one.

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2008-08-07 04:02am

I don't like how Obama is against nuclear energy, though.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2008-08-07 04:25am

DPDarkPrimus wrote:I don't like how Obama is against nuclear energy, though.

Are we basing this off past actions or election year rhetoric? Actions say he's pro-Nuke. If we're going off of rhetoric, McCain embraces the Drill Your Way To Happiness plan.

Ubiquitous · Post by **Ubiquitous** » 2008-08-07 05:15am

SirNitram wrote:
DPDarkPrimus wrote:I don't like how Obama is against nuclear energy, though.
Are we basing this off past actions or election year rhetoric?

Why would we take into account anything but his latest stated policy? Tony Blair was once a socialist loon, but by the time he left number ten he was a conservative. Peoples opinions evolve and it seems like Obama has evolved [well, regressed] onto the anti-nuke bandwagon.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2008-08-07 05:51am

CaptainChewbacca wrote:I am glad that we are having discourse on this, and that both guys are particularly good at this back-and-forth.

I wouldn't be surprised if they genuinely respect each-other.

I doubt it.
A simple comparison of their comments and ads proves that at least McCain doesn't respect Obama.
Basically calling your opponent a traitorous arrogant airhead nigger (McCain's attacks are on Obama's character, integrity, and are dog whistle racist) isn't respectful.
Contrast that with Obama's ads and comments that attack policies and positions that McCain holds or has held.

Heck, by their childish reaction to BHO's 'inflate your tires' suggestion to a questioner from the audience who asked what she could do to save money, the Repubs opened themselves up to more Whoop-Ass than Obama's dished out so far.

But those kind of attacks are better left to surrogates and it looks like the Obama campaign understands that.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2008-08-07 10:13am

Ubiquitous wrote:
SirNitram wrote:
DPDarkPrimus wrote:I don't like how Obama is against nuclear energy, though.
Are we basing this off past actions or election year rhetoric?
Why would we take into account anything but his latest stated policy? Tony Blair was once a socialist loon, but by the time he left number ten he was a conservative. Peoples opinions evolve and it seems like Obama has evolved [well, regressed] onto the anti-nuke bandwagon.

His website, with latest updated policy statements available in .pdf form, shows his advocacy for safe nuclear energy, and states explicity that nuclear cannot be ruled out of the energy equation.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2008-08-07 10:52am

The really hilarious part is that two days ago, McCain conceded that properly inflated tires help improve gas mileage, and even admitted that he "doesn't disagree" with Obama about tire inflation.

Countdown report. Keith looks like the cat who ate the canary.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2008-08-07 10:58am

"I think it will be very interesting to watch this debate between John McCain and John McCain." I believe are Obama's words. It sums up McCain's whole political career in a go.

Slacker · Post by **Slacker** » 2008-08-07 12:37pm

It looked like Olbermann was going to explode from restraining that smug grin for a little bit there.

It really seems like the RNC is trying to throw this election. I've lost a tremendous amount of respect for McCain in recent months, but I'm genuinely baffled as to why he's, well, going along with it.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2008-08-07 12:38pm

Slacker wrote:It looked like Olbermann was going to explode from restraining that smug grin for a little bit there.

It really seems like the RNC is trying to throw this election. I've lost a tremendous amount of respect for McCain in recent months, but I'm genuinely baffled as to why he's, well, going along with it.

Why wouldn't he? It feeds his massive ego.

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2008-08-07 12:42pm

hehehe

yeah, I think this goes along with what we've been saying since before this website's forums sections started....

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2008-08-07 01:14pm

SirNitram wrote:
Slacker wrote:It looked like Olbermann was going to explode from restraining that smug grin for a little bit there.

It really seems like the RNC is trying to throw this election. I've lost a tremendous amount of respect for McCain in recent months, but I'm genuinely baffled as to why he's, well, going along with it.
Why wouldn't he? It feeds his massive ego.

Either that or they're still convinced they're going to win somehow. Now, that means either they're sure they've got the fix in somewhere, or they've gotten ensnared in their own disinformation loop and now have no actual contact with reality anymore.

Adrian Laguna · Post by **Adrian Laguna** » 2008-08-07 07:58pm

Patrick Degan wrote:His website, with latest updated policy statements available in .pdf form, shows his advocacy for safe nuclear energy, and states explicity that nuclear cannot be ruled out of the energy equation.

But to hear McCain tell it, Obama is flatly opposed to nuclear power.

Darksider · Post by **Darksider** » 2008-08-07 08:00pm

Adrian Laguna wrote: But to hear McCain tell it, Obama is flatly opposed to nuclear power.

[sarcasm]Oh my. The republican candidate is greatly exaggerating or outright lying about his opponent's position. What a shock[/sarcasm]

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-08-07 08:32pm

Darksider wrote:
Adrian Laguna wrote: But to hear McCain tell it, Obama is flatly opposed to nuclear power.
[sarcasm]Oh my. The republican candidate is greatly exaggerating or outright lying about his opponent's position. What a shock[/sarcasm]

The problem is that it works. Increasingly, I'm running into people who believe that Obama is anti-nuke. Some even think he is radically anti-nuke, and wants to shut down already-existing nuclear plants.

Media outlets don't actually investigate or report on politicians any more; they simply report what they're saying. So if McCain says that Obama is a radical anti-nuke, then the media will report that McCain said that Obama is a radical anti-nuke. Less work for the media, when they can hand off responsibility for factual accuracy to whomever they are reporting on.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2008-08-07 09:06pm

Patrick Degan wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:
SirNitram wrote: Are we basing this off past actions or election year rhetoric?
Why would we take into account anything but his latest stated policy? Tony Blair was once a socialist loon, but by the time he left number ten he was a conservative. Peoples opinions evolve and it seems like Obama has evolved [well, regressed] onto the anti-nuke bandwagon.
His website, with latest updated policy statements available in .pdf form, shows his advocacy for safe nuclear energy, and states explicity that nuclear cannot be ruled out of the energy equation.

The PDF he released over twitter the other day was a pack of weasel words I see tossed out every time someone wants to say "no nukes" without saying "no nukes".