KaskadskyjKozak Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 The big question is, what attribute is more valuable in a president....character, or charisma. My vote's for character. how ironic, I remember hearing this argument before, like 8 years ago. How is that ironic? in terms of character seems to me it was a wash between Gore and Bush. this time around I'm not sure it's anything other than a wash again. the question is charisma versus experience, and that question was settled in favor of charisma in the D primaries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirwoofalot Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 How long before one of the cc.com conservatives come on to defend their brave leader? Everyone has an opinion, just as everyone has an butt hole. Some of us choose not to publicly display. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 How long before one of the cc.com conservatives come on to defend their brave leader? Everyone has an opinion, just as everyone has an butt hole. Some of us choose not to publicly display. Clearly you are not one of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 O HAI. IS THIS THE DEBATE CLUB THREAD? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 I'm a masterdebater. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 I'm a masterdebater. you fucker - you beat me to the punch! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericb Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 sounds like a man of character to me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 yes, and as this fair and balanced video indicates, Obama HUSSIEN is not hO_eE21r8r4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericb Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 yes, and as this fair and balanced video indicates, Obama HUSSIEN is not hO_eE21r8r4 Porter - what about this man's eye witness testimony (in the Mccain video) do you question? Do you think he's lying? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 You can't argue with the bible, porter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 So you think a stirring account of how his cellmate was the most decorated veteran in history and McCain too was a pretty solid guy in captivity 35 years ago really has a lot to do with his "character" in a manner that is relevant to whether he'll make a good president now? I'd look more at his performance in the Senate in recent years, myself. You could certainly make a good case that he has been an advocate for reform of campaign financing and that he has on some issues bucked his own party so that shows some measure of independece -- both good things in my view. (Though I think he has not shown that as president he will necessarily continue to demonstrate these traits.) But to say we should elect him because he was a good soldier? I don't get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 not questioning anything. just pointing out that everyone who supports obama belongs to a suicide cult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericb Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 So you think a stirring account of how his cellmate was the most decorated veteran in history and McCain too was a pretty solid guy in captivity 35 years ago really has a lot to do with his "character" in a manner that is relevant to whether he'll make a good president now? I'd look more at his performance in the Senate in recent years, myself. You could certainly make a good case that he has been an advocate for reform of campaign financing and that he has on some issues bucked his own party so that shows some measure of independece -- both good things in my view. (Though I think he has not shown that as president he will necessarily continue to demonstrate these traits.) But to say we should elect him because he was a good soldier? I don't get it. IMO, a persons true colors (depth of character, integrity, etc.) are revealed when the shit hits the fan. I think it would be foolish to elect someone solely on what he did 40 years ago. This account, simply adds dimension and perspective to a man that was huge amount of proven leadership experience. What will happen to Obama when the shit hits his presidential fan???? Who knows, and quite frankly the job's a little too important to risk it. He talks a great game (if you agree with his ideology), but has yet to demonstrate that he's anything more than a windbag of insprirational ideas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 Did you vote for Bush? He'd clearly demonstrated that he was a failure at pretty much everything he'd ever run and his military service record showed he avoided his responsibility there too. I understand your concern about Obama, but I gotta say I'm equally concerned that McCain may not be up to the job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 would 4 years without a president really be that bad? We should give it a go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 well i remember having more respect for mccain than i do now. he seems to have pulled out all the stops in order to become president (maybe that is just what it takes). he seems to have gone from someone who wasn't afraid to take a stand on a particular issue, who wasn't afraid to differ from the crowd if he believed in it, who was even labeled a "maverick". now he seems to have changed his stance on everything (latest is wiretapping) so as to conform to whatever his advisers tell him will help him get the most votes. regardless of his valor and integrity as a soldier, his actions and talk as of late indicate that he isn't really the maverick that people thought he was. i'm not sure what that says about his character, but it doesn't appear to be a good thing. people usually like consistency and not sudden shifts into the fold that he seems to be demonstrating as of late. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 I'd be interested to hear if anybody has presented any other rationale for changing his stances on those issues you note. Either you are against torture or your for us, errr... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No. 13 Baby Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 How long before one of the cc.com conservatives come on to defend their brave leader? can we instead make tasteless black jokes? Apparently tasteless Chelsea Clinton jokes are permissible, as long as you are a man of character. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 "Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno." as tasteless jokes go, that isn't so bad. is mccain secretly still a maverick????? thats the only explanation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TREETOAD Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 I think he is scared shitless. I thought that he was a bit of a pariah in the Republican party, being of the minority not involved in drug deals and toe tapping and other unseemly misdeeds. It seems that he was picked for point man because he is the last man standing. I liked him a few years ago when he was actually questioning the invasion etc. Maybe that is the real McCain and the one that is before you now is just another puppet of the money men. I heard that his wife is stinking rich, perhaps she put him up to it, and all he wants is to go golfing and fuck about at home in his workshop. Who knows? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Conway Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 the question is charisma versus experience, and that question was settled in favor of charisma in the D primaries. When will McCain start touting his mortgage bailout experience? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 Didn't McCain support the invasion? I think the part he questioned was the lack of sufficient force going in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TREETOAD Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 Yah but he still questioned it That in itself is enough to incur the wrath of the believers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Conway Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 IMO, a persons true colors (depth of character, integrity, etc.) are revealed when the shit hits the fan. I think it would be foolish to elect someone solely on what he did 40 years ago. This account, simply adds dimension and perspective to a man that was huge amount of proven leadership experience. What will happen to Obama when the shit hits his presidential fan???? Who knows, and quite frankly the job's a little too important to risk it. He talks a great game (if you agree with his ideology), but has yet to demonstrate that he's anything more than a windbag of insprirational ideas. John "Keating 5" McCain has integrity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericb Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 (edited) The investigation concluded that 3 of the "Keating 5" had "substantially and improperly interfered with the FHLBB in its investigation of Lincoln Savings"....John McCain was not one of them. Also, the special investigator at the time recommended that the Senate Ethics Committee not pursue charges against McCain because of "no evidence against him". Please note, not a lack of substantial evidence, but rather NO evidence. Edited June 6, 2008 by ericb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.