Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.
Regards,
Shodan
The little dog barks, but the caravan rolls on.
Of all the things I thought I’d see in this life, Shodan citing Noam Chomsky in a political thread wasn’t one of them.
Daniel
Great! “Hussein” sounds way cooler than “Sidney”! 
Eh, reality has a well-known liberal bias, so McCain has his work cut out for him.
Today, I had some driving to do, so out of curiosity I flipped over to Limbaugh.
Perhaps we should have expected it: “Here’s how Obama’s like Hitler…”
So now, Godwin’s Law has officially been invoked, and the Republicans have officially run out of ideas and lost the debate.
Barack Hussein Obama refuses to wear an American flag pin on his lapel. He refuses to put his hand over his heart when reciting The Pledge of Allegiance. He is a Muslim. He wants to give free healthcare to the rich and illegals. He wants to raise taxes to help lazy people. His wife has an attitude and hates America.
Barack Hussein Obama is an ungrateful, unpatriotic, Islamo-Fascist, willing to compromise American values and pride to appease the evil doers.
I think there will be a lot of talk about his arrogance and conceit, combined with his lack of “experience,” with the intent of playing up the “uppity nigga” theme without saying “nigga.”
Actually, the patriotism thing may well be used, not as a primary argument, of course, but to chip away at Obama’s credibility. It’s particularly striking when compared with the “war hero” McCain.
Except for the fact that it doesn’t have a shred of validity to it.
Try imagining your reaction on hearing George Bush drawing raving crowds all over America. Republicans are shaking their heads with the adoration over Obama.
So what. Clinton was addressing mostly Democrats and like minded, while McCain will be addressing Republicans and like minded. The argument will definitely help McCain.
I’m gonna watch for McCain to present Iraq as uberly critical for the future of the United States and withdrawal as an utterly humiliating defeat with global consequences That issue will be drawn as a line in the sand, do or die, and make the choice for the American voter based primarily on one issue.
In other words, you expect him to lie through his teeth and go full bore with the fear mongering. That only works with a shrinking minority of voters anymore. People want out of Iraq. They know it’s a disaster. They know it’s non-defensive and expensive, that it’s creating more (not fewer) terrorists, that our military personel and resources are being stretched thin for an occupation which has wasted thousands of lives protecting America from nothing. Every argument for staying in Iraq is a lie, and everybody knows it’s a lie and the lie isn’t working anymore.
Iraq is McCain’s weakest issue, not his strongest. Touting Iraq only serves to placate his most right wing base. It will kill him with independents, especially if Obama’s over there on the other side ready to drink his milkshake.
No, the criticism doesn’t have any validity to it, but the ultraconservative spin doctors don’t care. People buy it. Capitalizing on people’s prejudices and fears works for the radical conservatives. I don’t think it will stick to Obama, but I am sure he is preparing for what’s coming. It’s already started.
The problem with that is Iraq isn’t even the number 1 issue Americans care about anymore. If he forces the issue on Iraq, he still loses if the democrats can convince us they’ll be better for the economy.
Are you sure about that? Last I heard, Americans did not support a withdrawl from Iraq, but rather criticized how Bush was handling the war. If McCain can convince Americans that he can “win” the Iraq war, it’ll be a point for him.
I just don’t think that’s enough to get him elected, though. Americans are losing their houses and having to cut back their expenses. They don’t give a damn about Iraq anymore.
So is a middle manager now considered “executive experience” for the purposes of being President? How many organizational levels can exist above someone before we stop considering them executives?
Only 1/4 think we should withdraw immediately. I wonder why 1/3 want to wait a year to withdraw? I don’t think counting them on the same side as the “withdraw immediately” crowd is proper, considering the fact that they are willing to stay for a year indicates that they’re still optimistic for some progress toward victory.
I think it just means they want a phased withdrawal rather than just yanking everybody out of the pool all at once.
Plus, only 34% say they want to stay in Iraq until we “win” (whatever “win” means).
There’s probably some of both types in that 37% I’d bet that for every person who wants to leave Iraq within a year unconditionally, there’s at least one who thinks setting a timeframe will light a fire under our ass (or the Iraqi government’s) to get the job done once and for all.