PDA

View Full Version : Elections McCain : The Low Road


banyon
07-30-2008, 08:06 PM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zPPLSHKH0h4&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zPPLSHKH0h4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Donger
07-30-2008, 08:10 PM
"Take on Big Oil"? How's he going to do that and why?

banyon
07-30-2008, 08:12 PM
"Take on Big Oil"? How's he going to do that and why?

You forgot to say "Barack Hussein".

Donger
07-30-2008, 08:13 PM
You forgot to say "Barack Hussein".

No, I didn't. I use his name when it suits me.

So, how is Barack Hussein going to do that and why?

HolmeZz
07-30-2008, 08:16 PM
He one upped 'President McCain'.

banyon
07-30-2008, 08:20 PM
No, I didn't. I use his name when it suits me.

So, how is Barack Hussein going to do that and why?

Yeah, I just have trouble taking you seriously if you don't address him by his middle name.

He's got like a whole energy plan and everything. It's well concealed on his Website under :Issues: Energy

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pdf/EnergyFactSheet.pdf

banyon
07-30-2008, 08:21 PM
I'm glad he threw an elbow back after all of the ridiculous BS that's been desperately thrown at him by the chain email gang.

banyon
07-30-2008, 08:26 PM
My favorite part is the black and white of McCain next to Bush.

Donger
07-30-2008, 08:37 PM
Yeah, I just have trouble taking you seriously if you don't address him by his middle name.

He's got like a whole energy plan and everything. It's well concealed on his Website under :Issues: Energy

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pdf/EnergyFactSheet.pdf

Well, as far as I can tell, Barack Hussein is in favor of a "windfall profit" taxation of the oil companies. Is that correct? If so, why?

beer bacon
07-30-2008, 08:42 PM
Wow, I bet Programmer is going to get some pretty hard hitting McCain fanfiction forwarded to him as a result of this.

banyon
07-30-2008, 08:43 PM
Well, as far as I can tell, Barack Hussein is in favor of a "windfall profit" taxation of the oil companies. Is that correct? If so, why?

Why did you seize on that one aspect of the plan?

Too many other substantive answers to your question?

Taco John
07-30-2008, 08:51 PM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zPPLSHKH0h4&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zPPLSHKH0h4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>



Here's what is missing from McCain's campaign. Barack Obama counterpunches McCain, and then starts talking about his issues. McCain never talks about his positions. His whole campaign is about not being Obama.

Donger
07-30-2008, 09:01 PM
Why did you seize on that one aspect of the plan?

Too many other substantive answers to your question?

It was in the ad you posted. And, I didn't see any reference to how Barack Hussein is going to "go after" Big Oil in the PDF you linked.

markk
07-30-2008, 09:08 PM
It was in the ad you posted. And, I didn't see any reference to how Barack Hussein is going to "go after" Big Oil in the PDF you linked.

well if you listen to congress they think that taxing the oil companies into oblivion is going to lower prices.

banyon
07-30-2008, 09:11 PM
It was in the ad you posted. And, I didn't see any reference to how Barack Hussein is going to "go after" Big Oil in the PDF you linked.

There are plenty of things in the PDF that are contrary to Big Oil's wishes.

Wrt the windfall profits tax, though, it is one policy item in his overall plan, yes. As the more general website explains (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/), the purpose of the tax will be to reinvest it into alternatives and easing the burden on the middle class. It would also probably deter a certain level of speculation.

Donger
07-30-2008, 09:14 PM
There are plenty of things in the PDF that are contrary to Big Oil's wishes.

Wrt the windfall profits tax, though, it is one policy item in his overall plan, yes. As the more general website explains (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/), the purpose of the tax will be to reinvest it into alternatives and easing the burden on the middle class. It would also probably deter a certain level of speculation.

"Barack Obama supports imposing a windfall profits penalty on oil selling at or over $80 per barrel."

Why $80 per barrel? Is he not aware that oil is a globally-traded commodity, not set by "Big Oil"?

And, again, why a windfall tax at all? What is he basing it one? Is he basing it on profit margin?

banyon
07-30-2008, 09:14 PM
well if you listen to congress they think that taxing the oil companies into oblivion is going to lower prices.

Are you really going to feign that I didn't already explain this to you?

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=4834353&postcount=45

banyon
07-30-2008, 09:20 PM
"Barack Obama supports imposing a windfall profits penalty on oil selling at or over $80 per barrel."

Why $80 per barrel? Is he not aware that oil is a globally-traded commodity, not set by "Big Oil"?

And, again, why a windfall tax at all? What is he basing it one? Is he basing it on profit margin?

80$ is probably figured because of the average prices over the last ten years I would imagine. I prefer the formula (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=4834353&postcount=45)that was in the bill that the Senate filibustered though.

I think denying that speculation and monopolistic (and literal Cartel) influences aren't present (and very relevant to pricing) in the oil industry is kind of myopic.

Donger
07-30-2008, 09:25 PM
80$ is probably figured because of the average prices over the last ten years I would imagine. I prefer the formula (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=4834353&postcount=45)that was in the bill that the Senate filibustered though.

I think denying that speculation and monopolistic (and literal Cartel) influences aren't present (and very relevant to pricing) in the oil industry is kind of myopic.

Myopic? Perhaps you could present some evidence that "Big Oil" has been manipulating the globally-traded price of crude?

banyon
07-30-2008, 09:36 PM
Myopic? Perhaps you could present some evidence that "Big Oil" has been manipulating the globally-traded price of crude?

Ha. I'm going to watch a movie now. I think I'll let you continue to live in Candyland where giant Multinational corporations always treat people fairly and never seek to gain unfair advantages for a while longer.

Donger
07-30-2008, 09:37 PM
Ha. I'm going to watch a movie now. I think I'll let you continue to live in Candyland where giant Multinational corporations always treat people fairly and never seek to gain unfair advantages for a while longer.

Okay. I'll take that as a "No, I can't."

SBK
07-31-2008, 12:13 AM
Okay. I'll take that as a "No, I can't."

LMAO

patteeu
07-31-2008, 01:49 AM
I honestly didn't think that was a very good ad.

Alphaman
07-31-2008, 06:52 AM
I honestly didn't think that was a very good ad.


Did you think McCain's Brittany Spears ad was a good ad?

patteeu
07-31-2008, 09:37 AM
Did you think McCain's Brittany Spears ad was a good ad?

Not really. I think the whining about it being a low blow is silly, but I didn't think it was very compelling. To be honest, I would have liked to have seen more Brittany and less Obama and McCain. ;)

Alphaman
07-31-2008, 09:43 AM
Not really. I think the whining about it being a low blow is silly, but I didn't think it was very compelling. To be honest, I would have liked to have seen more Brittany and less Obama and McCain. ;)

LOL!!! She's definitely more pleasing to the eye.

I haven't heard whining about it being a low blow. I've heard responses saying it is sophomoric. I've heard responses that both McCain and his wife (not that what she says really matters) said the American people wanted an election campaign built on the issues and not on negative ads, yet his last 4 (that's the number Rachael Madow quoted) ads have been negative attack ads whose facts have been refuted.

patteeu
07-31-2008, 10:24 AM
LOL!!! She's definitely more pleasing to the eye.

I haven't heard whining about it being a low blow. I've heard responses saying it is sophomoric. I've heard responses that both McCain and his wife (not that what she says really matters) said the American people wanted an election campaign built on the issues and not on negative ads, yet his last 4 (that's the number Rachael Madow quoted) ads have been negative attack ads whose facts have been refuted.

I guess I was thinking of Taco John's thread where he says it "degrades the office".

siberian khatru
07-31-2008, 10:28 AM
I honestly didn't think that was a very good ad.

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/07/weaver_mccains_former_strategi.php

Weaver, McCain's Former Strategist, Calls "Celeb" Ad "Childish"

30 Jul 2008 04:10 pm

John Weaver, for years one of John McCain's closest friends and confidants, has been in exile since his resignation from McCain's presidential campaign last year. With the exception of an occasional interview, he has, by his own account, bit his tongue as McCain's campaign has adopted a strategy that Weaver believes "diminishes John McCain."

With the release today of a McCain television ad blasting Obama for celebrity preening while gas prices rise, and a memo that accuses Obama of putting his own aggrandizement before the country, Weaver said he's had "enough."

The ad's premise, he said, is "childish."

"John's been a celebrity ever since he was shot down," Weaver said. "Whatever that means. And I recall Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush going overseas and all those waving American flags."

Weaver remains in contact with senior McCain strategists and, for a while early this year, regularly talked to McCain.

The strategy of driving up Obama's negatives "reduces McCain on the stage," Weaver said.

"For McCain to win in such troubled times, he needs to begin telling the American people how he intends to lead us. That McCain exists. He can inspire the country to greatness."

He added: "There is legitimate mockery of a political campaign now, and it isn't at Obama's. For McCain's sake, this tomfoolery needs to stop."

On a conference call with reporters, McCain campaign manager Rick Davis said the ad "addresses a unique facet in Barack Obama's campaign that is unlikenbsp; any other campaign we've seen in modern history: a campaign that is focused on the development of an enormous image of celebrity status." Davis and Weaver do not get along, and the campaign's operations chief, Steve Schmidt,was reportedly upset that Weaver told the New York Times that the campaign "lost" the week that Obama went overseas.

Obama, speaking to reporters outside a diner in Lebanon, MO, at first did not answer a question about the ad. Then he said,.

"You know, I don't pay attention to John McCain's ads, although I do notice he doesn't seem to have anything to say very positive about himself. He seems to only be talking about me. You need to ask John McCain what he's for and not just what he's against," he said.