Comments

1. Michelle wrote:

   I was in Washington Heights drinking calming tea for my nerves!

   But what is really making my want to vomit is the freaking, ridiculous commentators!

   WTF!

   In Mississippi no less!

   OMG!!!!!!!!!!!

   I need a drink!

   What is wrong with Chris Matthews?!?

   Help me Lord!

   Oh, and he just interviewed a Black man and the Black guy said Obama won and Chris Matthews said “If he lost would you admit it?” The dummy then said “No”. Why didn’t he ask the country twang White woman the same question!

   WTF!

   Posted 27 Sep 2008 at 12:01 am ¶

2. waxghost wrote:

   McCain’s refusal to even look at Obama struck me as decidedly racist; one pundit (I don’t remember which one) said it seemed like McCain was angry that he even had to debate Obama, and I thought, yeah, because Obama isn’t completely white!

   But I was very happy to see Obama facing McCain directly more and more throughout the debate when he saw that McCain wouldn’t even look at him. I really hope that comes back and bites McCain in the ass – and from the commentary afterwards, it seems like it just might.

   Posted 27 Sep 2008 at 12:13 am ¶

3. Ethan wrote:

   I was kinda disappointed overall. I though Obama held his own, but McCain got the last word in several times. I didn’t think there was a clear winner, which was disappointing, ’cause I wanted Obama to wipe the floor with McCain.

   One thing, though, what the hell was up with the ‘Miss Congeniality’ thing? Clearly McCain was suggesting Obama is the senate’s Ms. Congeniality, but I thought it was a wee bit…misogynist? I assume it was a hit-tip to his Brittany Spears/Paris Hilton ads.

   Posted 27 Sep 2008 at 12:44 am ¶

4. drispe wrote:

   Like Obama would ever utter a phase like the caption in that picture! He spent way too much time saying what McCain was “right” about. He started sluggishly and eventually improved as the debate went on, though. I’d like to know who the maverick thinks he is, going on about what Obama doesn’t understand.

   Posted 27 Sep 2008 at 1:12 am ¶

5. Minotaar wrote:

   Ok, I want to preamble this by saying (to the best of my knowledge) that I get it. I get that Obama sort of has his hands tied, in the sense that if he gets angry, theres always that risk that he gets painted as an ABM. I get that.

   But I am sick and tired of Barack just not getting mad. Look at the last 8 years of fucking bullshit that we’ve all put up with. Just take McCain and drag him through all the Bush crap that he’s agreed with. That ONE sentence ” [etcetcetc] you were wrong. [etcetcetc] you were wrong. [etcetcetc] you were wrong” Was the only time he ever really hit back hard.

   I understand that his message has been to take a new high road, and avoid a certain kind of dirty politics. But Barack needs to find OUR voice that is fucking furious about the last 8 years. The subjugation of our justice department. The hyperderegulation of our banking system. The destruction of our foreign policy. Tax cuts for the super wealthy. Why cant Barack just get mad?

   The reason so many of us love Barack is because every time he delivers one of those leave-me-sobbing-on-my-couch, emprisoned-by-my-own-sexist-indoctrination-that-men-dont-cry-but-crying-anyway, hell-fuckin-yeah speeches is because Barack finds all of our voices. All of our angry voices. He’s GOT to bring that big gun out in a debate, instead of pointing out that he agrees with an old fart who thinks he invented the blackberry.

   Stop holding back, Barack!

   Posted 27 Sep 2008 at 2:19 am ¶

6. Minotaar wrote:

   BTW – obama lolcats is totally the new lolcats. I think we need to have a racialicious “make the best obama lolcats” contest. It would be awesome.

   Posted 27 Sep 2008 at 2:22 am ¶

7. Ef wrote:

   I’m really in love with that macro, Latoya. XD

   Posted 27 Sep 2008 at 3:30 am ¶

8. i-geek wrote:

   “McCain’s refusal to even look at Obama struck me as decidedly racist; one pundit (I don’t remember which one) said it seemed like McCain was angry that he even had to debate Obama, and I thought, yeah, because Obama isn’t completely white!”

   I’m not sure that was it (or at least not all of it). I think there was some anger on McCain’s part at being the elder statesman, and having to deal with this young whippersnapper who didn’t want to wait his turn in Washington. I also think McCain knew that a lot of the time he was reeeally stretching the truth or just making things up (my husband’s comment was that his “tell” was the furious eye blinking as he spoke). If you’re lying about someone’s record or policies, are you going to look them in the face while you do it?

   I’m certainly not going to argue that race isn’t a factor. Of course it is. But I’m pretty sure that’s not all that’s going on here.

   Posted 27 Sep 2008 at 8:16 am ¶

9. Phil Deeze wrote:

   I found it ironic and moronic that McCain would try to cast Obama as Miss Congeniality. Last I checked, all of the GOP ball-riders were lusting after Sarah Heath when she walked across a stage in high heels and a bathing suit on youtube.

   McCain needs to be careful with the Miss Congeniality crap. His lovely VP selection was the one in a beauty pageant. Obama can’t ever bring that up (nor can Biden) lest the GOP white folks cry “sexism.” Well, if the GOP wanted to avoid this, they had women of substance that were eminently more qualified than the plucky Mrs. Palin. But, hey, if “middle American” voters want to vote for someone out of their element solely on the basis of their ability to “hunt” an animal out of a helicopter then how do they explain George W. Bush?

   Obama was able to set the record straight MANY times on McCain’s attempts to jab him on spending. And, McCain’s inability to look Obama in the face while on-stage was distracting. Obama didn’t back down from McCain either. He was able to do it, also, without appearing “angry.”

   Posted 27 Sep 2008 at 1:08 pm ¶

10. phoenix wrote:

    @ Michelle

    Watch it on PBS next time. It is soooo much better. I started doing that last year. No spin, no stupid banter, or drivel. The two commentators on PBS that were on after, David Brooks and Mark Shields, are very intelligent and smart. And they aren’t annoying like Matthews. I love my PBS!

    Posted 27 Sep 2008 at 1:19 pm ¶

11. Dolly wrote:

    Michelle, I thought the exact same thing! And it was really annoying the way that woman was all like, “Oh, well I think he was avoiding looking at Obama so that he wouldn’t get mad.” Like, wow, your candidate can’t control his temper enough not to look at his opponent. How can we expect him to handle foreign crises with calmness then?

    Posted 27 Sep 2008 at 1:34 pm ¶

12. Renee wrote:

    Like Obama would ever utter a phase like the caption in that picture! He spent way too much time saying what McCain was “right” about.

    I so agree with you there. This is a war and you do not concede one damn thing to your opponent. This is not the time to play nice guy. Though you could tell watching his facial expression last night that he was frustrated with McCain.

    Posted 27 Sep 2008 at 1:56 pm ¶

13. Fatemeh wrote:

    BWAHAHAHAH! I love the Obama lolcats!!! And the mental image of you hollering at the screen!!!

    Posted 27 Sep 2008 at 5:46 pm ¶

14. Mogs wrote:

    I absolutely adore kitchenpundit… that’s where you got the pic from, right?
    ok, so i know almost everyone here supports Obama… but please tell me that there’s at least one other person out there who thinks it’s inappropriate that Obama always calls McCain “John”? i mean yeah, that’s his name, but McCain is at LEAST 20 yrs older than Obama… not to mention that from what i’ve seen McCain addresses Obama as Senator Obama… not to mention that both of these men are running for President of the United States… saying “Senator McCain” instead of “John” would seem more appropriate , no? maybe i’m just being old-fashioned here… but i can’t imagine ever addressing ANYONE more than a decade my senior by their first name… much less in such a public, formal setting. even if i was the president.

    Posted 27 Sep 2008 at 6:03 pm ¶

15. Stephanie wrote:

    I thought Obama won, but not with a KO. It would have been nice, but you know he can’t be “too angry.” Ugh.

    I agree with whomever said McCain refusing to look at Obama just screamed “racist old cranky white guy!”

    I cannot WAIT for October 2, though! I’m having a dessert and cocktail debate party!

    Posted 27 Sep 2008 at 8:06 pm ¶

16. Mary wrote:

    Interestingly I thought Obama didn’t hit McCain as hard as he could have – but reading a bunch of polls afterwards, people seem to have rated Obama more positively than McCain. A lot of articles I’ve read suggest that people did not react well to the fact that McCain never once LOOKED at Obama – it made him look bitchy and unstatesmanly. Whereas by being open and calm, Obama appeared more convincingly presidential.

    McCain comes across to me as feeling he is owed the Presidency – that he is a soldier, a warrior, a POW, that he endured racist attacks on his daughter from Bush and Rove in order to wait his turn – and the idea of it being “stolen” from him by some young, smooth-talking guy who has never fought in a war really, really pisses him off. (The following article from CBS News offers an interesting theory: that personal honor is so primary in McCain’s way of thinking that it becomes very easy for him to conceptualize his opponents as not merely wrong, but dishonorable. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/24/opinion/main4475223.shtml)

    It’s worth noting that McCain’s most hated rival in the GOP primary was Mitt Romney (although they’ve since made nice). Although Romney and Obama are not remotely similar on substance or ground support, in a superficial sense I can see some similarities – both attractive, younger, more graceful speakers, extremely well-educated, and well-funded – from McCain’s perspective, both men are the “Miss Congeniality” he prides himself on not being. In addition, it would not surprise me if Obama’s race only added insult to injury from McCain’s perspective, that being the first black presidential candidate from a major party is just part of Obama’s “razzle dazzle,” and yet another way in which Obama doesn’t “know his place.”

    As I typed that out I wondered if I was being too harsh and making assumptions… and then I remembered that McCain’s opposed Martin Luther King Day for most of his time in public office, so I’m not inclined to be charitable.

    As far as Obama’s attacks go: there were a few moments in which I wished he would snap back harder. But he is excellent at sliding in the needle, at weaving a criticism of his opponent into an overall statement of policy. When Obama went after McCain for “singing songs” about bombing Iran, and for the comments about NATO ally Spain, I was sitting there in my living room applauding. I think Obama’s attacks are more surgical, McCain’s more blunt and angry. Whichever is more effective remains to be seen…

    Posted 27 Sep 2008 at 8:16 pm ¶

17. Tony wrote:

    @ Waxghost.

    I didn’t see McCains not looking at Obama as racist, I viewed it as strategy.

    Obama is trying to look dignified and not look like the bullies of Washington we are all so sick of.

    As a result, Obama is less likely to keep attacking someone who is looking like they are afraid and don’t want to look him in the eye.

    The sad thing is it worked, and Obama didn’t attack as much as he could or should have IMO.

    McCain “Will take care of the veterans”
    The second he said that Obama should have brought up every pro-veteran bill that McCain voted against.
    “I have no doubt that you care about them, but you’re not supporting them” should have been the response. But no, he just let McCain get it in unanswered.

    Also, is ANYONE else offended that in a debate that takes place in Mississippi, where Katrina struck quite hard, there was NO mention of Hurricanes Katrina, Gustav or Ike?

    If we’re talking about national security, I am far more concerned over natural disasters than I am conspiracy plots by terrorists.
    And when Lousianians and Mississippians were DYING during/after Katrina, McCain was eating birthday cake.
    I would have LOVED to see McCain try to defend that in a state that knows Hurricanes well.

    Posted 27 Sep 2008 at 9:44 pm ¶

18. Avalon's Willow wrote:

    @Mogs

    http://tinyurl.com/5ys3w4 On Obama calling McCain by his first name. There are many shades of respect and Obama was claiming his.

    Also see Mary’s comment (#15) on McCain feeling he is owed the Presidency. Combine that with also feeling he’s owed because he’s White, he’s a POW and a War Veteran and you end up with McCain leaning on a lot of damn privilege and expectation.

    However people feel that Obama wasn’t assertive enough, he claimed his right to be where he was; in that room, debating for the Presidency. And that’s a whole different kind of assertiveness than what people may have expected to see.

    Posted 28 Sep 2008 at 12:54 pm ¶

19. em wrote:

    i’m not sure where people are reading that obama won that debate. everything i’ve seen has said that obama won on the economy, but lost by a smallish margin on iraq, iran, and russia. basically, on foreign policy. and that pisses me off in a big way.

    Latoya wrote a post not too long ago, “Harnessing the Power of Pop Culture,” http://www.racialicious.com/2008/09/17/harnessing-the-power-of-pop-culture/
    and the reason i’m so pissed about the foreign policy section of the debate, is because obama and the democrats just don’t get it. they don’t get that they need to cut down the amount of words they’re using, and stick to the furiously outrageous truth of the matter.

    obama did so much TALKING during the foreign policy section, while mcain just kind of stood there and authoritatively delivered his talking points. why doesn’t OBAMA have pithy talking points??? why doesn’t obama take the offensive instead of playing defense? ABM issues be damned, i’m not suggesting that obama start yelling at mcain. just call the liar out. and do it in 6 words or less. then repeat it over and over again, so the average passive news viewer starts to realize it’s truth.

    let’s face it, anyone who’s still on the fence about voting for mcain or obama, is not focused on the issues. they’re focused on personality, strength, and soundbites. or something else that i can’t imagine, because i’m so not undecided. but the bottom line, is that obama will not “swing” these voters with lots of words and equivocating.

    so frustrating!

    Posted 28 Sep 2008 at 1:13 pm ¶

20. yilun wrote:

    I watched the video and read the transcript. I thought both did well, although they appeal to different ways of seeing (I am amazed at how different the two are — personality, experience, etc). My favorite part was Obama’s close, when he referred to his name, his father, and Kenya. Given that the battle for the Presidency is among the small group of undecided voters in the battleground states and may likely come down to fundamentally “who” he is if the Bradley effect is still true, he has to reinforce that his experience is the average American experience and that he understands and supports those universally American values. Talking about Main Street, farmers, and unions; that is his ticket to winning. I think with the Republican apparatus and demographic trends, McCain is either favored or in a dead heat in the electoral college (Obama has the popular vote). He needs Bush to lie low, political calm from the bailouts, unity in his party, and a way to get momentum back on his side now that the Palin show has subsided. More surprises ahead.

    Posted 28 Sep 2008 at 7:58 pm ¶

21. Ange wrote:

    Listening to part of the debate on the radio, it sounded like McCain was doing well, but like the Nixon/Kennedy debate, when I got home and watched it, Obama looked much more presidential.

    McCain looked about as crazy as Admiral Stockdale, though not nearly as lovable.

    Posted 28 Sep 2008 at 9:45 pm ¶

22. Minotaar wrote:

    Palin show is about to get round two. And I hope think Biden is going to leave some blood on the floor!!

    Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 1:13 am ¶

23. KuriusJurge612 wrote:

    I think McCain sucked, he kept saying the same gibberish over and over again.

    Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 7:39 am ¶

24. sejw wrote:

    O.M.G. When I saw that image, I burst out laughing at my desk — I laughed so hard that I cried — people in my office came over to my cube, worried about me.

    To me, it just epitomizes the way that Obama has been running his whole campaign: “just relax, I got this!”

    *wiping laugh-induced tears out of eyes* Thanks for a great way to start the week!

    Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 9:04 am ¶

25. exhausted wrote:

    @yilun

    McCain is NOT favored in the electoral college at this point. He never has been. It’s been Obama. And at the end of the day, the electoral college is all that matters.

    http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/2008/09/the-numbers/

    This is not to say that we can recline and relax now. Obama supporters still have to push EVERYDAY with the canvassing, phonebanking and voter registration. The undecideds are moving more toward Obama… we have to work on bringing more of them into the light.

    Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 9:39 am ¶

26. gatamala wrote:

    co-sign Mary & Willow.

    My friend and I had our own running commentary during this debate. Especially when McCain tried to link Obama with Bush.

    minotaar~ I feel ya on Thursday. That’s going to be comedy.

    Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 11:12 am ¶

27. thesciencegirl wrote:

    I only caught the last 40 minutes of the debate because I was out-of-town at a business conference. Overall, I was underwhelmed. I couldn’t ID a clear winner from the 1/2 that I saw, but I definitely noticed McCain’s refusal to look Obama in the eye, and I gotta say, that pisses me off. I have not seen him (fail to) address other opponents that way. This went along with his stiff use of “Senator Obama.” His body language and his repeated statement that “Senator Obama doesn’t understand xxx” came across as really condescending. I, too, would like to see Obama express some of the anger that many Americans are feeling, and also to pound out some quotable talking points at the next debates. I am looking forward to the VP debate this week, but I hope that the commentary in the days following consists of more than “was Biden sexist?” drivel.

    Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 11:23 am ¶

28. Princess wrote:

    It’s interesting that there is a debate going on across the nation concerning which candidate won the first presidential debate on foreign policy. Some say Obama won, others, with a straight face say McCain won and some feel there was not a clear winner and it was a tie.

    In my opinion Obama held his own, especially since foreign policy is supposedly McCain’s strong point and he prides himself on having 26 years of experience.

    On the issue of health care alone, McCain mentioned providing $5,000 and keeping the government out of it. Speaking of dollars and sense, Americans are asleep at the wheel if it is assumed the $700 billion bail out plan is intended to help the average majority. The taxpayers will absorb the costs and if one becomes ill in the process, oh well, you’re on your own.

    At the end of the day, the citizens of the U.S. must decide which candidate is clearly the best choice based upon the issues which are increasingly more complexed each and everyday.

    Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 11:51 am ¶

29. Dan wrote:

    I’m as big an Obama supporter as any, even going so far as to volunteer for his campaign through MoveOn.org, and BlueWaveNJ, yet I don’t think McCain’s refusal to look at Obama had anything to do with racism. McCain is just an ornery old asshole.

    Plus, I guess I kind of hope for his adopted Bangladeshi daughters’ sake that he’s not a deprived racist.

    On a personal level, I hate the guy for his greed based policies and his shitty attitude, for calling his wife a “cunt” in front of 3 journalists, and for marrying his first wife because she was a model and then divorcing her because she became crippled in an accident.

    Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 12:41 pm ¶

30. Paz wrote:

    Did anyone else notice that when Obama challenged McCain on voting against Clean Energy, McCain kind of muttered nervously “Who could be against clean energy?” Uh, your hero Ronald Reagan for one, who took the solar panels off the White House, installed by Carter!

    Even though I would never vote Republican, I respected John McCain. That is until he started to run against Obama for President. With stunts like the “suspended campaign” and the joke of a vp pick, he has lost his integrity. I am utterly disappointed by him.

    Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 1:05 pm ¶

31. gr8ful1997 wrote:

    Unfortunately, I was not impressed by either candidate or the entire debate structure, as a whole. As for the candidates, I heard sound bite politics and resume trading, not substantial discussion of issues. In my opinion, the reason that Obama kept telling McCain that he is ‘right’ is that they are really not that far from each other on the political spectrum. For example, they both want to spend our tax dollars fighting a pre-emptive war in the Middle East, they both want to bail out Wall Street, etc.; they only have differences on how to do these things. There are other options and presidential candidates representing these options in the 3rd parties, but these voices are not allowed into the debate.

    I think it is insane that the political conversation in this country is restricted to only 2 points of view via the 2-party system. The Corporation for Presidential Debates is run by former heads of the Democratic and Republican parties, and they work hard to reinforce this 2-party stranglehold on American politics. This is not democratic, nor is it line with the type of diversity that I support in other areas of life. Just as there are many variations to human existence and experience, I believe there are many ways to view the administration of our society. Similarly, I believe that the exclusion of the 3rd parties from media coverage and the debates is a form of political bigotry that censors and suppresses information and alternative political views.

    Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 3:06 pm ¶

32. Paz wrote:

    gr8ful1997: I agree there definitely needs to be more coverage of 3rd party candidates. I’m a bit conflicted though because when there are many political parties, there tends to be less stability since there’s so many competing interests. However, I don’t like the idea of choosing between the lesser of the two evils.
    Fortunately for me I sincerely believe in Barack Obama, and I will be voting for who I think is the better candidate.
    Personally, I think that Obama said “I agree John” many times to recognize the good points that McCain makes, instead of making him out to be simply the bad guy. Whoever becomes President WILL have to work across party lines. If you listen to their positions on the issues, you see that they are not close on the political spectrum at all.

    Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 4:40 pm ¶

33. Yvette wrote:

    Perhaps because I did not see the debate but only read a transcript, I was not concerned with Obama’s statements of agreement. In fact, the structure of his comments were quite clever. These statements were clearly not conceding issues to McCain, but were a classic example of an effective rhetorical strategy. A couple of examples:

    …Well, I think Senator McCain’s absolutely right that we need more responsibility, but we need it not just when there’s a crisis. I mean, we’ve had years in which the reigning economic ideology has been what’s good for Wall Street, but not what’s good for Main Street…

    …Well, Senator McCain is absolutely right that the earmarks process has been abused, which is why I suspended any requests for my home state, whether it was for senior centers or what have you, until we cleaned it up.

    And he’s also right that oftentimes lobbyists and special interests are the ones that are introducing these kinds of requests, although that wasn’t the case with me.

    But let’s be clear: Earmarks account for $18 billion in last year’s budget. Senator McCain is proposing — and this is a fundamental difference between us — $300 billion in tax cuts to some of the wealthiest corporations and individuals in the country, $300 billion.

    Now, $18 billion is important; $300 billion is really important…

    Really very very nice, IMO.

    Also, I have heard some analysts mention that the “he’s absolutely right” gambit was because of who Obama needs to win over at this junction–Generally not folks who would have him attackattackattack, but those who see him as some scary, radically different ball game.

    Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 11:24 am ¶

34. Lyonside wrote:

    Re: 3rd parties, etc.

    The problem is that our government really is set up as a 2 party system. We don’t have a parliament where multiple minority parties can form coalitions to form a voting majority. Our president is chosen seperately from the representative legistlative body, which allows for checks and balances, but also ensures that there is a decent chance for the president to be of a different party than the legislative majority, so policies and laws need more negotiation to go anywhere. The House needs more than a simple majority to pass bills, and they are the first tier of lawmaking.

    I’m not against 3rd parties by any means- I’m just not sure how they would work in our current system w/out a Parliamentary framework.

    Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 11:32 am ¶

35. SR wrote:

    One issue I had with Obama in the debate was when he was talking about negotiations with adversarial nations and said “It doesn’t mean that you invite them over for tea one day”. It pulled up “gendered insult” red flags.

    Overall, I think in a larger geopolitical context that the only difference I can see between Obama and McCain is Obama redeploying troops in Iraq to Afghanistan.

    Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 1:56 pm ¶

36. Free wrote:

    I think that McCain can’t look at Obama because if he did, he would loose his temper. McCain shows contempt because, how dare Obama, a junior Senator and a Black Man stand on the same stage and act like an equal. That’s not following the rules. After all, he’s a veteran, a war hero whose earned his place on the national stage. Also, I’ve noticed that McCain tends to say what he thinks without meaning too. Those little “gaffs,” are windows to his true thoughts.

    McCain’s racism, wit and wisdom:

    In 2006, campaigned for George Wallace, Jr., (son of the infamous anti-segregationist governor of Alabama.) Wallace Jr., often gave speeches before the racist Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC),” which opposes “race-mixing.” [Note: Which means they oppose MY very existence. Barack Obama's too].

    Did you hear the one about the woman who is attacked on the street by a gorilla, beaten senseless, raped repeatedly and left to die? When she finally regains consciousness and tries to speak, her doctor leans over to hear her sigh contently and to feebly ask, ‘Where is that marvelous ape?’ [Ape is an euphemism for ???]

    I play to win. I do whatever it takes to win. If I have to fuck my opponent to win I’ll do it. If I have to destroy my opponent I won’t give it a second thought.

    I hated the gooks (North Vietnamese). I will hate them as long as I live. [repeated for 27 years; dropped the usage during his current candidacy].

    Question: Why does Mexican beer have two “X’s” on the label?

    Answer: Because wetbacks always need a co-signer.

    There’s so much more: search and ye shall find.

    Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 4:20 pm ¶

37. Michelle wrote:

    Free,

    Those things can’t possibly be true.

    Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 7:22 pm ¶

38. Princess wrote:

    @SR

    In my opinion, the statement Obama made concerning negotiations with adversaries, and not inviting those leaders or their reps over for tea was not intended as a gender insult.

    The truth is, in many countries and among many cultures, tea is the beverage of choice consumed before, during and after meals by both men and women.

    Obama was simply using this as an example of his knowledge of protocol, and that sitting down having talks is more complexed than just having tea one day.

    Finally, there are many differences between the two presidential candidates and I don’t think there’s space or time to list them all here.

    Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 7:59 pm ¶

39. Free wrote:

    Michelle, Why are you so sure that they are not?

    Posted 01 Oct 2008 at 12:45 am ¶

40. Free wrote:

    Just to clarify: are not, as in are not true.

    Posted 01 Oct 2008 at 12:46 am ¶

41. Lyonside wrote:

    Michelle: at least three of those statements have been corroberated and discussed on Shakesville and Amp and a few other places. The fact that they’re not being widely discussed is part of the reason some complain that the national media has given McCain a bit of a pass.

    Posted 01 Oct 2008 at 1:50 pm ¶

42. Free wrote:

    Thank you Lyonside. I really didn’t want to answer Michelle’s question with the evidence because … I am just tired of having to answer to lazy thinkers. The evidence is always right in front of their faces, and yet they deny. For example, the gook remark has been widely reported, even on CNN. But the lazy thinkers, they are so stubborn – god, it must hurt to switch on a new thought in their brains. And for their callousness, their total disregard for how their thoughts and actions effect others, racism, sexism, all those isms continue to march all over our backs.

    Posted 02 Oct 2008 at 9:38 am ¶

43. Michelle wrote:

    Wow…I forgot that when you type things people can’t hear your tone of voice.

    Also, I guess when we were admonished to be civil people would actually listen and not be insulting, but oh well.

    I meant my “those things can’t possibly be true” like, “Dear God! What on earth could we be in for!” And to be fair, I actually have been doing my own research for many years on many things.

    But please, feel free (no pun intended) to continue to insult people.

    Posted 02 Oct 2008 at 5:32 pm ¶

44. Free wrote:

    @ Michelle: Wow…I forgot that when you type things people can’t hear your tone of voice.

    Exactly. Michelle, I understand your response. However, I don’t take back what I wrote about lazy thinkers, but I am happy to know that you are not one of them.

    Posted 03 Oct 2008 at 12:03 am ¶