Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (49100)	9/26/2008 11:40:13 PM
From: Ann Corrigan	Respond to of 224749

Swift McCain ad on the debate: michellemalkin.com Michelle Malkin gives the debate to McCain and she's been very rough on John for sometime.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (49100)	9/26/2008 11:43:05 PM
From: lorne	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224749

ken...."Ann, I just heard Dick Morris tell Sean Hannity that Obama won the debate tonight.".... Did you also watch Dick Morris last night on fox where he said what McCain did with regards to the 700 billion bail out was brilliant? And tonight he was ticked off that McCain didn't take advantage of that? He was angry as you and anyone could tell.... maybe Dick will rethink his remarks after he cools down.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (49100)	9/27/2008 1:04:23 AM
From: puborectalis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224749

``Barack Obama passed the commander-in-chief test,'' former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Richard Holbrooke, an adviser to the Illinois senator, said on Bloomberg's Political Capital with Al Hunt following last night's debate.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (49100)	9/27/2008 5:41:13 AM
From: puborectalis	Respond to of 224749

Hillary Clinton's statement on the debate: "Tonight Barack Obama displayed beyond a doubt that he understands both the gravity of the financial crisis facing America, and the challenges we face in Iraq and around the world. Senator McCain offered only more of the same failed policies of the Bush Administration. America deserves better." “I stood next to Barack Obama in 22 debates and tonight epitomized why millions are joining me in standing with him and working hard to ensure he is the next President of the United States.”

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (49100)	9/27/2008 8:22:24 AM
From: puborectalis	Respond to of 224749

In snap polls after the debate, men gave the debate to Mr McCain by a significant margin, while women gave it to Mr Obama overwhelmingly. It perhaps reflected the fact that Mr McCain appeared firmer and more experienced on issues of foreign policy; Mr Obama crisper and more focused on the economy. After an extraordinarily sluggish opening few minutes, Mr McCain rallied and put in a forceful and focused performance, repeating frequently that his younger rival “doesn’t get it” on foreign policy. In the final few seconds he told a prime-time audience that might have exceeded 80 million: "There are some advantages to experience and knowledge and judgment. And I honestly don't believe that Senator Obama has the knowledge or experience" to serve as commander in chief. He added: “I don’t need any on the job training.” Yet Mr Obama held his own in the foreign policy debate, and took Mr McCain head on over Iraq, a subject that the Republican is now trumpeting because of his early support for the “surge” of troops that has greatly reduced violence – a policy that Mr Obama opposed. "When the war started you said it was quick and easy, you said we knew where the weapons of mass destruction were. You were wrong,” Mr Obama said, addressing Mr McCain directly during a debate in which the moderator repeatedly urged them to confront each other. Having said that he opposed the war, Mr Obama continued: "You said that we were going to be greeted as liberators. You were wrong. You said that there was no history of violence between Shia and Sunni and you were wrong.” He added: “John, you like to pretend the war began in 2007." Mr McCain accused Mr Obama of denying the achievements of the troops in Iraq, declaring: "We are winning in Iraq and we'll come home. And we'll come home as we have when we have won other wars and not in defeat.” He added: "Senator Obama refuses to acknowledge that we are winning in Iraq.” The debate, held at the University of Mississippi in Oxford, came 48 years to the day since the first televised presidential debate between John F Kennedy and Richard Nixon in 1960. It had for weeks been scheduled as a foreign policy debate, but the first third of the evening was devoted to the financial crisis and the struggle on Capitol Hill to agree on the $700 billion rescue package being demanded by the Bush administration. Both candidates indicated that they supported a deal on a bailout, with major modifications, but neither seemed to reflect the real urgency of the situation. Indeed, Mr McCain succeeded in getting his rival bogged down in a discussion of “pork barrel” spending – the pet projects politicians attach to spending bills – something the Republican loves railing against but which is largely irreverent to the crisis that has afflicted the US banking sector.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (49100)	9/27/2008 8:29:31 AM
From: puborectalis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224749

In addition, it seems clear that Mr. McCain does not like his opponent. He never looked at him and even in the pre-debate handshake gave him an apparent cold shoulder. The result was that Mr. McCain at times seemed annoyed with Mr. Obama and unable to hide his contempt. In contrast, Mr. Obama was restrained, even laconic, passing up numerous opportunities to aggressively counter-attack his opponent. At times he wandered too far into law professor mode, but for the supposedly less experienced candidate, there were no obvious mistakes or gaffes. It was a workmanlike performance. And the one word that came to mind when watching the Democratic nominee was “statesmanlike.” Even if you didn’t agree with Mr. Obama, it’s hard to argue that he didn’t come across as serious and sober.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (49100)	9/27/2008 8:31:05 AM
From: puborectalis	Respond to of 224749

Michael A.Cohen: For Mr. McCain, who is trailing in the polls and has had a rough two-week stretch since the financial crisis broke, he needed a clear victory Friday night. Considering that foreign policy is seen as his strong point he needed to portray Mr. Obama as naïve and inexperienced and not up to the job of commander in chief. More important, after his behavior of this past week, he needed to cultivate an air of statesmanship and counteract the growing chorus of recklessness being heard in the national media. On a substantive level, both candidates acquitted themselves well. In a political vacuum, this debate would seem like a tie. But as any fan of baseball knows, the tie goes to the runner. Well, in politics, the tie goes to the candidate who has the momentum and right now that candidate is Barack Obama and from that perspective the debate was an important tactical victory for him. He more than held his own and at times seemed more effective and knowledgeable than Mr. McCain whose efforts to paint his rival as inexperienced fell flat and occasionally seemed mean-spirited. Beyond the mere question of expectations, Mr. Obama was far better at relating the debate to those issues that are of greatest concern to voters. His relentless message discipline was again on keen display. Nowhere was that more evident than in the debate’s initial economic discussion. While neither candidate seemed willing to go on the record in support of the federal bailout plan now being negotiated in Washington, Mr. Obama talked about the financial crisis in terms of how it affected voters directly. He linked the turmoil on Wall Street to issues like health care and jobs, and he seemed more empathetic than Mr. McCain. Mr. McCain spent much of the economic part of the debate talking about earmark spending. He mentioned it three times and was relentless in his focus on the scourge of government spending. As one TV commentator joked, he clearly has sewn up the anti-earmark segment of the electorate. But it begs the question: Are Americans really concerned about government spending? At a time when there are warnings of another Great Depression, Mr. McCain’s incessant focus seemed off the mark and unhelpful. In addition, it seems clear that Mr. McCain does not like his opponent. He never looked at him and even in the pre-debate handshake gave him an apparent cold shoulder. The result was that Mr. McCain at times seemed annoyed with Mr. Obama and unable to hide his contempt. In contrast, Mr. Obama was restrained, even laconic, passing up numerous opportunities to aggressively counter-attack his opponent. At times he wandered too far into law professor mode, but for the supposedly less experienced candidate, there were no obvious mistakes or gaffes. It was a workmanlike performance. And the one word that came to mind when watching the Democratic nominee was “statesmanlike.” Even if you didn’t agree with Mr. Obama, it’s hard to argue that he didn’t come across as serious and sober.