US Republican presidential candidate John McCain has accused his rival, Barack Obama, of supporting both teams playing in the baseball World Series.
The baseball championship series begins on Wednesday, and both teams - the Tampa Bay Rays and the Philadelphia Phillies - are from key swing states.
Senator McCain said Mr Obama backed the Phillies when in Pennsylvania and rooted for Tampa Bay when in Florida.
But the Obama campaign said that its candidate was a Chicago White Sox fan.
Speaking in Pennsylvania, Mr McCain said: "Now, I'm not dumb enough to get mixed up in a World Series between swing states.
"But I think I may have detected a little pattern with Senator Obama. It's pretty simple really. When he's campaigning in Philadelphia, he roots for the Phillies, and when he's campaigning in Tampa Bay, he 'shows love' to the Rays.
"It's kind of like the way he campaigns on tax cuts, but then votes for tax increases after he's elected."
'Love to the Rays'
Campaigning on Monday in Tampa, Mr Obama was joined at a rally by members of the Rays, a team that had just come from last place in the league the previous year to defeat the world champion Boston Red Sox for a place in the World Series.
Members of the Philadephia Phillies
The Philadelphia Phillies are from the key swing state of Pennsylvania
He told the crowd: "I've said from the beginning that I am a unity candidate, bringing people together. So when you see a White Sox fan showing love to the Rays - and the Rays showing some love back - you know we are on to something right here."
But Obama spokesman Bill Burton said although the Democrat "said nice things about the members" of the Rays who were endorsing him, "that doesn't change his feelings about the fact that they bounced his White Sox out of the playoffs".
During the National League playoffs last week, Mr Obama said he was "going to have to root for Philly" because his campaign manager, David Plouffe, "is a fanatical Phillies fan, and I don't want him mad at me for the next few weeks".
Mr McCain supports the Arizona Diamondbacks, from his home state, who did not make the playoffs this year.
The World Series is widely followed in America, and the television audience for the last presidential debate was lower than usual because a key game was televised at the same time.
The series, which can last up to seven games, will conclude in the final full week of campaigning.
The Romulan Republic wrote:Of course. I'm just wondering why Al Qaeda would issue such a counter productive statement. They've done very well recruitment and propaganda wise out of the last 8 years, and McCain offers more of the same.
The message, posted Monday on the password-protected al-Hesbah Web site, said if al-Qaida wants to exhaust the United States militarily and economically, "impetuous" Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain is the better choice because he is more likely to continue the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
This wasn't a statement that they issues to the public, this was a piece of internal communication that no one outside of A-Q was meant to see.
"Stop! No one can survive these deadly rays!"
"These deadly rays will be your death!"
- Thor and Akton, Starcrash
"Before man reaches the moon your mail will be delivered within hours from New York to California, to England, to India or to Australia by guided missiles.... We stand on the threshold of rocket mail."
- Arthur Summerfield, US Postmaster General 1953 - 1961
MRDOD wrote:Anyhow, the bottom line: The ground game of Obama is a well-oiled machine, registering thousands if not tens of thousands students, and I expect them to deliver high hundreds, low thousands of voters for early voting if not more.
You know, there's something to be said about Obama's management skills in how he's run the campaign. One of the chief charges against him is that he's fresh, inexperienced -- and as we all know, that's not relevant when it comes to policy or judgment. However, management skills is an entirely different issue; experience, one would think, plays a large role in how well one manages, and management/leadership skills are important since the President is, in effect, an administrator.
That's where the campaigns come in. McCain is either a poor manager or has surrounded himself with poor managers; Obama, on the other hand, is either a brilliant manager or has surrounded himself with brilliant managers. In either case, Obama is the superior choice when it comes to administrative skills.
A Government founded upon justice, and recognizing the equal rights of all men; claiming higher authority for existence, or sanction for its laws, that nature, reason, and the regularly ascertained will of the people; steadily refusing to put its sword and purse in the service of any religious creed or family is a standing offense to most of the Governments of the world, and to some narrow and bigoted people among ourselves.
Congressman admits saying, 'Liberals hate real Americans'
Posted: 05:25 AM ET
From CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney
(CNN) — A North Carolina congressman locked in a tight re-election race admitted Tuesday to recently telling a crowd of John McCain supporters that "liberals hate real Americans," the latest in a string of comments from Republicans that appear to question Democrats' patriotism.
Rep. Robin Hayes, a five-term Republican who has been heavily targeted by Democrats this election cycle, first denied making the remarks, but conceded Monday afternoon that he was accurately quoted.
"After reading it, there is no doubt that it came out completely the wrong way," Hayes said. “I actually was trying to work to keep the crowd as respectful as possible, so this is definitely not what I intended."
The comments came at a McCain rally in Concord, North Carolina Saturday before the Arizona senator or members of his staff had arrived at the event. As first reported by the New York Observer, Hayes said, "Liberals hate real Americans that work and achieve and believe in God."
Hayes also told the raucous crowd to make sure "we don't say something stupid, make sure we don't say something we don't mean," warning the news media would likely distort such remarks.
In his statement Tuesday, Hayes suggested he meant to differentiate between the liberal and conservative philosophies rather than directly impugn the patriotism of his opponents.
"Liberals are advocating higher taxes, which I believe punish success — and they are advocating policies like gay marriage that I feel undermine strong families," he said. "We have a strong difference of opinion about the future of our nation, but obviously this was the wrong way to get that difference of opinion across."
Hayes is top target of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and his prospects of re-election appear to be endangered by Obama's stronger than expected support in North Carolina. According to Stuart Rothenberg of the Rothenberg Political Report, Obama is out-polling McCain by 9 points in Hayes' 8th district, a dynamic that could spell trouble for Hayes come Election Day. In 2004, President Bush defeated John Kerry by 9 points in Hayes' district and the GOP congressman narrowly won in 2006.
Hayes' comments echo those of other Republicans in recent days that have drawn fire from Democratic circles. Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann said late last week she's concerned Barack Obama “may have anti-American views,” and suggested other liberal members of Congress also may be anti-American.
"The news media should do a penetrating exposé and take a look," she said. "I wish they would. I wish the American media would take a great look at the views of the people in Congress and find out, are they pro-America or anti-America?"
Republican VP nominee Sarah Palin also drew fire from Democrats earlier this week when she suggested at a recent GOP fundraiser that she only likes to travel to "Pro-America parts of this great nation."
"We believe that the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit, and in these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hard working very patriotic, um, very, um, pro-America areas of this great nation," she said.
In an interview with CNN Thursday, Palin apologized if her comments were interpreted to mean some areas of the country are more patriotic than others.
"I don't want that misunderstood," Palin said. "If that's the way it came across, I apologize."
McCain spokeswoman Nancy Pfotenhauer also turned heads when she said over the weekend that Northern Virginia, did not represent 'real Virginia' because of the influx of Democrats to the region in recent years.
“I certainly agree that northern Virginia has gone more Democratic. And as a proud resident of Oakton, Virginia I can tell you that the Democrats have just come in from the District of Columbia and moved into northern Virginia. And that’s really what you see there. But the rest of the state, ‘real’ Virginia if you will, I think will be very responsive to Senator McCain’s message," she said.
Palin may have retracted her statement, but it seems like the GOP hasn't noticed.
Palin didn't retract a damned thing. She just claims it was "misinterpreted", when in fact it is impossible to interpret her statements any other way.
I'm sick of the way these assholes say incredibly offensive things and then just claim that they were "misinterpreted". Like hell they were misinterpreted; they knew exactly what they were saying and who they were saying it to. They were saying to their base: "you are real Americans, and people who aren't like you are not real Americans".
Why don't they just admit that they're bringing back McCarthyism?
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
MRDOD wrote:Anyhow, the bottom line: The ground game of Obama is a well-oiled machine, registering thousands if not tens of thousands students, and I expect them to deliver high hundreds, low thousands of voters for early voting if not more.
You know, there's something to be said about Obama's management skills in how he's run the campaign. One of the chief charges against him is that he's fresh, inexperienced -- and as we all know, that's not relevant when it comes to policy or judgment. However, management skills is an entirely different issue; experience, one would think, plays a large role in how well one manages, and management/leadership skills are important since the President is, in effect, an administrator.
That's where the campaigns come in. McCain is either a poor manager or has surrounded himself with poor managers; Obama, on the other hand, is either a brilliant manager or has surrounded himself with brilliant managers. In either case, Obama is the superior choice when it comes to administrative skills.
Absolutely. Obama doesn't get enough credit for running a remarkably effective campaign, which is especially odd when so many of the other presidential contenders have run their campaigns straight into the ground. For an outsider to defeat a respected party stalwart like Hillary Clinton, a great deal of skill and organization is needed. Obama has proven himself at every turn of this election to be a remarkably skilled campaigner, and essentially has made this election a referendum on his candidacy rather than a choice between two able politicians. Republicans aren't voting for McCain because they particularly care about him or like him - they're voting for him because they don't want to see Obama become president. That's a big indicator of just how much Obama is resonating with people, and how little the republicans are offering this election cycle.
Another thing that constantly annoys me about the 'experience' crap is that the repubicans rapidly (and rabidly) discount Obama's education as any kind of indicator of experience and write him off as a light weight, while ignoring Palin's glaring lack of education. Obama was president of Harvard Law Review, for crying out loud! I'm sorry, but when a group of the best law students in the country come together and in essence say "we want you to represent us because we think you're the best one", you simply can't be considered a light weight.
"A country without a Czar is like a village without an idiot."
- Old Russian Saying
irishmick79 wrote:
Another thing that constantly annoys me about the 'experience' crap is that the repubicans rapidly (and rabidly) discount Obama's education as any kind of indicator of experience and write him off as a light weight, while ignoring Palin's glaring lack of education. Obama was president of Harvard Law Review, for crying out loud! I'm sorry, but when a group of the best law students in the country come together and in essence say "we want you to represent us because we think you're the best one", you simply can't be considered a light weight.
The most common rationalization I see in regards to this is that Palin isn't the one people are electing as President, so it's okay if she doesn't have as much experience as McCain. It's a completely bullshit argument of course, but it's pretty indicative of their mindset.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
irishmick79 wrote:
Another thing that constantly annoys me about the 'experience' crap is that the repubicans rapidly (and rabidly) discount Obama's education as any kind of indicator of experience and write him off as a light weight, while ignoring Palin's glaring lack of education. Obama was president of Harvard Law Review, for crying out loud! I'm sorry, but when a group of the best law students in the country come together and in essence say "we want you to represent us because we think you're the best one", you simply can't be considered a light weight.
The most common rationalization I see in regards to this is that Palin isn't the one people are electing as President, so it's okay if she doesn't have as much experience as Obama. It's a completely bullshit argument of course, but it's pretty indicative of their mindset.
Ghetto edit for clarification.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
Darth Wong wrote:Palin didn't retract a damned thing. She just claims it was "misinterpreted", when in fact it is impossible to interpret her statements any other way.
I'm sick of the way these assholes say incredibly offensive things and then just claim that they were "misinterpreted". Like hell they were misinterpreted; they knew exactly what they were saying and who they were saying it to. They were saying to their base: "you are real Americans, and people who aren't like you are not real Americans".
Why don't they just admit that they're bringing back McCarthyism?
What I loved even more about her non-apology apology was, to quote Keith Olbermann, that it was "putting the onus on the recipients".
If The Infinity Program were not a forum, it would be a pie-in-the-sky project. “Faith is both the prison and the open hand.”— Vienna Teng, "Augustine."
I would really want to see how will Sarah Palin manage her own campaign if she was to run for president. Obama faced one of the toughest primaries yet, and manage to defeat a person who is expected to take the election easily.
Sarah Palin on the other hand, depend heavily on McCain to manage this whole campaign, and her decisions I suppose has alienated a huge portion of the voting public.
Well, at the least she will look older, and it will become harder for her to pull off a 'cute comment' again. Yet at the same time, Sarah Palin is a real polar opposite against Obama. Reason? Obama gain supporters by encouraging them to make a change, a positive encouragement.
Sarah Palin on the other hand, seems to favour the fear approach heavily. A person like Sarah Palin could rise to power if the economy went down-hill under Obama's leadership or term as a president. The fear-effect might put Palin into the oval office in the next election.
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.
ray245 wrote:I would really want to see how will Sarah Palin manage her own campaign if she was to run for president. Obama faced one of the toughest primaries yet, and manage to defeat a person who is expected to take the election easily.
Sarah Palin would never make it past the first round of primaries if she were to run on her own.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
irishmick79 wrote:
Another thing that constantly annoys me about the 'experience' crap is that the repubicans rapidly (and rabidly) discount Obama's education as any kind of indicator of experience and write him off as a light weight, while ignoring Palin's glaring lack of education. Obama was president of Harvard Law Review, for crying out loud! I'm sorry, but when a group of the best law students in the country come together and in essence say "we want you to represent us because we think you're the best one", you simply can't be considered a light weight.
The most common rationalization I see in regards to this is that Palin isn't the one people are electing as President, so it's okay if she doesn't have as much experience as McCain. It's a completely bullshit argument of course, but it's pretty indicative of their mindset.
You're absolutely right. That's about as logical as their efforts to attack Obama/Biden on lack of executive experience while conveniently ignoring McCain's lack of executive experience. They're clearly implying that Obama/Biden don't carry any significant qualifications because they aren't appropriately republican, and treat that as a disqualifying factor for higher office on its own strength. It's just completely frustrating to argue against such a self-serving logical loop. It really speaks to the arrogance of the McCain/Palin ticket that they routinely use this kind of reasoning.
"A country without a Czar is like a village without an idiot."
- Old Russian Saying
ray245 wrote:I would really want to see how will Sarah Palin manage her own campaign if she was to run for president. Obama faced one of the toughest primaries yet, and manage to defeat a person who is expected to take the election easily.
Sarah Palin would never make it past the first round of primaries if she were to run on her own.
Agreed. The other GOP candidates would eat her alive.
I found this picture on the website of the Washington Post:
I know that it is just a public picture of Obama, but the way it was done implies something.
The photo looks as if he already is president.
ray245 wrote:I would really want to see how will Sarah Palin manage her own campaign if she was to run for president. Obama faced one of the toughest primaries yet, and manage to defeat a person who is expected to take the election easily.
Sarah Palin would never make it past the first round of primaries if she were to run on her own.
Agreed. The other GOP candidates would eat her alive.
I'm sure that's what Frank Murkowski thought, too. Sarah Palin is immensely popular among the evangelical base of the party, and that base is going to be arguing, four years from now, that the reason John McCain lost is because he wasn't conservative enough (the same thing always happens when a party gets its ass kicked--Hoover gets whooped, so the Republicans decide he lost because he wasn't laissez-faireenough, so they nominate Alf Landon; Carter gets beat so the Democrats nominate Mondale, etc). She's a charismatic demagogue who might just get out of this election with her reputation intact amongst the base, if she can lay all the blame on McSame and his handlers. And on top of that, she's a nasty, vindictive, power-hungry backstabber who's already won political knife fights against powerful Republicans. Any Republican who thinks he's going to "eat her alive" is going to regret it.
Now, can she win a general? Not even if hell freezes over. But she can win a nomination.
Any city gets what it admires, will pay for, and, ultimately, deserves…We want and deserve tin-can architecture in a tinhorn culture. And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed.--Ada Louise Huxtable, "Farewell to Penn Station", New York Times editorial, 30 October 1963 X-Ray Blues
Anybody see AP's latest declaration of a dead-even race? They're claiming Obama up by 1% over McCain (44 to 43) among likely voters, although he's up 47% to 37% among everyone interviewed, and up 5 points among registered voters.
I'd be curious to see their methodology, as it suggests 13% of likely voters are either still undecided or voting a third party. Considering that most other polls show Obama at ~50%, this one stands out. The article references McCain's strong showing in the third debate, which makes me wonder just what the writer was smoking when he wrote the article.
ray245 wrote:I would really want to see how will Sarah Palin manage her own campaign if she was to run for president. Obama faced one of the toughest primaries yet, and manage to defeat a person who is expected to take the election easily.
Sarah Palin would never make it past the first round of primaries if she were to run on her own.
Agreed. The other GOP candidates would eat her alive.
(assuming Obama wins)
the GOP primarries in 2012 will be a bloodfest. Huck vs Romneyas the main fight with Sanford, Pawlenty, Portman as also rans and Gingrich and Jeb looking from the sidelines to swoop in as the white knight. Palin may be poular with the base but she doesnt havethe organization of either Huck or Rom., and no ones going to stand aside thier own ambitions for her
Go back far enough and you'll end up blaming some germ for splitting in two - Col Tigh
xerex wrote:(assuming Obama wins)
the GOP primarries in 2012 will be a bloodfest. Huck vs Romneyas the main fight with Sanford, Pawlenty, Portman as also rans and Gingrich and Jeb looking from the sidelines to swoop in as the white knight. Palin may be poular with the base but she doesnt havethe organization of either Huck or Rom., and no ones going to stand aside thier own ambitions for her
How much organization did Huckabee have at the beginning of last year? Palin has four years and a ton of new friends with which to build an organization. She'll be a player, assuming some calamity doesn't happen between now and then (like getting impeached over ethics violations).
Any city gets what it admires, will pay for, and, ultimately, deserves…We want and deserve tin-can architecture in a tinhorn culture. And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed.--Ada Louise Huxtable, "Farewell to Penn Station", New York Times editorial, 30 October 1963 X-Ray Blues
RedImperator wrote:How much organization did Huckabee have at the beginning of last year?
This actually brings up an important point that shows why Palin would be an attractive candidate in 2012: she brings the same people to the table as Huckabee but without scaring the establishment conservatives. Huckabee espoused compassionate conservatism (fundamentalist social agenda but potentially leftist economics) and apparently he actually meant it, whereas Palin is equally popular with the evangelical base but is blatantly unprincipled. She is actually kind of like a female George W. Bush circa the 2000 election in this respect, though probably she'll be without the intense establishment support (which could well be backing another Romney run).
"I am gravely disappointed. Again you have made me unleash my dogs of war."
--The Lord Humungus
SancheztheWhaler wrote:Anybody see AP's latest declaration of a dead-even race? They're claiming Obama up by 1% over McCain (44 to 43) among likely voters, although he's up 47% to 37% among everyone interviewed, and up 5 points among registered voters.
I'd be curious to see their methodology, as it suggests 13% of likely voters are either still undecided or voting a third party. Considering that most other polls show Obama at ~50%, this one stands out. The article references McCain's strong showing in the third debate, which makes me wonder just what the writer was smoking when he wrote the article.
I read about it in one of the news articles I was browsing earlier, I didn't know where it came from though. I just remember it striking me as really odd since everyone and their brother is talking about Obama's lead, and now it's "dead-even" race? It was definitely a WTF moment for me.
RedImperator wrote:How much organization did Huckabee have at the beginning of last year?
This actually brings up an important point that shows why Palin would be an attractive candidate in 2012: she brings the same people to the table as Huckabee but without scaring the establishment conservatives. Huckabee espoused compassionate conservatism (fundamentalist social agenda but potentially leftist economics) and apparently he actually meant it, whereas Palin is equally popular with the evangelical base but is blatantly unprincipled. She is actually kind of like a female George W. Bush circa the 2000 election in this respect, though probably she'll be without the intense establishment support (which could well be backing another Romney run).
Huckabee is just a lol awh shucks Southern Christian loony. Yeah he made noises for the poor but also showed a disturbing tendency toward bandwagoning with right-wing fringe policy (the (un)FairTax, a highly-regressive consumption tax with a rebate in place of all payroll, capital gains, and income taxes) and goofy Larry the Cable Guy politics, like making Chuck Norris his unofficial spokesman.
"You know what the problem with Hollywood is. They make shit. Unbelievable. Unremarkable. Shit." - Gabriel Shear, Swordfish
"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi in reply to an incredibly stupid post.
The Fifth Illuminatus Primus | Warsie | Skeptical Empiricist | Florida Gator | Sustainability Advocate | LibertarianSocialist |
SancheztheWhaler wrote:Anybody see AP's latest declaration of a dead-even race? They're claiming Obama up by 1% over McCain (44 to 43) among likely voters, although he's up 47% to 37% among everyone interviewed, and up 5 points among registered voters.
I'd be curious to see their methodology, as it suggests 13% of likely voters are either still undecided or voting a third party. Considering that most other polls show Obama at ~50%, this one stands out. The article references McCain's strong showing in the third debate, which makes me wonder just what the writer was smoking when he wrote the article.
I read about it in one of the news articles I was browsing earlier, I didn't know where it came from though. I just remember it striking me as really odd since everyone and their brother is talking about Obama's lead, and now it's "dead-even" race? It was definitely a WTF moment for me.
According to AmericaBlog, it is a fixed sample poll with 44% of "likely voters" being born-again/evangelical Christians (compare with the 23% evangelical turnout in 2004). I'm at a loss for why AP would try to fix the results of a poll like that. I expected more out of them.
"You know what the problem with Hollywood is. They make shit. Unbelievable. Unremarkable. Shit." - Gabriel Shear, Swordfish
"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi in reply to an incredibly stupid post.
The Fifth Illuminatus Primus | Warsie | Skeptical Empiricist | Florida Gator | Sustainability Advocate | LibertarianSocialist |
