McCain shallow like Bush-CNN

[geeker2]

Originally Posted by Mike

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/...ain/index.html

This article sums it up for me. He suffered as a POW and appears to be a noble man, but that doesn't qualify him to be President in my eyes.

I'm ashamed to have Bush as our President, let's raise the bar in this election

...and that would be Obama? now that is funny

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by geeker2

...and that would be Obama? now that is funny

Tell me about it! This shiat cracks me up ... Obama isn't even qualified to run for President of our homeowner's association. LMFAO!

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

Tell me about it! This shiat cracks me up ... Obama isn't even qualified to run for President of our homeowner's association. LMFAO!

Neither is qualified. Obama has very lil seasoning, and McCain has a history of not getting along with authority. It's one thing to be a Maverick Senator, and another thing to be a Maverick President. Didn't we go thru this with Nixon? Always had a chip on his shoulder. Kind of attracted a bunch of freaks around him that he could trust. I'm not saying they would have the same groups of people they don't get along with, but I think they are both Mavericks in their own party. Replace Jews in this discussion below with another group, because that's about the same type conversations McCain will be having about his enemies(he has many.)

"Nixon and his chief of staff, H.R. "Bob" Haldeman, had the following conversation July 1971:

Nixon: Now, point: [Fred] Malek is not Jewish.

Haldeman: No.

Nixon: All right, I want a look at any sensitive areas around where Jews are involved, Bob. See, the Jews are all through the government, and we have got to get in those areas. We've got to get a man in charge who is not Jewish to control the Jewish … do you understand?

Haldeman: I sure do.

Nixon: The government is full of Jews. Second, most Jews are disloyal. You know what I mean? You have a [White House Counsel Leonard] Garment and a [National Security Adviser Henry] Kissinger and, frankly, a [White House speechwriter William] Safire, and, by God, they're exceptions. But Bob, generally speaking, you can't trust the bastards. They turn on you. Am I wrong or right?

Haldeman: Their whole orientation is against you. In this administration, anyway. And they are smart. They have the ability to do what they want to do—which—is to hurt us."

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

Neither is qualified. Obama has very lil seasoning, and McCain has a history of not getting along with authority. It's one thing to be a Maverick Senator, and another thing to be a Maverick President. Didn't we go thru this with Nixon? Always had a chip on his shoulder. Kind of attracted a bunch of freaks around him that he could trust. I'm not saying they would have the same groups of people they don't get along with, but I think they are both Mavericks in their own party. Replace Jews in this discussion below with another group, because that's about the same type conversations McCain will be having about his enemies(he has many.)

"Nixon and his chief of staff, H.R. "Bob" Haldeman, had the following conversation July 1971:

Nixon: Now, point: [Fred] Malek is not Jewish.

Haldeman: No.

Nixon: All right, I want a look at any sensitive areas around where Jews are involved, Bob. See, the Jews are all through the government, and we have got to get in those areas. We've got to get a man in charge who is not Jewish to control the Jewish … do you understand?

Haldeman: I sure do.

Nixon: The government is full of Jews. Second, most Jews are disloyal. You know what I mean? You have a [White House Counsel Leonard] Garment and a [National Security Adviser Henry] Kissinger and, frankly, a [White House speechwriter William] Safire, and, by God, they're exceptions. But Bob, generally speaking, you can't trust the bastards. They turn on you. Am I wrong or right?

Haldeman: Their whole orientation is against you. In this administration, anyway. And they are smart. They have the ability to do what they want to do—which—is to hurt us."

To be honest, I'm not a fan of McCain either (he swings too left for me) ... he is the lesser of two evils IMO and that is why I'm voting for him.

[Rileyoriley]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

To be honest, I'm not a fan of McCain either (he swings too left for me) ... he is the lesser of two evils IMO and that is why I'm voting for him.

Ditto.

[geeker2]

Originally Posted by Rileyoriley

Ditto.

Me too..looks he's already up by 3 votes..it's a landside!!

[SCUDSBROTHER]

In some of these Southern States, I got a feeling this is gunna be a story of 10%.


10%- of the Black Vote for McCain

10%-of the White Vote for Obama

[Rileyoriley]

Originally Posted by geeker2

Me too..looks he's already up by 3 votes..it's a landside!!

Those 3 votes are Cajun, you and me!

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

Neither is qualified. Obama has very lil seasoning, and McCain has a history of not getting along with authority. It's one thing to be a Maverick Senator, and another thing to be a Maverick President. Didn't we go thru this with Nixon? Always had a chip on his shoulder. Kind of attracted a bunch of freaks around him that he could trust. I'm not saying they would have the same groups of people they don't get along with, but I think they are both Mavericks in their own party. Replace Jews in this discussion below with another group, because that's about the same type conversations McCain will be having about his enemies(he has many.)

"Nixon and his chief of staff, H.R. "Bob" Haldeman, had the following conversation July 1971:

Nixon: Now, point: [Fred] Malek is not Jewish.

Haldeman: No.

Nixon: All right, I want a look at any sensitive areas around where Jews are involved, Bob. See, the Jews are all through the government, and we have got to get in those areas. We've got to get a man in charge who is not Jewish to control the Jewish … do you understand?

Haldeman: I sure do.

Nixon: The government is full of Jews. Second, most Jews are disloyal. You know what I mean? You have a [White House Counsel Leonard] Garment and a [National Security Adviser Henry] Kissinger and, frankly, a [White House speechwriter William] Safire, and, by God, they're exceptions. But Bob, generally speaking, you can't trust the bastards. They turn on you. Am I wrong or right?

Haldeman: Their whole orientation is against you. In this administration, anyway. And they are smart. They have the ability to do what they want to do—which—is to hurt us."

nixon was the quintessential insider. the guy was vp for 8 years.

goldwater in 64 was a guy working against party orthodoxy. nixon in 68 was the orthodoxy's revenge.

your example is completely off base.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

nixon was the quintessential insider. the guy was vp for 8 years.

goldwater in 64 was a guy working against party orthodoxy. nixon in 68 was the orthodoxy's revenge.

your example is completely off base.

I'm talking about the real person(not some fake persona he had to take on.) Obviously, he set up a White House with his own lil Jew hater society in the Oval Office. He may of had more support from the traditional party loyalists than McCaine has had, but in Nixon's head he obviously didn't think that many people liked him, and he seemed to be constantly thinking even people in his own party were out to ruin him. Although I think McCain is an upgrade, I don't see him as being a leader. I see him being more comfortable as a leader of those against a leader. His nature is to get hot, and do something to make it tough on somebody who did him wrong. That's not that big of a deal when you're a senator. A president looking for revenge against enemies will not be nearly as cute as a moderate Republican Senator "trying to find common ground" with Democrats. He's a leader of opposition to something.The President's job has to be less combative, and it won't be very much fun to a guy like this.

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

I'm talking about the real person(not some fake persona he had to take on.) Obviously, he set up a White House with his own lil Jew hater society in the Oval Office. He may of had more support from the traditional party loyalists than McCaine has had, but in Nixon's head he obviously didn't think that many people liked him, and he seemed to be constantly thinking even people in his own party were out to ruin him. Although I think McCain is an upgrade, I don't see him as being a leader. I see him being more comfortable as a leader of those against a leader. His nature is to get hot, and do something to make it tough on somebody who did him wrong. That's not that big of a deal when you're a senator. A president looking for revenge against enemies will not be nearly as cute as a moderate Republican Senator "trying to find common ground" with Democrats. He's a leader of opposition to something.The President's job has to be less combative, and it won't be very much fun to a guy like this.

scuds, i'm not sure how you make the leap from a guy who doesn't care what anyone thinks of him and is willing to be his own man even at his own personal detriment (mccain) and one who is so concerned about other's opinion of him that he compiles enemy lists.

mccain is comfortable in his own skin. nixon wanted approval. there is no comparison.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

scuds, i'm not sure how you make the leap from a guy who doesn't care what anyone thinks of him and is willing to be his own man even at his own personal detriment (mccain) and one who is so concerned about other's opinion of him that he compiles enemy lists.

mccain is comfortable in his own skin. nixon wanted approval. there is no comparison.

Doesn't care what anyone thinks of him? Are you kid'n me? He has been an attention seeker for a while now. He used to go on IMUS just to be on IMUS.
The guy even went on TVG at Del Mar(again for no particular reason.) He and Nixon aren't uniter types. They are fighter types. Those types do poorly with this job. Those who are most correct for the job(personality-wise) have done best with it. Those who atleast create the illusion of being a negotiator/uniter type have done the best at handling the job.( Kennedy, Reagan, Clinton types. ) For sure, there is one of those here(OBAMA,) and there is the more combative type personality running against him(McCain.) This is primarily a negotiating job, and it suits certain people better than others. To be honest, Hilary wasn't the right personality for the job either(at all.) OBAMA has the right personality for it. Obviously, politics of somebody are a factor, but people need to look at the type of person best equipped for this type of a job. It's a frustrating job..They have the responsibility, but not the power they often would like to have. It, no doubt, would feel like a no-win situation to most who did it. That's the way it's gunna feel to McCain too.

[Mortimer]

I Like Ike!!