Comments on: Obama: McCain Should Get No Credit for Bailout Agreement

By: Scott

Scott — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Obama as usual spoke extremely eloquently about absolutely nothing of substance…I felt like McCain was debating Tony Robbins.
I read earlier that some of Obamas’ favorite literature was the works of Shakespeare..I think he took the title “Much ado about Nothing” a little to literally..

How any even semi-educated human could have watched that debate and come out with any opinion other than McCain is so much more in tune with what is going on in the world and also (this kind of surprised me) the economy…defies all logic..

Look folks, stop and think….This is not a Football game where you support one team, and your neighbour supports another…It’s just a tad bit more important than that…Stop and forget weather you are a dem or a rep…..stop and look at the history of these two men and what they have said, and more importantly , what they have DONE !!!!

Then make your decision..I think then you will support John McCain..its the only logical choice

What do you think? 0 0

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Scott if that is your real name GOP plant. In fact it was McChicken that said nothing of substance. McChicken is out of tune with the rest of the world he made a huge mess when he went back to DC to help with the bail out. He talked for about 2 minutes (according to GOP reps) and did even really say if he was for or against the bail out that just we need to do something. That revelation according to McChicken’s own campaign “only after a man walked up to McChicken and asked why he did not do anything yet about the trouble after all he is running for president”. Fox news even said McChicken look like he “was unprepared and confused”. However with everybody saying that McChicken did a lousy job you think he did well. It does seem that you watched the wrong debate, or as I suspect you have your head shoved so far up your own ass you could not see anything of the debate GOP plant.

What do you think? 0 0

By: nikolai

nikolai — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Look how he spelled “neighbor” and he said, “tad bit” which I believe is a British phrase originally, and he speaks of Shakespeare and football, (probably soccer). Now, why would a Brit want to stir up American political debate? At any rate he’s wrong about McCain; there was no decisive victor in the first presidential debate, but Obama spoke more clearly, rationally, and didn’t get flustered. McCain wouldn’t/couldn’t even look at Obama, and only spoke semi-intelligently when it came to foreign policy and that was about IT. Sorry euro-trash Scotty, you lose!

What do you think? 0 0

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

You two do a heck of a job of getting your point across. The way you resort to the time-tested kindergarten method of calling names is astonishing. I don’t guess that a “Brit” could actually be an American citizen, huh? In fact, Nikolai calling someone Euro-trash sounds like the pot calling the kettle black. You two stick with you wrongheaded, rose colored view of the world (in my opinion) and vote for Obama. I chose not to vote for a liberal of that accord. However, if you’re going to grace any website forum with your infinite wisdom, please do it in a manner that doesn’t make us think that you’re actually a 13 year old. If you can’t express your point of view without calling names and cursing, keep it to yourself.

What do you think? 0 0

By: America loses

America loses — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

I am appalled that anonymous and Nikolai have behaved in such a ridiculously childish manner. What difference would it make if Scott was, indeed, a Brit? Does our foreign policy not affect Britain? Are they not our closest allies? You guys instead have to resort to idiotic comments that do nothing to raise us Americans to any kind of standard. It’s shameful embarrassing to think you’re Americans and legally able to vote for anyone since clearly you don’t possess enough intelligence to do it. People really should have to pass a test in order to qualify to vote. Turning 18 isn’t enough. This is how people like Dubbya get elected, by a bunch of uneducated meat heads. I didn’t see the debate, but I’d be hard pressed to believe anyone’s point of view since this election seems to have so polarized our nation that intelligent debate seems unlikely. We need to abolish the party system if there is ever any hope of finding a candidate qualified enough to lead this country. While the system still stays in place all is does is distract everyone from the real issues. This country is in serious trouble. Rhetoric and articulate speech will not fix it. We need someone that can’t be bought, and can think for themselves. A candidate who won’t get into bed with special interest groups, and one who wasn’t involved in the PREVIOUS savings and loan scandal either. I have no faith in either of these men to be honest. Ron Paul would have been a much better choice. Change for the sake of change just to mention the word change a hundred times in a speech means nothing. I want a PLAN. Both candidates should have to outline what their first month in office is going to entail. What their “business plan” is for this country, instead of relying on a popularity contest and mudslinging in order to get ahead in the polls.

What do you think? 0 0