[clue-talk] Wow, Card's a little political...

[Angelo Bertolli]

Nate Duehr wrote:
>
> On Nov 1, 2008, at 5:23 PM, Angelo Bertolli wrote:
>
>> Thanks Nate for making so many responses... I don't think we think 
>> all that differently.
>>
>> Nate Duehr wrote:
>>> What Obama's been doing for decades is promising that he'll help 
>>> poor people out of their predicament, and delivering things like bad 
>>> loans to them, prolonging the problem.  That's not a very good track 
>>> record.   He put the nails in the coffin by spending $4 million on 
>>> his "I love me, don't you?" informercial the other night.  With his 
>>> poll numbers, he's likely to win... why do a 1/2 hour TV show?  Send 
>>> that $4 million back to his "neighborhood", perhaps?  Not a chance.  
>>> He's just as much of a party shill as McCain is right now... he has 
>>> to be.  They both do.
>>
>> Ok then we can agree this is a vote for party rather than the man.  
>> Although I get the impression you're hoping McCain is just playing 
>> the Republicans for now.  But either way, McCain can't have his cake 
>> and eat it too.  He won't be able to convince people that he doesn't 
>> tow the party line ("if you wanted to run against Bush...") while at 
>> the same time bending over for them.
>
> I disagree.  I'll still vote for the man, not the Party.  If we don't, 
> we're just buying into the Party horse-pucky.  It's also the reason I 
> voted for Kerry instead of Bush.  Yeah, that's probably a shocker for 
> some reading my opinions this year, eh?

Not shocked really, but it is good to know.  I'll have to reconcile this 
statement about the man and not the Party with the last statement of 
your email somehow though:


 > I think Obama's an incredible person, but he's not good enough to 
fight his whole Party.  No one is.


> McCain's a guy who fights the battles he can win.  A pragmatist.  Look 
> at his stance on Immigration for example... he's not a "lock the 
> borders" ultra-Right wack-job.  He's just surrounded by them.  
> Politics is nasty, so what?  He's stepped on more of his own Party's 
> toes over the years than Obama has.

Uhhh, yeah, that's exactly what I'm afraid of.  I don't hate McCain as 
an individual, but he is surrounded by a crowd I don't like.  And that 
crowd seems to be growing in the Republican party.

> Obama on the other hand appears to be a guy who wants to win at all 
> costs, including pandering to the poor.  I can't abide voting for more 
> of that.  That's the same thing as the guy running Lehman Brothers, in 
> a cheaper suit.  Can Obama stand up to his own Party?  I do NOT think 
> he can.  He doesn't have the character.  What he has going for him is 
> charisma, which is a completely different thing.

I really don't think McCain can stand up to his own party either.  
Unlike Brian (or was it Sean?) I don't think that McCain was always a 
political opportunist just because of recent history, I really think 
he's finally agreed to go along with the party politics as his "last 
chance" at becoming President.  As an individual, he really deserves the 
office more than anyone.  Unfortunately,  I can't really vote that way 
just because I feel he deserves it.

>> Personally I would have been a lot more on your page if he hadn't 
>> picked Palin.  Picking Palin sort of indicated to me that he was 
>> willing to go "too far" and that the rather than playing nice to the 
>> Republican party,  he was now their puppet.  I seriously might be 
>> voting for McCain if he had picked someone who seemed like they at 
>> least knew how to play the game.  Disparaging remarks about the 
>> office of VP aside, the President needs as many good people around 
>> him as possible.  It's a possible indicator of how he chooses his 
>> cabinet.
>
> I think he knew he badly needed women voters, he needed religious 
> voters, and he needed the heartland states where the electoral votes 
> will count more than here.

Well that's what I thought at first too:  take the Hillary voters.  But 
I don't think he's really gained much in that area.  What he did secure 
was a segment of the Republican base that was a little uneasy with him 
for his mavrickness.  I think it is just a really obvious political 
move, and I think they felt they could somehow tell one set of people, 
"McCain's half Democrat," while telling another set of people, "McCain's 
totally Republican."  It didn't work.

> Ironically if the mixed "fears" that Palin is "unqualified" (which I'm 
> still waiting for the answer to -- unqualified to do WHAT?  Is anyone 
> really "qualified" to run a country or act as VP of one?  Is there a 
> "VP School" somewhere?) ... are mixed with the fears that Palin has 
> some wacked-out religious agenda and will somehow pass laws to enact 
> those beliefs (last I checked, the VP can't do that)... obviously if 
> someone believes both, she can't possibly get it done.  I think the 
> real fear is that she's GOOD at what she does.

So you don't think the VP has any influence or matters at all?  I think 
it's still an important political office, regardless of whatever is 
specifically prescribed in the Constitution for the office.  Saying that 
she's not the sharpest knife in the drawer is putting it mildly.  The 
very fact that she seems to be in lock-step with the extremist 
Republicans and that McCain saw fit to choose her over other better 
qualified candidates makes me question his judgement.  Although I 
wouldn't go as far as Christopher Hitchens as to say that McCain is 
getting senile.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AD8uHW0hbiA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGMWdDNMpZY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YV-2OuihEsA

At any rate, it's obvious that the Republicans believe she has a 
political role.  Some people are voting McCain soley because of her 
stances on things like abortion and gay marriage.

> And what did she do?  Cut the pork in Alaska and do what her 
> constituents wanted.  Wow.  A politician who will do what they say 
> they will.  I'm soooo scared.

I will post a small defense for Palin, to be fair:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html


>> Well maybe I give the same benefit of the doubt to Obama that you 
>> give McCain.  But I really don't like the way Obama is glorified 
>> either,  and I don't prefer him because of the things he's said.  I'm 
>> just freaking scared of the Republicans at this point based on what 
>> I've watched from their rallies.  Maybe that's because I've watched 
>> more Republican rallies, and I really would just hate everyone 
>> equally.  My friend, on the other hand, says he just doesn't trust 
>> Obama... so it all comes down to trust, I guess.
>
> What have you watched?  I'm still really curious about this.  I've 
> been watching rallies of both on C-SPAN for quite a while now, and I'm 
> not seeing anything other than two candidates pandering to their 
> bases.  In Obama's case, he's pandering to Liberals who want the 
> "ultimate kill" toward Socialism because it's "time for fundamental 
> change", and McCain's pandering to the small-town hard-working folks.

Ok, I tracked down whatever clips I found on YT, but I hadn't seen all 
of these:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vL20TdHjX2s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kf6YKOkfFsE

This is a weird one...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjxzmaXAg9E

You know, "nobama" sounds way too close to "Obama."  I wonder if there 
isn't a better catch-phrase that won't confuse people.

> Since I identify a lot more (mostly because of family history, not 
> because I'm a small town country boy myself) with the hard-working 
> type, as a non-degreed guy who worked hard enough to make a 
> considerably higher salary than the median or mean salaries in this 
> great country -- I'd kinda like to keep what I earned through my work.
>
> I see Obama as a guy who wants to take what I earned and hand it to 
> the same people who've run companies I've worked hard for, into the 
> ground.  I also see a tendency of a lot of comfortable people in the 
> 'burbs in cities to want to vote to "help" him with his socialistic 
> vision to help the poor or whatever.  I think they'll be quite 
> disillusioned with the results.
> Hard work and personal responsibility pays off, always.  If tomorrow I 
> wake up and what I've accomplished for myself and my family is 
> suddenly no longer true, I'll start "believing" that I should let 
> Obama take money from the rich and give it to me.  Until then, I'll be 
> working on my own "American Dream", not Obama's, thanks.  His 
> continual advertising that "America is broken" just isn't true in this 
> household.  I go out, I work, I make money, I save... it works for me.
>
> Is building a real future for myself and my family a struggle?  
> Absolutely.  It's a hell of a lot easier for me than it was for my 
> grandparents (all of whom I was lucky enough to know) during the 
> 1930's.  Am I willing to do it?  Yes.  Would having more of my money 
> taken away to fund someone else's dream be a severe blow to my 
> motivation to even try?  Yep.

Why?  If you're not making as much as Joe the plumber (250k) and you 
don't have any capital gains (do any of have any now?) you really have 
nothing to worry about from Obama.  I can buy arguments that you just 
don't think people should be taxed that much in general, but otherwise I 
would think you'd be in Obama's camp on this issue.  Is McCain going to 
really reduce your taxes?  These stupid stimulus packages are a joke, at 
least for me.  But I guess that's coming from both sides of the aisle.

> Nothing ... absolutely NOTHING in history shows that socializing 
> healthcare makes it better.  Nothing shows that higher taxes on 
> capital gains or government leads to real sustainable growth.  Nothing 
> shows that ANY of his policies will help anyone but those already on a 
> government dole.  It concerns me deeply that people think they will 
> without any proof.  They're just following the populist wave created 
> by electing Bush and finding out his character was lacking.

Yeah, but to be fair, both candidates suck on the health care issue.  
For me that puts the issue off the table.