BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

McCain is running the dirtiest campaign since Nixon's CREEP. That is
not the fault of Obama or his ability to raise campaign funds.


You keep saying that, yet many of your contemporaries, like Chris
Mathews, are expressing amazement that McCain didn't get down and
dirty with Obama, particularly on the Rev. Wright issue.

No, McCain didn't run a particularly dirty campaign. Some of his
supporters in isolated areas did some stupid things, but so did
Obama's. Neither have leashes on everyone.

You have the habit and style of repeating things over and over until
they become facts in your mind. So do many of the third string pundits.

Eisboch



You're not living in a contested state or next to one. I do. I see
lots of McCain television commercials you do not. All McCain does is
attack-attack-attack. Dirty.

Harry your view of McCain is through a tinted lens. I see the same ads
that you do and you believe that stating the truth about your party's
candidate is an attack. You truly are a partisan hack.




The point is, my dim-witted friend, is that *all* McCain has to sell is
attack. He's got no plans, no proposals, no ideas, no vision, no view of
how we can make America better. All he seems to be able to do is sell
fear-doubt-smear. That works on the Republican base, I suppose.

I'm still waiting to hear more about the "plan" McCain often mentions to
"get Osama bin Laden." If he isn't elected, will he *then* share that
plan with the elected leaders of this country?

McCain thought his history as a P.O.W. would be enough to get him
elected. You know what? It was more than 30 years ago and it isn't
particularly relevant. It's not like JFK's PT-109 adventures. McCain is
no JFK.

On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 07:08:25 -0500, Eisboch wrote:


Your are correct. My state was Obama from the get-go. Not even worth
voting in. But, my point was that even political fanatics like Mathews
has commented that McCain himself has not run a particularly "dirty"
campaign. He made that point last night and indicated that he was quite
amazed by it.

I agree with you. McCain's campaign may have been somewhat "negative",
but I wouldn't consider it dirty. There have been no "whisper campaigns"
alleging illicit children, no "Willie Horton" ads, etc. Personally, I
think it's been the cleanest campaign in recent memory, from both sides.
Still, what happens Tuesday could make up for it.

Boater wrote:
BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

McCain is running the dirtiest campaign since Nixon's CREEP. That
is not the fault of Obama or his ability to raise campaign funds.


You keep saying that, yet many of your contemporaries, like Chris
Mathews, are expressing amazement that McCain didn't get down and
dirty with Obama, particularly on the Rev. Wright issue.

No, McCain didn't run a particularly dirty campaign. Some of his
supporters in isolated areas did some stupid things, but so did
Obama's. Neither have leashes on everyone.

You have the habit and style of repeating things over and over until
they become facts in your mind. So do many of the third string
pundits.

Eisboch



You're not living in a contested state or next to one. I do. I see
lots of McCain television commercials you do not. All McCain does is
attack-attack-attack. Dirty.

Harry your view of McCain is through a tinted lens. I see the same ads
that you do and you believe that stating the truth about your party's
candidate is an attack. You truly are a partisan hack.




The point is, my dim-witted friend, is that *all* McCain has to sell is
attack. He's got no plans, no proposals, no ideas, no vision, no view of
how we can make America better. All he seems to be able to do is sell
fear-doubt-smear. That works on the Republican base, I suppose.

Can you define "Better", Obama sure as hell won't. All Obama says is
"Change." Change to what? Why the change? What does he want to change us
to?

I'm still waiting to hear more about the "plan" McCain often mentions to
"get Osama bin Laden." If he isn't elected, will he *then* share that
plan with the elected leaders of this country?

There is no reason to waste any effort on "getting" Osama bin Laden. Bin
Laden is hiding in caves, if he is still alive. An emasculated man who
is afraid to fight on the field of battle.

McCain thought his history as a P.O.W. would be enough to get him
elected. You know what? It was more than 30 years ago and it isn't
particularly relevant. It's not like JFK's PT-109 adventures. McCain is
no JFK.

McCain is using his status as a "maverick" to become president and his
status as a former POW as being tested in the face of an enemy.

Kennedy's PT-109 adventure? How do you get run over by a Japanese
destroyer without knowing that the destroyer is bearing down on you
hard. The one and only thing the Kennedy clan has done that is good for
the USA is by killing themselves off or being killed. Good old Joe
Kennedy funded the family through illegal activity.

BAR wrote:


McCain is using his status as a "maverick" to become president and his
status as a former POW as being tested in the face of an enemy.


He's not a maverick, and if he learned anything important from his POW
days, he should have fought Bush more on prisoner torture.




Kennedy's PT-109 adventure? How do you get run over by a Japanese
destroyer without knowing that the destroyer is bearing down on you
hard. The one and only thing the Kennedy clan has done that is good for
the USA is by killing themselves off or being killed. Good old Joe
Kennedy funded the family through illegal activity.


Yep. You are an asshole.

On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 10:22:38 -0500, BAR wrote:


There is no reason to waste any effort on "getting" Osama bin Laden. Bin
Laden is hiding in caves, if he is still alive. An emasculated man who
is afraid to fight on the field of battle.

I don't understand this line of reasoning. The man is directly
responsible for the deaths of over 3000 Americans. I want his head on a
pike.

If bin Laden isn't important, what are we doing in Afghanistan?

wrote:
On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 10:22:38 -0500, BAR wrote:


There is no reason to waste any effort on "getting" Osama bin Laden. Bin
Laden is hiding in caves, if he is still alive. An emasculated man who
is afraid to fight on the field of battle.

I don't understand this line of reasoning. The man is directly
responsible for the deaths of over 3000 Americans. I want his head on a
pike.

If bin Laden isn't important, what are we doing in Afghanistan?

Will you spend $1,000,000,000,000 dollars to put his head on a pike?

wrote:
On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 10:22:38 -0500, BAR wrote:


There is no reason to waste any effort on "getting" Osama bin Laden. Bin
Laden is hiding in caves, if he is still alive. An emasculated man who
is afraid to fight on the field of battle.

I don't understand this line of reasoning. The man is directly
responsible for the deaths of over 3000 Americans. I want his head on a
pike.

If bin Laden isn't important, what are we doing in Afghanistan?


Battle-tested BAR (he served stateside) is apologizing for Bush, still.

Boater wrote:
BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

McCain is running the dirtiest campaign since Nixon's CREEP. That
is not the fault of Obama or his ability to raise campaign funds.


You keep saying that, yet many of your contemporaries, like Chris
Mathews, are expressing amazement that McCain didn't get down and
dirty with Obama, particularly on the Rev. Wright issue.

No, McCain didn't run a particularly dirty campaign. Some of his
supporters in isolated areas did some stupid things, but so did
Obama's. Neither have leashes on everyone.

You have the habit and style of repeating things over and over until
they become facts in your mind. So do many of the third string
pundits.

Eisboch



You're not living in a contested state or next to one. I do. I see
lots of McCain television commercials you do not. All McCain does is
attack-attack-attack. Dirty.

Harry your view of McCain is through a tinted lens. I see the same ads
that you do and you believe that stating the truth about your party's
candidate is an attack. You truly are a partisan hack.




The point is, my dim-witted friend, is that *all* McCain has to sell is
attack. He's got no plans, no proposals, no ideas, no vision, no view of
how we can make America better. All he seems to be able to do is sell
fear-doubt-smear. That works on the Republican base, I suppose.

I'm still waiting to hear more about the "plan" McCain often mentions to
"get Osama bin Laden." If he isn't elected, will he *then* share that
plan with the elected leaders of this country?

McCain thought his history as a P.O.W. would be enough to get him
elected. You know what? It was more than 30 years ago and it isn't
particularly relevant. It's not like JFK's PT-109 adventures. McCain is
no JFK.



Obama seems to have done well with his "chicken in every pot theme" Too
bad for McCain that he couldn't stooop that low to trick the pooor and
hungry.

On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 06:14:17 -0500, Boater wrote:

Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

McCain is running the dirtiest campaign since Nixon's CREEP. That is not
the fault of Obama or his ability to raise campaign funds.


You keep saying that, yet many of your contemporaries, like Chris Mathews,
are expressing amazement that McCain didn't get down and dirty with Obama,
particularly on the Rev. Wright issue.

No, McCain didn't run a particularly dirty campaign. Some of his supporters
in isolated areas did some stupid things, but so did Obama's. Neither have
leashes on everyone.

You have the habit and style of repeating things over and over until they
become facts in your mind. So do many of the third string pundits.

Eisboch




You're not living in a contested state or next to one. I do. I see lots
of McCain television commercials you do not. All McCain does is
attack-attack-attack. Dirty.

I live *in * the state to which you refer, and I find your assertions full
of crap.
--
A Harry Krause truism:

"It's not a *baby* kicking, beautiful bride, it's just a fetus!"
[A Narcissistic Hypocrite]

JohnH wrote:
On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 06:14:17 -0500, Boater wrote:

Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

McCain is running the dirtiest campaign since Nixon's CREEP. That is not
the fault of Obama or his ability to raise campaign funds.

You keep saying that, yet many of your contemporaries, like Chris Mathews,
are expressing amazement that McCain didn't get down and dirty with Obama,
particularly on the Rev. Wright issue.

No, McCain didn't run a particularly dirty campaign. Some of his supporters
in isolated areas did some stupid things, but so did Obama's. Neither have
leashes on everyone.

You have the habit and style of repeating things over and over until they
become facts in your mind. So do many of the third string pundits.

Eisboch



You're not living in a contested state or next to one. I do. I see lots
of McCain television commercials you do not. All McCain does is
attack-attack-attack. Dirty.

I live *in * the state to which you refer, and I find your assertions full
of crap.


You're looking inward again.