What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

*** Official Barack Obama FBG campaign headquarters *** (1 Viewer)

ETA: post deleted as to not promote the KAA and Stat propaganda show
:mellow: This coming from the kid who posts any and EVERY wild innerweb rumor about Obama.If you were actually interested in political debate, you would bring up issues and policy. Instead your only goals are to stir up the left by promoting bold face lies and pumping up your post total. Dont worry, once the election is over, you can go back to being the guy every one ignores in social situations.
This is really insane. I simply post an alternative viewpoint than yours. Sorry you don't feel people should have an opposing opinion.
 
adonis said:
nah, i bet him and BGPaiMei have a wicked WoW room. You know, in the basement of their parents houses where they live
It's amazing how quickly Democrats resort to name-calling in a political discussion rather than a serious, honest debate.
It's amazing how bad this shtick is. And I know you're thinking "that's the greatness of my shtick, that nobody gets how over-the-top I am." No, I get it. And after months and months, it's just awful. Know when to quit. I don't think any regular board member reads anything you type with any shred of seriousness. Might as well buy your next 4-digit username, cause you've driven this one into the ground.
You can't begin to imagine how broad it makes me smile knowing I frustrate you like this.
:shrug: Whatever gets your rocks off, guy. Have fun being an innernet doosh. :shrug:
Why do I continue to be amazed that when Democrats are presented an opportunity to debate a political issue, they turn to name calling instead.I think the responses I get in here really speak for themselves in this regard. Democrats, instead of arguing the point intelligently, resort to slurring the messenger.
I'm continually amazed at your amazement regarding how people receive and reply to your messages.
I don't have a problem with stratorama. He has a view and speaks his mind. I don't care for the people that launch personal attacks at him. That adds nothing to the discussion.
:mellow: :unsure: FINALLY, someone "gets it".

Obama fans, people are allowed to have viewpoints in opposition to yours.

 
I don't have a problem with stratorama. He has a view and speaks his mind. I don't care for the people that launch personal attacks at him. That adds nothing to the discussion.
:thumbup: :thumbup: FINALLY, someone "gets it".Obama fans, people are allowed to have viewpoints in opposition to yours.
Of course you do. I've been a lifelong holder of minority viewpoints, so I'm always appreciative of those who grant the courtesy of discourse. But if one side just spews nonsense then they should be called on it. Discourse only works if it is reality-based.
 
I don't have a problem with stratorama. He has a view and speaks his mind. I don't care for the people that launch personal attacks at him. That adds nothing to the discussion.
:thumbup: :thumbup: FINALLY, someone "gets it".Obama fans, people are allowed to have viewpoints in opposition to yours.
Of course you do. I've been a lifelong holder of minority viewpoints, so I'm always appreciative of those who grant the courtesy of discourse. But if one side just spews nonsense then they should be called on it. Discourse only works if it is reality-based.
Oh, absolutely. Crush, you and Adonis have been great. You just moved past posts of mine that you felt didn't warrant a response, and shot back a very logical and educated response to those that you felt did. Never has your discourse been uncivil, and I thank you for that.What I appreciate most about you (and a few others on the board) is that you don't simply put your head in the sand and "ignore" someone. You're educated enough to understand that differing viewpoints are what got our great country started in the first place.Respek.
 
Media is FINALLY delving into Obama's dubious donations

Barack Obama has proved the greatest fund-raiser of all time by a long shot. His campaign has raised more than $600 million - $150 million in September alone. But the campaign has also failed to adopt standard protections against fraudulent giving.

The average contribution to Obama in September was just under $86. And federal law only requires the disclosure of identifying information for contributions in excess of $200. Campaigns must keep running totals for each donor and report them once they exceed $200.

The Federal Election Commission says the Obama campaign has reported well over $200 million as coming from contributions of $200 or less. Only a small portion of that sum is attributable to donors the Obama campaign has disclosed.

No presidential campaign has ever before received such a gargantuan sum of money from unidentified contributors.

The campaign's records reveal big contributors with names like "Doodad Pro" (employer: "Loving," profession: "You") and "Good Will" (same employer and profession). Both donated via credit card. Other reports have suggested that some donations come from overseas - raising the question of whether Obama is accepting donations from foreigners, another violation of federal law.

All of which prompted an enterprising citizen to test the controls put in place to enforce compliance with federal campaign law by the Obama and McCain campaigns. Last Thursday, he decided to conduct an experiment.

He went to the Obama campaign Web site and made a donation under the name "John Galt" (the hero of Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged"). He provided the equally fictitious address "1957 Ayn Rand Lane, Galts Gulch, CO 99999."

He checked the box next to $15 and entered his actual credit-card number and expiration date. He was then taken to the next page and notified that his donation had been processed.

He then tried the same experiment on the McCain site, which rejected the transaction. He returned to the Obama site and made three more donations using the names Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and Bill Ayers, all with different addresses but the same credit card. The transactions all went through. By Saturday, he'd reported that the transactions had all posted to his credit-card account.

Others repeated "John Galt's" experiment last week, giving to Obama under such fictitious names as Della Ware, Joe Plumber, Idiot Savant, Ima BadDonation (with a Canadian bank card) and Fake Donor.

What accounts for the Obama campaign's acceptance of these fraudulent donations? Most merchants selling goods and services use the basic Address Verification System that screens credit-card charges for matching names and addresses. (It can also screen cards issued by foreign banks.) The McCain campaign uses AVS and provides a searchable database of all donors, including those who fall below the $200 threshold. The Obama campaign apparently has chosen not to use the AVS system to screen donations.

"Della Ware" contacted The New York Times to report her experience contributing under a fictitious name and address ("12345 No Way") to the Obama campaign, while her contribution was rejected by the McCain campaign. Times reporter Michael Luo verified "Della Ware's" account and reported it online at the Times' campaign blog. But Luo missed the story's point.

"To be fair to the Obama campaign," he wrote, its "officials have said much of their checking for fraud occurs after the transactions have already occurred. When they find something wrong, they then refund the amount."

But the Obama campaign is running a system that complicates the discovery of "something wrong." It has chosen to operate an online contribution system that facilitates illegal falsely sourced contributions, illegal foreign contributions and the evasion of contribution limits.

Obama backers making such contributions may not be worried that "something wrong" will be detected if they have no intention of complaining about it.

According to journalist Kenneth Timmerman, the Obama site did not ask for proof of citizenship until just recently - in contrast not just with McCain but also with Hillary Clinton. Sen. Clinton's presidential campaign required US citizens living abroad to fax copies of their passports before it would accept donations. By contrast, foreign donors to Obama can just use credit cards and false addresses.

Why has the Obama campaign chosen to operate without the basic automated credit-card controls that would prevent or hamper fraud and illegal contributions? Has it made a conscious decision to assist the evasion of federal campaign law or worry about it after it has had the use of the money?

It's hard to see any other motive.
 
Voted for Obama in Macon Georgia, today.

Took me just over an hour to cast my vote. Poll workers said it has been like that or more so for days, and have described voting as "heavy."

Lots of Obama voters in line with me. :blackdot:

 
Palin off-script comments irritate McCain aides

(CNN) -- Some aides to Sen. John McCain say they weren't happy that running mate Sarah Palin went off script Sunday and turned attention back to the controversy over her wardrobe.

The Alaska governor on Sunday brought up the recent reports regarding the Republican National Committee's $150,000 spending spree on clothing and accessories for the Palin family. Palin denounced talks of her wardrobe as "ridiculous" and declared emphatically: "Those clothes, they are not my property."

"Just like the lighting and the staging and everything else that the RNC purchased, I'm not taking them with me," she said at a rally in Tampa, Florida. A senior McCain adviser told CNN that those comments "were not the remarks we sent to her plane." Palin did not discuss the wardrobe story at her rally in Kissimmee, Florida, later in the day.

A Palin aide, however, told CNN that the governor clearly felt like she had to say something to defend herself, because "that's really not who she is." Over the weekend, sources told CNN that long-brewing tensions between Palin and key aides to McCain were on the rise.

Several McCain advisers suggested that they have become increasingly frustrated with what one aide described as Palin "going rogue."
 
Here's Andrew Sullivan's "Top Ten Reasons Conservatives Should Vote for Obama"

10. A body blow to racial identity politics. An end to the era of Jesse Jackson in black America.

9. Less debt. Yes, Obama will raise taxes on those earning over a quarter of a million. And he will spend on healthcare, Iraq, Afghanistan and the environment. But so will McCain. [McCain] plans more spending on health, the environment and won't touch defense of entitlements. And his refusal to touch taxes means an extra $4 trillion in debt over the massive increase presided over by Bush. And the CBO estimates that McCain's plans will add more to the debt over four years than Obama's. Fiscal conservatives have a clear choice.

8. A return to realism and prudence in foreign policy. Obama has consistently cited the foreign policy of George H. W. Bush as his inspiration. McCain's knee-jerk reaction to the Georgian conflict, his commitment to stay in Iraq indefinitely, and his brinksmanship over Iran's nuclear ambitions make him a far riskier choice for conservatives. The choice between Obama and McCain is like the choice between George H.W. Bush's first term and George W.'s.

7. An ability to understand the difference between listening to generals and delegating foreign policy to them.

6. Temperament. Obama has the coolest, calmest demeanor of any president since Eisenhower. Conservatism values that kind of constancy, especially compared with the hot-headed, irrational impulsiveness of McCain.

5. Faith. Obama's fusion of Christianity and reason, his non-fundamentalist faith, is a critical bridge between the new atheism and the new Christianism.

4. A truce in the culture war. Obama takes us past the debilitating boomer warfare that has raged since the 1960s. Nothing has distorted our politics so gravely; nothing has made a rational politics more elusive.

3. Two words: President Palin.

2. Conservative reform. Until conservatism can get a distance from the big-spending, privacy-busting, debt-ridden, crony-laden, fundamentalist, intolerant, incompetent and arrogant faux conservatism of the Bush-Cheney years, it will never regain a coherent message to actually govern this country again. The survival of conservatism requires a temporary eclipse of today's Republicanism. Losing would be the best thing to happen to conservatism since 1964. Back then, conservatives lost in a landslide for the right reasons. Now, Republicans are losing in a landslide for the wrong reasons.

1. The War Against Islamist terror. The strategy deployed by Bush and Cheney has failed. It has failed to destroy al Qaeda, except in a country, Iraq, where their presence was minimal before the US invasion. It has failed to bring any of the terrorists to justice, instead creating the excresence of Gitmo, torture, secret sites, and the collapse of America's reputation abroad. It has empowered Iran, allowed al Qaeda to regroup in Pakistan, made the next vast generation of Muslims loathe America, and imperiled our alliances. We need smarter leadership of the war: balancing force with diplomacy, hard power with better p.r., deploying strategy rather than mere tactics, and self-confidence rather than a bunker mentality.

Those conservatives who remain convinced, as I do, that Islamist terror remains the greatest threat to the West cannot risk a perpetuation of the failed Manichean worldview of the past eight years, and cannot risk the possibility of McCain making rash decisions in the middle of a potentially catastrophic global conflict. If you are serious about the war on terror and believe it is a war we have to win, the only serious candidate is Barack Obama.
I'm a big believer in balance, and think that America needs a strong and coherent conservative philosophy to act as a counterbalance to the excesses of liberalism. Therefore, I strongly endorse Sullivan's reason #2. Bush was not a conservative, except to his "loyal Bushies" who completely distorted the meaning of the word. Right now I try to distinguish Republicans (Bush and his ilk) from Conservatives. Sullivan's greatest sin to the Republican base was calling Bush on his lack of conservatism.
 
Wow. Charles Fried just announced that he voted for Obama. He was Solicitor General under Reagan, and has been a very influential conservative voice on legal matters for the last several decades. I read and was very impressed by his book, Order and Law: Arguing the Reagan Revolution in the early 1990s. As Ed Brayton characterizes him, "If you were to make a list of the most important conservative legal scholars in academia, I have a hard time imagining a name at the top of the list other than Fried." I'm not sure I disagree with that characterization: I'm having trouble coming up with a name I'd put ahead of Fried on such a list.

 
As we get closer to Nov 4, here's something to ponder: Why did Obama under-perform the polls in the Primary earlier this year? Do you think the Obama campaign figured it out and addressed it? Does this fact make anyone nervous for Nov 4?

 
Wow. Charles Fried just announced that he voted for Obama. He was Solicitor General under Reagan, and has been a very influential conservative voice on legal matters for the last several decades. I read and was very impressed by his book, Order and Law: Arguing the Reagan Revolution in the early 1990s. As Ed Brayton characterizes him, "If you were to make a list of the most important conservative legal scholars in academia, I have a hard time imagining a name at the top of the list other than Fried." I'm not sure I disagree with that characterization: I'm having trouble coming up with a name I'd put ahead of Fried on such a list.
Obviously Mr. Fried has never heard of Drill Baby Drill.
 
As we get closer to Nov 4, here's something to ponder: Why did Obama under-perform the polls in the Primary earlier this year? Do you think the Obama campaign figured it out and addressed it? Does this fact make anyone nervous for Nov 4?
I haven't seen it broken down state by state, but I would suspect that some of this was due to Republicans crossing over to vote for Hillary. Those folks wouldn't have been reflected in the polls I wouldn't think.
 
As we get closer to Nov 4, here's something to ponder: Why did Obama under-perform the polls in the Primary earlier this year? Do you think the Obama campaign figured it out and addressed it? Does this fact make anyone nervous for Nov 4?
I haven't seen it broken down state by state, but I would suspect that some of this was due to Republicans crossing over to vote for Hillary. Those folks wouldn't have been reflected in the polls I wouldn't think.
ha, forgot about that whole mess. good point
 
Dozens Of Call Center Workers Walk Off Job In Protest Rather Than Read McCain Script Attacking Obama

By Greg Sargent - October 27, 2008, 5:18PM

Some three dozen workers at a telemarketing call center in Indiana walked off the job rather than read an incendiary McCain campaign script attacking Barack Obama, according to two workers at the center and one of their parents.

Nina Williams, a stay-at-home mom in Lake County, Indiana, tells us that her daughter recently called her from her job at the center, upset that she had been asked to read a script attacking Obama for being "dangerously weak on crime," "coddling criminals," and for voting against "protecting children from danger."

Williams' daughter told her that up to 40 of her co-workers had refused to read the script, and had left the call center after supervisors told them that they would have to either read the call or leave, Williams says. The call center is called Americall, and it's located in Hobart, IN.

"They walked out," Williams says of her daughter and her co-workers, adding that they weren't fired but willingly sacrificed pay rather than read the lines. "They were told [by supervisors], `If you all leave, you're not gonna get paid for the rest of the day."

The daughter, who wanted her name withheld fearing retribution from her employer, confirmed the story to us. "It was like at least 40 people," the daughter said. "People thought the script was nasty and they didn't wanna read it."

A second worker at the call center confirmed the episode, saying that "at least 30" workers had walked out after refusing to read the script.

"We were asked to read something saying [Obama and Democrats] were against protecting children from danger," this worker said. "I wouldn't do it. A lot of people left. They thought it was disgusting."

This worker, too, confirmed sacrificing pay to walk out, saying her supervisor told her: "If you don't wanna phone it you can just go home for the day."

The script coincided with this robo-slime call running in other states, but because robocalling is illegal in Indiana it was being read by call center workers.

Representatives at Americall in Indiana, and at the company's corporate headquarters in Naperville, Illinois, didn't return calls for comment.
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmem...ter_workers.php :moneybag: :lmao: :lmao:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is a pretty strong part of Obama's closing speech, gift wrapped by Sarah Palin.

Because despite what our opponents may claim, there are no real or fake parts of this country. There is no city or town that is more pro-America than anywhere else - we are one nation, all of us proud, all of us patriots. There are patriots who supported this war in Iraq and patriots who opposed it; patriots who believe in Democratic policies and those who believe in Republican policies. The men and women who serve in our battlefields may be Democrats and Republicans and Independents, but they have fought together and bled together and some died together under the same proud flag. They have not served a Red America or a Blue America - they have served the United States of America.
The entire thing.
 
As we get closer to Nov 4, here's something to ponder: Why did Obama under-perform the polls in the Primary earlier this year? Do you think the Obama campaign figured it out and addressed it? Does this fact make anyone nervous for Nov 4?
I haven't seen it broken down state by state, but I would suspect that some of this was due to Republicans crossing over to vote for Hillary. Those folks wouldn't have been reflected in the polls I wouldn't think.
ha, forgot about that whole mess. good point
and FWIW, there's a bunch of evidence out there that's just not true. He outperformed in basically any state with a large AA population (ie southern states) or any state with a minimal AA population (midwest or mountain west).
 
This is a pretty strong part of Obama's closing speech, gift wrapped by Sarah Palin.

Because despite what our opponents may claim, there are no real or fake parts of this country. There is no city or town that is more pro-America than anywhere else - we are one nation, all of us proud, all of us patriots. There are patriots who supported this war in Iraq and patriots who opposed it; patriots who believe in Democratic policies and those who believe in Republican policies. The men and women who serve in our battlefields may be Democrats and Republicans and Independents, but they have fought together and bled together and some died together under the same proud flag. They have not served a Red America or a Blue America - they have served the United States of America.
The entire thing.
McCain's closing is "He'll raise your taxes. I won't."
 
As we get closer to Nov 4, here's something to ponder: Why did Obama under-perform the polls in the Primary earlier this year? Do you think the Obama campaign figured it out and addressed it? Does this fact make anyone nervous for Nov 4?
This is not true. It was a mixed bag.He underperformed in some, particularly the northeast.But he way overperformed in the south.Given that only NH is in play in the northeast, whereas theere are a few battlegrounds in the south, I think this bodes well.
 
Got this from a friend's blog. Thought it was a good read

“There was something so incredibly AMERICAN about that”

Today, I, a Japanese-American, went to a Korean Market in Mishawaka, IN with my Mexican-American girlfriend to buy Japanese-style dessert cakes manufactured by Lotte America, a Tokyo based company’s US branch, which had been founded by a Korean-Japanese businessman. Oh, and the packaging for the dessert was printed in Korean. While this, in and of itself is kind of amazing in its sheer globalization’s scale, what particularly struck me was when I was communicating with the Korean lady at the cash register. I say communicating, rather than merely talking, because I was also trying to ask her if she had frozen edamame, which she didn’t know what that was because her first language was Korean. So, I punched into her handy-dandy Japanese/Korean/English electronic translator (in Japanese, my first language) “edamame”, which gave her the Korean translation, and led me to the prized frozen vegetable.

Now, excuse me if I seemed to have crammed a lot of unnecessary details in there, but it serves a purpose—bear with me. What’s really remarkable, to me, about that whole situation is the pure and sheer diversity of it all. The way that 3 people with very different backgrounds coming together in a small shop in Indiana to enrich all our lives with the sale of some frozen vegetables and pastries, with the only common link that we are American.

In this case, I use that term loosely, since I’m a permanent resident without citizenship as of yet, and I frankly have no idea if the korean-speaking shopkeeper lady was an American citizen either. But after I got into the car, I turned to Rosie and told her just how distinctively American that whole process felt. It wasn’t that we were buying apple pie, or sweet tea, it wasn’t that English was the sole vehicle of communication, it wasn’t that it was two white middle class Americans were meeting for a sale… but that’s what to me made it so incredibly American experience.

In particular, we hear so much about the speeches and comments by Sarah Palin and Co. make about the “Real America” or “Real Americans”. I find it hard to express just how intensely REVOLTING I find her characterizations. How quickly we forget that America was founded on its differences in character, and the acceptance and toleration of those differences, not on its uniform heritage.

In 1776 America was a collection of varying religious and cultural communities which didn’t readily trust each other easily. That character grew even more diverse with the influx of German, Irish, and Chinese immigrants in huge numbers, as well as the acquisition of Mexican and French territories. It was this constantly changing, constantly hedrogenous nature that has defined America through its history.

Yet somehow, the GOP has largely come out pushing for a vision of America as if it should be represented as one image. Palin notoriously commented about rural America as being the “Pro-america” parts of the country, with false calls of Obama being an “arab” or “muslim” who is a traitor being barely put aside. While it is true that directly confronted with this ugliness, McCain/Palin have denied or corrected some (but definitely not all) of these yells at their rallies, the ugly display is no coincidence. The McCain-Palin campaign has relentlessly and repeated tried to paint the image of Obama as an “other”—seeing things differently, therefore alien, dangerous, and above all “un-American”(see the Ayers issue, Palin’s characterizations of Obama, etc).

What I’m talking about may sound like I’m simply rehashing the idea of racism and intolerance in America, and on one level it is. But it, in away, goes beyond that. What I really am trying to talk about is the image of the ideal America that I have.

To me, America is the land where diversity is can truly be celebrated, where the vast majority of Americans are, or are descended from immigrants. What is the “real America”? To me, its not simply whatever the people who happened to live in the United States largely had in common (WASPs), or their shared cultural heritage. While that is a part of American history/culture, and is important, there was an idea there that was so much greater, so much more distinct that truly made America special. It was that they truly had so much that was NOT in common. It was the acceptance of that difference, yet coming together to form a union. It was the willingness to put aside differences for the common idea of America. That, to me made America special, unique—founded on the idea of difference, rather than commonality.

The GOP is desperately trying to redefine the idea of America to mean middle-income, English-speaking, culturally White America. That conception of America as a political force came to maturity during the waves of immigrantion which began accelerating with the influx of Irish, German, and Chinese immigrants throughout the mid-19th century… But that’s an image of America that should not, and cannot be allowed to prevail, lest we lose that which made America, truly American.
 
From Politico:

One rainstorm, two campaigns and two responses

Wearing jeans, white sneakers and an insulated windbreaker, Barack Obama delivered his stump speech this morning in a chilly, steady rain in Chester, Pa.

"A little bit of rain never hurt anybody," Obama said, surveying the soaking, umbrella-covered crowd at Widener University, occasionally rubbing his hands together for warmth and squinting through the raindrops.

Obama took the stage less than an hour after the McCain campaign announced it was postponing a rally at 1:15 p.m. in Quakertown, Pa., about one hour north of Chester, "due to weather."
:topcat:
 
From Politico:

One rainstorm, two campaigns and two responses

Wearing jeans, white sneakers and an insulated windbreaker, Barack Obama delivered his stump speech this morning in a chilly, steady rain in Chester, Pa.

"A little bit of rain never hurt anybody," Obama said, surveying the soaking, umbrella-covered crowd at Widener University, occasionally rubbing his hands together for warmth and squinting through the raindrops.

Obama took the stage less than an hour after the McCain campaign announced it was postponing a rally at 1:15 p.m. in Quakertown, Pa., about one hour north of Chester, "due to weather."
:topcat:
I think it was the right move for McCain, though. He's having enough trouble attracting crowds when it's sunny. The last thing he wants on the news is footage of him speaking in front of 20 people.
 
From Politico:

One rainstorm, two campaigns and two responses

Wearing jeans, white sneakers and an insulated windbreaker, Barack Obama delivered his stump speech this morning in a chilly, steady rain in Chester, Pa.

"A little bit of rain never hurt anybody," Obama said, surveying the soaking, umbrella-covered crowd at Widener University, occasionally rubbing his hands together for warmth and squinting through the raindrops.

Obama took the stage less than an hour after the McCain campaign announced it was postponing a rally at 1:15 p.m. in Quakertown, Pa., about one hour north of Chester, "due to weather."
:lol:
Mavericky...
 
Big news from Politico.com's Ben Smith:

Crist extends voting hours

This is a very big deal: Florida Governor Charlie Crist, to the shock and dismay of Florida Republicans, just moved to extend early voting hours, a move likely to widen the Democrats' lead under a program on which the Obama campaign has intensely focused.

"He just blew Florida for John McCain," one plugged in Florida Republican just told me.

The Buzz reports:

At a hastily arranged news conference, Crist said the right to vote is sacred and that "many have fought and died for this right." He said he consulted a leading Democratic legislator, Rep. Dan Gelber of Miami Beach, before issuing his order, and that Gelber knew of a similar order issued by Gov. Jeb Bush in 2002 that dealt with helping voters deal with new equipment.

As to the perception that more early voting helps Democrats, Crist said: "This is not a political decision. This is a people decision."

Democrats had urged the extension, which means that votes will be cast 12 hours a day, not eight hours a day.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top