T1B

Terry, you ignorant slut.

Since BSkunk pussed out when confronted, I'll give you the very same opportunity to be a puss.

I claim that on a scale of 1-10, with 1 being FAR left and 10 being FAR right, Obumblefuck is a 1 or a 2.

What number do you say he is?

If you say he is anything other than a 1 or a 2, name a handful of his positions on issues which are moderate or even right.

poptart wrote:Terry, you ignorant slut.

Since BSkunk pussed out when confronted, I'll give you the very same opportunity to be a puss.

I claim that on a scale of 1-10, with 1 being FAR left and 10 being FAR right, Obumblefuck is a 1 or a 2.

What number do you say he is?

If you say he is anything other than a 1 or a 2, name a handful of his positions on issues which are moderate or even right.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Certainly, if public opinion is the criterion, his position on Iraq is much closer to the political center than is McCain's.

But what, if anything, does this exercise in mental masturbation have to do with anything I posted?

I merely posted that right now, this election is Obama's to lose. I based that on two matters:

1. McCain's Bush problem; and

2. The current makeup of the electoral map.

Let me address those points one at a time.

On Point 1, the Marcus Allen-esque part of the observation is that McCain is saddled with a grossly unpopular President who happens to be a member of his own party. That alone will cost him some votes. Of course, if that were the only part of this particular problem, it would be easily remedied by McCain merely running away from Bush.

But unfortunately for McCain, there's another, more subtle, component at work. Bush, while overwhelmingly unpopular overall, remains quite popular among the Republican base. His approval rating stands around 30% overall, but in the range of 65-70% among Republicans. And he can shake down Republican donors like no other. To make matters worse, Bush's few remaining strengths as a politician corresopnd perfectly with McCain's most significant weaknesses.

The upshot of that is that McCain will have to run toward Bush in order to shore up his support among the Republican base and keep his coffers full, while simultaneously running away from Bush in order to appeal to the moderate independent voters who likely will decide this election. Obama has no similar dilemma.

As for Point 2, I haven't exactly hidden the source on which I'm relying: http://www.electoral-vote.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. And I note that those who've criticized my take that the electoral map favors Obama have not cited any source which would support their position.

Terry wrote:Not surprising. I seem to recall some group in 2004 (not sure if it was the National Journal) claiming that John Kerry was the most liberal member of the Senate back then. Of course, even if it was the National Journal, it wouldn't technically be contradictory to claim that Obama is the most liberal member of the Senate now, given that he wasn't in the Senate in 2004. But it would be a rather strange coincidence that in two consecutive Presidential elections, the Democratic Party managed to nominate two different people, both of whom happened to be "the most liberal member of the Senate." I'm quite sure that Hillary, had she managed to win the nomination, somehow would have become magically "the most liberal member of the Senate."

Did you not say this?? lol

You're claiming that the repugnican will say any candidate the dems put forth is a far left loon, and I'm saying that B.O. IS a far left loon.

.... as was Kerry, btw.

So I asked you to cite some of Obumblefuck's moderate or right positions, to BACK UP your claim, and you post this ...

Certainly, if public opinion is the criterion, his position on Iraq is much closer to the political center than is McCain's.

Can't.Stop.Laffing.At.You.

So in your strange world, since McCain has a 'right' position on Iraq that must mean that Obuttfucked's positon is center??

You fucking toolbox.

ODipshit's position on Iraq is not a center position and you know it.

Hitlery took much more of a 'center' position on Iraq.


Where is B.O. a moderate???



psssst ...

He's NOT ... anywhere.

He's a far left loony tune.

poptart wrote:

Where is B.O. a moderate???

He's against Gay Marriage.
He's further to the center on Healthcare than the far left.
He's further to the center than the far left on Affirmative action (wants to apply to poor whites as well as minorities).
He's further to the center on energy & the environment than the far left would want him to be, as he's actually not opposed to Nuclear power, like they want him to be.


He's not a radically left politician. He's a liberal. Not the most and far from the least.

poptart wrote:

Terry wrote:Not surprising. I seem to recall some group in 2004 (not sure if it was the National Journal) claiming that John Kerry was the most liberal member of the Senate back then. Of course, even if it was the National Journal, it wouldn't technically be contradictory to claim that Obama is the most liberal member of the Senate now, given that he wasn't in the Senate in 2004. But it would be a rather strange coincidence that in two consecutive Presidential elections, the Democratic Party managed to nominate two different people, both of whom happened to be "the most liberal member of the Senate." I'm quite sure that Hillary, had she managed to win the nomination, somehow would have become magically "the most liberal member of the Senate."

Did you not say this?? lol

You're claiming that the repugnican will say any candidate the dems put forth is a far left loon, and I'm saying that B.O. IS a far left loon.

.... as was Kerry, btw.

So I asked you to cite some of Obumblefuck's moderate or right positions, to BACK UP your claim, and you post this ...

Certainly, if public opinion is the criterion, his position on Iraq is much closer to the political center than is McCain's.

Can't.Stop.Laffing.At.You.

So in your strange world, since McCain has a 'right' position on Iraq that must mean that Obuttfucked's positon is center??

You fucking toolbox.

ODipshit's position on Iraq is not a center position and you know it.

I said that Obama's position is closer to the center on Iraq than is McCain's position. And you've provided nothing to refute that, except a bunch of names. Other than the fact that they're slightly more creative than the ones mvscal typically employs, I would have concluded that you gave him your password.

McCain wants to keep the U.S. in Iraq for 100 years. Obama wants to begin phased withdrawal immediately, as does 70% of the U.S. population.

JayDuck wrote:

poptart wrote:

Where is B.O. a moderate???

He's against Gay Marriage.
He's further to the center on Healthcare than the far left.
He's further to the center than the far left on Affirmative action (wants to apply to poor whites as well as minorities).
He's further to the center on energy & the environment than the far left would want him to be, as he's actually not opposed to Nuclear power, like they want him to be.


He's not a radically left politician. He's a liberal. Not the most and far from the least.

Also,

He voted to reinstate PAYGO federal budget rules on three separate occasions. http://www.barackobama.com/issues/fisca ... discipline" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So it would appear that our friend Sen. Obama is actually something of a fiscal conservative.

Then again, maybe that's a bad example of what you were looking for. After all, fiscal conservatism stopped being "conservative" right around the same time Ronald Reagan decided to sell his economic plan to the unwashed masses as a free lunch.

Actually the measurement Dinsdale spoke of earlier in this thread is the TRUE measure of liberal or conservative.
That is, a vote which upholds the constitution is conservative and a vote which does not is liberal.

Terry, you got called names because you deserved it.
You were bemoaning the fact that repugnicans claim B.O. is a super-liberal.
I said they are right and challenged you to show some areas in which he is moderate or right.
You dripped down your leg, offering his position on fucking IRAQ as evidence. LMAO.

I'll give Jay some credit for at least trying to step to the plate to defend this freak that the dems have gotten behind.
Too bad it's all spin.

Gay marriage?
If Obama is against gay marriage then why didn't he vote for the constitutional ban on it?
Oh, he respects the constitution too much to do that to it?
Nope, sorry, he's spent his time in the senate doing almost nothing but pissing on the constitution.

Health care??
You're seriously fucking HIGH, guy, if you think his 'free for everyone' health care plan is moderate.
Socialism isn't moderate, you ASS!!!

Affirmative action??
Oh, so he wants white trash included.
Well, at least we know he's not a shitstained racist ... err ...
Hey guy, ANY affirmative action is not a moderate position.

Energy?
No drilling?
No common sense.


Terry, take your Obama as a fiscal conservative and just get lost.
Laffable ... like totally, man.

poptart wrote:Terry, you got called names because you deserved it.
You were bemoaning the fact that repugnicans claim B.O. is a super-liberal.

I did no such thing. I merely said that Obama is not the "most liberal member of the Senate." In support of that, I cited a history of Republican groups saying the same thing about other Democratic Presidential nominees, and pointed to a member of the Senate who, by any objective measure, is far more liberal than Obama ever was. You have done nothing to refute that.

I said they are right and challenged you to show some areas in which he is moderate or right.
You dripped down your leg, offering his position on fucking IRAQ as evidence. LMAO.

No, once again I stated that his position on Iraq is more moderate than McCain's position, which is on the extreme right. Again, you brought nothing to refute that.

Terry, take your Obama as a fiscal conservative and just get lost.
Laffable ... like totally, man.

And what's your definition of fiscal conservatism: borrow and spend? That's all you've gotten from any Republican President since Reagan.

I'm not a republican.

Fiscal conservatism is having a balanced budget ... at least.

The repube's have been disgracefully far from that for a very long time.

And if you think Obuggeryou will have anything close to a balanced budget you should start thinking again.


I didn't refute your take that Obama's position on Iraq is more moderate than McCain's because it is blatantly obvious and it had nothing to do with Obama being the somewhat moderate candidate you seem to think he is.

Obama has a way left position on Iraq ... like he does on damn near everything.

poptart wrote:I'm not a republican.

Fiscal conservatism is having a balanced budget ... at least.

The repube's have been disgracefully far from that for a very long time.

And if you think Obuggeryou will have anything close to a balanced budget you should start thinking again.

Thank you for your definition of fiscal conservatism. I asked because it's certainly something of a moving target among conservatives.

PAYGO won't get us to a balanced budget by itself, but it's a good start. So if Obama, as President, were to act consistently with his votes as a Senator in that regard, at least things are moving in the right direction.

Terry in Crapchester wrote: Again, you brought nothing to refute that.

Yes, T-crapper, the so-called defenders of McCain, of the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, of the basic impetus of the so-called "conservative right," do not, can not, and will not refute much of anything. They really have no arguments that rise above the inane and scared sneering. Rove monkeys like babs/prick and the other lock-step racist stooges that appear to "support" the right are total phonies. You've noticed this, yes? In fact look a little closer and you'll find that the very nature of the so-called "conservative right" is rife with all manner of perversion and demented crime. Just go down the long list of high level public official criminals and perverts of the past 10 or 15 years and...thay're all "right wing conservatives."

And now this pathetic legion of losers and creeps is pretending to have real opinions about Obama and the presidency? C'mon. Let's cut the fetid bullshit already.

S'cuse, babs? And what are you barking about? The caravan, as it were, is the huge horde of scared white fatties who with each day's fresh scoured cold shower are waking up and realizing that of course Obama, for whatever concessions he may be forced to make, will be a significant and honorable effort to regain some measure of national pride.

Meanwhile, Rove Monkey (Limpdick) hacks like you are done. Your tired pissy snipes are just grafitti on the monument of disgrace which is in the end the Conservative Right's legacy.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:S'cuse, babs? And what are you barking about? The caravan, as it were, is the huge horde of scared white fatties who with each day's fresh scoured cold shower are waking up and realizing that of course Obama, for whatever concessions he may be forced to make, will be a significant and honorable effort to regain some measure of national pride.

Meanwhile, Rove Monkey (Limpdick) hacks like you are done. Your tired pissy snipes are just grafitti on the monument of disgrace which is in the end the Conservative Right's legacy.

Go fuck yourself with a speed train wrapped in razor wire.
Thanks

Papa Willie wrote:

MadRussian wrote:

LTS TRN 2 wrote:S'cuse, babs? And what are you barking about? The caravan, as it were, is the huge horde of scared white fatties who with each day's fresh scoured cold shower are waking up and realizing that of course Obama, for whatever concessions he may be forced to make, will be a significant and honorable effort to regain some measure of national pride.

Meanwhile, Rove Monkey (Limpdick) hacks like you are done. Your tired pissy snipes are just grafitti on the monument of disgrace which is in the end the Conservative Right's legacy.

Go fuck yourself with a speed train wrapped in razor wire.
Thanks

Is that really THE Babs? :D

Nick Frisco.

Is that really THE Babs?

THE Babs was run - of a permanence.

When a legislator's vote is for sale (sup every member of Congress), they are, by default a "moderate."

Mighty white of you to let George use your material, Dins.

http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=0u6lCBnRoHQ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hope you got your royalties before he kicked the bucket.

mvscal wrote:

Melt on, libtards.

About what? About you buying into the spin from both sides?

This isn't an expansion of Bush's programs. The programs were actually started by Bill Clinton. Bush expanded the role of religous organizations and Obama's plan reworks that to allow them less freedom.

But, congratz on falling for both side's spinning hook, line and sinker. The Obama camp wants the evangelicals to see this as him reaching out to the religous right, and the McCain camp wants liberals to see this as him moving away from the left. They are both happy to let the media call it what it isn't, and would like to thank you for buying it.