Posted on 09/26/2008 6:23:51 PM PDT by cake_crumb
LIVE DEBATE THREAD
Sen. McCain has mentioned his vast experience without sounding like a blowhard.
Thank you for noticing that, I too am in the position of being happy to vote McCain recently, despite my rather well documented and not very nice characterizations of him...though he STILL has to answer for the POW/MIA (Kerry/Kennedy) thing.
My brother, you are intense! Amen!!!!!
An observant women my friend; quite fortunate for you.
In 2004 the on line polls showed an 80-20 split for Kerry as the winner after the 1st debate. The Leftist think spamming these polls is some how significant. Their campaigns organize efforts to spam these polls so you get way lopsided numbers in them. It is totally meaningless
Sorry, not convinced! I’d like to believe my eyes, but not sure what I’m looking at?
The guy is lost in space. And who does he think wants to set up a nuclear exchange with Venezuela? Russia is the proper answer.
China and Russia could have taken North Korea out a decade ago. They want proxies. That’s what this is all about.
Oh goodness. I have to find a rerun of the debates..I had to take my husband to the hospital during the debate...sounds like I missed a lot!
There was a post over at Townhall.com implying that Obama was looking at his cell phone during the debate and suggested someone may have been texting him. Anyone see this?
(1) MISSILE DEFENSE: Obama lied (or flip-flopped without admitting it) on his position re missile defense. Tonight he claimed he supports it, when he is on video giving a left-wing rant calling for termination of funding for "unproven" missile defense:
(2) RUSSIA-GEORGIA CONFLICT: Mis-Represents his own position on Russia-Georgia as it "evolved".... he did NOT take the position on Russia-Georgia on the FIRST day of the conflict that he eventually took by day 3.
(3) PRESIDENTIAL SUMMIT WITH IRANIAN LEADERS, NO PRE-CONDITIONS: Obama mis-represents Henry Kissinger's position on Iran in order to pretend that Kissing agrees with the Obamanation. If a Republican candidate in a Presidential debate had just grossly mis-represented the position of the most famous living diplomat on an issue of such vital importance, in order to claim non-existent support for his own position (which position itself is in the midst of major flip-flops), the media would flay that candidate alive and the election is over. It is a measure of the depth and breadth of media bias that this will not even be a blip on the screen, or if they do feel any need to address it they will do so as apologists for the Obamanation.
"Henry Kissinger believes Barack Obama misstated his views on diplomacy with US adversaries and is not happy about being mischaracterized. He says: "Senator McCain is right. I would not recommend the next President of the United States engage in talks with Iran at the Presidential level. My views on this issue are entirely compatible with the views of my friend Senator John McCain. We do not agree on everything, but we do agree that any negotiations with Iran must be geared to reality.""
Posted by Stephen F. Hayes on September 26, 2008 10:55 PM | Permalink
(3a) PRESIDENTIAL SUMMIT MEETINGS: re: follow-up to (3) above, not only is Obama mis-representing Kissinger's position, but he is LYING (or flip-flopping without ackknowledgement) about his own pledge to hold direct meetings with leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, etc..... (now says he does expect "preparations" etc. - trying to backpeddle on what he actually did say in Democrat debate in July 2007).
Here's the beginning of the blowout if only the MSM could be forced to report it - Obama is LYING about his previous position on meeting with leaders of Iran, etc.:
"Asked if the candidates would be willing to meet “with leaders of Syria, Iran, Venezuela" during their first year in office, Obama immediately said yes and added, “the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them — which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration — is ridiculous.” These are 3 different vitally important foreign policy issues on which Obambi stumbled, crumbled, fumbled, and/or LIED about his past positions/stands.
This election would be OVER if we actually had a professional, unbiased, competent media.
More on original context for Obama's position on Presidential direct negotiations with the world's worst regimes:
Obama on Meeting With leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, etc.
"The question was a simple one but it elicited one of the few differences between Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama so far in the race for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination: "Would you be willing to meet separately during the first year of your administration, with leaders of Syria, Iran, Venezuela and others to bridge the gap between our countries?"
"Obama said he would be willing to have such meetings." "The notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them — which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration — is ridiculous," explained Obama."
The “undecided voters” with the little gizmos went for McCain 9 to 0 with one undecided in my area.
Channel 10 news at 11:00 in Roanoke, VA
I am coming in late having had to take the hubby to the hospital...you are correct..Obama opined against the war but he was NOT IN THE SENATE to vote against it as he wants the dummbunnies out there who are in love with him to believe.
Obama is a schmuck..can I say that here?
That or having an ear piece would not surprise me in the least for him to have someone behind a curtain to pull the strings on the Puppet Obama.
geesh...you know...I could only watch so much...I can’t stand either one of them for very long. By the way, was ANYTHING said about border security or immigration tonight? I’m not sure what the topic was they were going to cover.
Yes, McCain did acknowledge the existence of a U.S. border in the last 5 or 10 minutes.
[quote] Sen. McCain said to Obambam “I don’t have a Presidential seal yet”. I almost fell out of my chair laughing. [unquote]
I’ll look for it in the transcript. FRegards ....
"You'have had you time to talk, now are you going to give me mine, or are you going to be rude and keep interrupting me? Is this how you would behave when talking to world leaders? You may not have any preconditions for these talks, but they do: "Keep quiet and let me finish talking."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.