What Republicans Say about McCain-Palin
September 19th, 2008
Daniel Eran Dilger
When I point out facts that some people find objectionable, they typically respond by calling me a one-sided partisan with a limited perspective. To offer some balance in perspective, here’s a look at what prominent Republicans and conservative thinkers have to say about Barak Obama and the John McCain/Sarah Palin campaign.
.
Senior Republican Senator Chuck Hagel on Palin
Chuck Hagel, a senior member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, supported McCain in 2000, but has declined to endorse him this year. The difference is due to Hagel’s opposed to the war in Iraq. He has also voiced serious criticism of McCain’s choice of running mate in Palin.
Hagel told the Omaha World-Herald, “I think it’s a stretch to, in any way, to say that she’s got the experience to be president of the United States.”
“I think they ought to be just honest about it and stop the nonsense about, ‘I look out my window and I see Russia and so therefore I know something about Russia’,” Hagel said. “That kind of thing is insulting to the American people.”
Top Republican says Palin unready
Republican Representative Wayne Gilchrest
Wayne Gilchrest supported the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act, but like Hagel, is opposed to continued war in Iraq.
After serving in the House for nearly two decades, Gilchrest announced on Maryland WYPR radio, “My perspective is that the ticket is Mr. Obama and Mr. Biden that they have the breadth of experience, I think they are prudent, they are knowledgeable. We just can’t use four more years of the same kind of policy that’s somewhat hazardous, which leads to recklessness.”
Republican congressman endorses Obama
Republican Representative Ron Paul
When asked by Phil Gramm to endorse McCain, Ron Paul replied, “I can’t endorse somebody that disagrees with me on all the major issues — on the federal reserve system, on spending and taxes, and No Child Left Behind, and McCain-Feingold, and foreign policy especially. I mean I could never support somebody who thinks that its funny to say ”bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.“ That to me is not somebody I could endorse ever.”
Gramm Asks Ron Paul To Endorse McCain, But Paul Says No
Republican Former Representative Jim Leach
“From my perspective, this is simply not a time for politics as usual,” said Jim Leach, who represented eastern Iowa for three decades until 2006 and was one of only six House Republicans to presciently oppose the war in Iraq. “The case for inspiring, new political leadership and a social ethic has seldom been more self-evident.”
“Barack Obama’s platform is a call for change. But the change that he is so gracefully articulating is more renewal than departure. While a break from the ideological policies of the moment, it is rooted in very old American values that are as much a part of the Republican as the Democratic tradition. There’s an emphasis on individual rights, fairness and balance at home, and progressive internationalism.”
Republican Former Mayor of New York Ed Koch
Koch endorsed Bush in 2004, presenting him as better equipped to combat international terrorism than candidate John Kerry. In this election, Koch is endorsing Obama, noting that, “Protecting and defending the U.S. means more than defending us from foreign attacks.”
An AP report cited his concerns including civil liberties, abortion rights, gay rights and access to health insurance. Koch said he is particularly troubled by Palin’s record in those areas.
He called Palin a “plucky, exciting candidate” but also said, “She scares the hell out of me,” and that the country would be safer in the hands of Obama/Biden than McCain/Palin.
Koch says Palin “scares” him, endorses Obama ticket
Republican Former Mayor of Los Angeles Richard Riordan
Riordan recently endorsed Obama saying, “I think he’s a much more open person. He’s young, he has more energy, more electricity.”
On McCain, Riordan said, “When I was mayor I had dealings with McCain where I didn’t respect him.”
Former L.A. Mayor crosses party lines, endorses Obama
Republican Mayor of Fairbanks North Star Borough, Jim Whitaker
“My goal is to let Republicans have a clear understanding that their right to vote should not be restricted by any party affiliation,” Whitaker said.
He described Obama as having a stronger “intellectual capacity” and a greater ability to manifest it compared to McCain.
Mayor Whitaker endorses Obama
Conservative Thinker Larry Hunter
“I’m a lifelong Republican – a supply-side conservative,” wrote Larry Hunter. “I worked in the Reagan White House. I was the chief economist at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for five years. In 1994, I helped write the Republican Contract with America. I served on Bob Dole’s presidential campaign team and was chief economist for Jack Kemp’s Empower America. This November, I’m voting for Barack Obama.”
“How could I support a candidate with a domestic policy platform that’s antithetical to almost everything I believe in? The answer is simple: Unjustified war and unconstitutional abridgment of individual rights vs. ill-conceived tax and economic policies – this is the difference between venial and mortal sins.”
“Taxes, economic policy and health care reform matter, of course. But how we extract ourselves from the bloody boondoggle in Iraq, how we avoid getting into a war with Iran and how we preserve our individual rights while dealing with real foreign threats – these are of greater importance.”
“I suspect Obama is more free-market friendly than he lets on. He taught at the University of Chicago, a hotbed of right-of-center thought. His economic advisers, notably Austan Goolsbee, recognize that ordinary citizens stand to gain more from open markets than from government meddling. That’s got to rub off.”
“Overall, based on his embrace of centrist advisers and policies, it seems likely that Obama will turn out to be in the mold of John Kennedy – who was fond of noting that ”a rising tide lifts all boats.“ Over the last few decades, economic growth has made Americans at every income level better off. For all his borderline pessimistic rhetoric, Obama knows this. And I believe he is savvy enough to realize that the real threat to middle-class families and the poor – an economic undertow that drags everyone down – cannot be counteracted by an activist government.”
“These past eight years, we have spent over a trillion dollars on foreign soil – and lost countless lives – and done what I consider irreparable damage to our Constitution. If economic damage from well-intentioned but misbegotten Obama economic schemes is the ransom we must pay him to clean up this foreign policy mess, then so be it. It’s not nearly as costly as enduring four more years of what we suffered the last eight years.”
I’m a lifelong conservative activist and I’m backing Barack Obama
Conservative Thinker Wick Alllison
Wick Allison of D Magazine and the publisher of National Review in early 90s, recently wrote that “Barack Obama strikes a chord with me like no political figure since Ronald Reagan.”
Allison wrote that conservatism is “a recognition of the fallibility of man and of man’s institutions. Conservatives respect the past [...]; it gives the benefit of the doubt to customs and laws tried and tested in the crucible of time.”
“Liberalism,” Allison contrasts, “always seemed to me to be a system of ‘oughts.’ We ought to do this or that because it’s the right thing to do, regardless of whether it works or not. It is a doctrine based on intentions, not results, on feeling good rather than doing good.”
“But today,” Allison continued, “it is so-called conservatives who are cemented to political programs when they clearly don’t work. The Bush tax cuts—a solution for which there was no real problem and which he refused to end even when the nation went to war—led to huge deficit spending and a $3 trillion growth in the federal debt. Facing this, John McCain pumps his ‘conservative’ credentials by proposing even bigger tax cuts. Meanwhile, a movement that once fought for limited government has presided over the greatest growth of government in our history. That is not conservatism; it is profligacy using conservatism as a mask.”
“This kind of conservatism, which is not conservative at all, has produced financial mismanagement, the waste of human lives, the loss of moral authority, and the wreckage of our economy that McCain now threatens to make worse.”
“As a cause, conservatism may be dead,” Allison wrote, “But as a stance, as a way of making judgments in a complex and difficult world, I believe it is very much alive in the instincts and predispositions of a liberal named Barack Obama.”
A Conservative for Obama | D Magazine
Republican Talker Bill O’Reilly
On his radio show on Wednesday, O’Reilly stated, “More economic chaos today. Don’t panic, it’ll flip around. But this is the end of PResident Bush’s legacy. He’s done. He’s through. He will now go down in history … as an ineffectual leader,” O’Reilly stated, “and I’ll tell you the reason why, it’s poor leadership on his part. And the people that he picked to run certain things have been disastrous. And no leadership and now Americans are getting hurt.”
Given the McCain is pushing the same economic strategies as Bush, and that McCain has picked a “disastrous” person as his running mate, this doesn’t bode well for the McCain campaign either.
Think Progress » O’Reilly: The current ‘economic chaos…is the end of President Bush’s legacy.’
Other Republicans for Obama
“Tom Bernstein went to Yale University with Bush and co-owned the Texas Rangers baseball team with him. In 2004 he donated the maximum $2,000 to the president’s reelection campaign and gave $50,000 to the Republican National Committee. This year he is switching his support to Obama. He is one of many former Bush admirers who find the Democrat newcomer appealing.”
“Matthew Dowd, Bush’s chief campaign strategist in 2004, announced last month that he was disillusioned with the war in Iraq and the president’s ‘my way or the highway’ style of leadership – the first member of Bush’s inner circle to denounce the leader’s performance in office.”
“Disagreements on the war have not stopped John Martin, a Navy reservist and founder of the website Republicans for Obama, from supporting the antiwar senator. He joined the military after the Iraq war and is about to be deployed to Afghanistan.
”I disagree with Obama on the war but I don’t think it is a test of his patriotism,“ Martin says. ”Obama has a message of hope for the country.“
Republicans defect to the Obama camp – Times Online
Republicans for Obama
Why Republicans Like Obama
Other articles on current events:
Imagine Steve Jobs for President
The Big Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac Attack
Osama Bin Laden’s Dream of US Economic Collapse
You Know the Drill?
Ten Striking Parallels Between Microsoft and John McCain
Obama’s Apple, McCain’s Microsoft: the Politics of Tech
Did you like this article? Let me know. Comment here, in the Forum, or email me with your ideas.
Like reading RoughlyDrafted? Share articles with your friends, link from your blog, and subscribe to my podcast (oh wait, I have to fix that first). It’s also cool to submit my articles to Digg, Reddit, or Slashdot where more people will see them. Consider making a small donation supporting this site. Thanks!
 | Daniel Eran Dilger is the author of “Snow Leopard Server (Developer Reference),” a new book from Wiley available now from Amazon as a paperback or digital Kindle download. |
Links:
Amazon | Facebook | Twitter
Bookmark: Del.icio.us Slashdot Digg
RSS feed for comments on this post
TrackBack URI for this post
72 comments
Republicans don’t like McCain? You don’t say!
While Ed Koch has endorsed Republicans a few times — specifically Giuliani (the first time he ran, after which Koch became an outspoken critic), Bloomberg, D’Amato, Pataki, and Bush — he was a Democratic mayor and endorses Democratic candidates much more often.
That’s it. I’m going on a liquid yogurt diet. I’ve never seen such output from a blogger. Even if a lot is cut & paste, it’s still impressive. Dan, you better go back to raw milk and up those calories. Your fingers are logging hundreds of miles.
I’ve enjoyed the back and forth. Don’t take this the wrong way, Dan, but I thought you’d front a much stronger argument. Of course, no one can get into the details in a few articles or posts. I just have read your blogs on computer/Apple/anti-MS stuff, and thought the extremely high quality and tight analysis would transfer over.
Ideology is hard to shake. I view it as a nature/nurture thing, where nurture shapes our basic social ideas. And once crafted, they are hard to change.
One thing is for sure, there is no end of stupidity and hypocrisy when it comes to man, but especially political man.
If Obama should win, I look forward to 4 years of ‘foot-in-mouth’ speeches from Biden. Youtube is littered with some hilarious statements. And I mean funny like Dan Quayle.
Daniel: “…Republican Former Mayor of New York Ed Koch…”
Ummm, hate to break it to you, but Koch is a Democrat. Always was. A fairly conservative Democrat, which is how he ended up supporting Bush in 2004, but now he’s come home. I’m New Yorker, and Ed lives close by in my neighborhood (on Fifth Ave., just off Washington Square). I’ve met him. Nice guy.
To blithely label Koch a Republican clearly demonstrates just how tenuous Daniel’s grasp of actual “facts” is.
Kent said: “Every time DED writes a loony column about politics, all Republicans, instead of unsubscribing to Roughly Drafted, have to send $200 to a solid Republican candidate or PAC.”
I’ve already unsubscribed from Daniel’s RSS. His toxic tunnel vision has been fully revealed. As a big Apple partisan myself, I was inclined to overlook some things in the past. Not anymore.
I am somewhat disappointed by Daniel’s addition of political commentary. I don’t agree with his views or the views of his chosen candidate, but this is his blog and thankfully he is free to write it and we are free to read it or not read it.
It is painful to read material from someone whose opinions, insight and depth of understanding on one topic (tech and Apple) you so respect, are such a departure from your own on another topic. But, I still look forward to his insightful Apple articles.
I am sure we all don’t agree about everything with everyone we associate, and I think we all have tunnel vision about one thing or another.
That said I think Larry Hunter needs to listen to what he said.
He is going to endorse, not Obama’s economic policy, but what he thinks that policy is even though it is not what Obama has stated…
“I suspect Obama is more free-market friendly than he lets on. He taught at the University of Chicago, a hotbed of right-of-center thought. His economic advisers, notably Austan Goolsbee, recognize that ordinary citizens stand to gain more from open markets than from government meddling. That’s got to rub off.”
Maybe it has rub off, I think not!
Then in the end he thinks Obama’s economic policy will fail…
“If economic damage from well-intentioned but misbegotten Obama economic schemes is the ransom we must pay him to clean up this foreign policy mess, then so be it.”
[He says "If," indicating that even if there were cause for worry, Obama would still outweigh greater problems. He's a good writer, don't knock his subtly.]
So I am getting the feeling that Mr. Hunter’s real problem is with the war.
And I thought it is the economy stupid.
[The economy and the war are interlinked to the sum of trillions of dollars.]
According to Hunter we must pay for our supposed sins in foreign policy with a bad economy. Seems to me that our foreign policy mess was caused by an attack on us by foreigners.
As always my belief is that we were attacked on September 11, not because we were perceived as strong, but that we were seen as weak and not willing or not having the conviction to fight back for ourselves.
[Our air defenses were weak in terms of our lack of sophisticated air traffic control technology. But 9/11 was a taunt, and the taunt was clearly an attempt to draw out the US into a bankrupting war by an extremist who hates western culture. Ignorantly playing into his hand and failing is not an example of strength, but of foolish bravado. ]
To go with Obama is to go back to the days of Jimmy Carter. Weak and ineffectual.
[Or how about Clinton, an example from the last 30 years, who ushered in the longest peacetime expansion in US history?]
RobertR said
“I’ve already unsubscribed from Daniel’s RSS. His toxic tunnel vision has been fully revealed. As a big Apple partisan myself, I was inclined to overlook some things in the past. Not anymore.”
Robert, although you have unsubscribed, its nice to know that you’re still reading “Roughly Drafted” anyway (and now your substantial RSS subscription fees can go to a more worthy cause!) ;-)
I find it dubious to include O’Reilly’s criticism of Bush in your column against McCain. While you may think McCain is the same as Bush, you have failed to show that O’Reilly feels the same way. Furthermore, O’Reilly is criticizing the implementation of the policies, not the policies themselves. You should appreciate that difference.
If you can’t find quotes directly critical of McCain, and you can’t find quotes that explicitly parallel Bush and McCain while attacking Bush, it is irresponsible to attempt to induct O’Reilly into your fold.
[O'Reilly has been praising Bush for 8 years. It's just like Microsoft, hailing XP for 8 years and then announcing that its full of problems and you need to upgrade to Vista. Perhaps both were lying all along? ]
Hi Daniel
Hope your feeling better…
I visit and enjoy RDM for its extensive, and in depth analysis of what is about with Apple, and tech in general. I have also listened to you on MBW.
While it is your site, and you should do with it as you please, imho, you are slowly driving reader(s) away, at least this one.
While it’s not a matter or red vs blue, it is that I visit here for tech, not for politics. We are already overburdened with the never-ending campaigning as it is.
Also from where I sit (in the undecided middle) you show a strong bias in your political items, and again, while that is your right, I think that they are not nearly as accurate and thoughtful as your tech items. I guess what I am saying is that I think you are doing a disservice to yourself with this.
You may want to consider a separate site and or page on the blog for your political views. I know I could just not read them, but your analysis always intrigues me, but I have yet to find the same quality in any of your political articles as we always find in your tech ones.
Food for thought, from a current reader…
Cheers
-wsn
RE: Palin’s “experience”: Washington does not have a shortage on experience – it has TOO MUCH experience. We all know Palin is a heartbeat away the Presidency. As scared as so many people seem to be of this possibility, I think it is the best thing that could happen to our government.
[But why?]
From an experience standpoint, maybe she is naïve… but she has a record and reputation of being the kind of elected official who genuinely cares about her constituency, for what is right and will work hard for it. She is a frugal spender and has experience identifying and getting rid of wasteful spending. She has experience pushing OUT the old guard who were standing in the way of progress. Washington could use all of that. Bush isn’t alone in low approval ratings – our whole government is extremely unpopular. We don’t need to do things the way the rest of the world thinks we should.
[But that isn't true. She demonstrated pretty clearly that she only cared about her constituency that was white, affluent, evangelical, and agreed with her. "Work hard for it?" She hired a city manager so she wouldn't need to.
"frugal spending?" her first action as mayor was to illegally spend lots of money on redecorating her office. When challenged, she said she could anything she wanted until the court stopped her. Sounds like Cheney!
"getting rid of wasteful spending?" did you ignore the part about how she set up a secondary, unnecessary emergency dispatch center out of small town rivalry, leaving behind a money hole while urban areas in Alaska that actually needed the services are deprived?
She gets credit for having sold the jet as governor (for less that it was worth) but she then billed the state tens of thousands of dollars to fly her family around, and charged taxpayers thousands of dollars for meals while she ate at home rather than living in the governor's residence.
"push out the old guard"? She fired competent people so she could hire high school friends with no experience. This isn't can-do determination, it's selfish, paritsan fiefdom politics, the very thing that is wrong with Washington. I provided links with real examples, you just pull stuff out of the air and give her credit.]
In regard to your comparison between Bush and Microsoft; I counter with a comparison between Apple and America. Everybody in the world tells us how we should be doing things, playing nice with them and doing things the way THEY want us to, crying foul when we do something for our own good – in the same fashion that you argue critics tell Apple that it should change, even though its strategies are proving successful – just as globally unpopular American choices have lifted us to where we are today – both as an economy and a democracy.
[where we are today is stripped thin defenses, policing a war zone where Americans are dying needlessly, terrorism threats higher than when Bush came into office, trillions in new debt, and economic disaster. Education is in shambles, jobs are leaving, and China owns too much of the US. Stop bragging and wake up.]
The thing is that our country has been very successful doing what WE know to be best. Obama’s policies are basically taking us further in the direction of Europe, pandering to the rest of the world and, worse, pandering to special interests here at home.
[Bush has low popularity ratings AT HOME.]
What we need is a president who can work toward taking us back to the core of what is right for the U.S., right for the MAJORITY and still kind to the non-majority, and the rest of the world who eats at our table. More frugal spending, make people who want to do better WORK for it and not punish those who ARE working hard for it. I am not opposed to taxing wealthy individuals more (differentiate from small/medium businesses), but I AM opposed to simply GIVING away more. Government-sponsored WORK programs and other big projects that EMPLOY people, now that I could get behind. Giving people checks just kills their desire to work.
[Bush has done nothing for local interests but hoodwink them. He played Christians with the "compassionate conservative" campaign and then left them hanging because he only wanted their vote and didn't want to do anything to really further their cause in helping the poor. He waved a flag that got cheers from workers and vets, but then handed them massive debt and sent soldiers back into the war repeatedly while planning efforts poorly, resulting in unnecessary death and injury. He's done too little to care for the basic needs of disabled vets. And nothing to help American workers.
Obama has outlined service work and investing in the infrastructure of America to become competitive. McCain just wants to go into debt to hand out tax incentives to big oil and the super wealthy who already benefit from government infrastructure the most.]
Truman is my all-time favorite president (yes, Democrat). According to the History channel (I know, not the authority on the subject), he would not have likely ever run and been elected as president of his own accord. He was “snuck” in via the VP slot and then proceeded to do things for our country that it REALLY needed. HARD choices that required REAL backbone. I think we could see the same thing in Palin.
[What a complete joke. Palin has only ever been interested in spending for her God's Will pipeline and advancing evangelical extremism. She has absolutely no interest in serving Americans. She's the wife of an Alaskan separatist, and she supports the idea of taking massive Federal spending (most per person in the US) while Alasks swims in wealth. she shows no qualms about breaking the law and doing secret public business that mixes with her private needs. She is a female Cheney.]
Obama has no real backbone. He is a typical democrat politician in this regard. His choice of Biden makes me REALLY skeptical of what kind of agenda he will *really* push when in office. I hear everything he is saying and some of it *sounds* good, but I don’t trust him. We definitely won’t see “more of the same” from him – we will see initiatives that will have decades of destruction AFTER he leaves office – just like Clinton (to whom, IMHO, our current financial situation – at least in housing and individual debt – should be attributed). I believe that America would be better off with “more of the same” no matter how bad it is right now than it will be with the “change” Obama would try to usher in.
[Great jobs blaming Clinton for installing an 8 year hidden time bomb that Bush couldn't figure out how to disarm! Bush destroyed the economy by spending trillions in Iraq and bungling the job. He will hand his successor massive debt, a decaying national infrastructure, children left behind, and a crumbling economy. And that unnecessary war, started on false premises, still in progress. In contrast, Clinton handed Bush a balanced budget, a surplus, and economic prosperity.
That Obama even desires to clean up the massive mess Bush has created demonstrates a clear "backbone." He is aware of the depth and breadth of the mess. McCain and Palin aren't. ]
I find it funny when people begin to cry like babies when Dan speaks against their own set of beliefs, like “Dan, I love your rants against X, but then you started gunning against Y and that’s not cool man, you just lost yourself.”. It’s baby talk, gentleman. And the threat to “unsubscribe” the blog is ridiculous, too. What a bunch of whiners.
The thing is, you people all subscribed to Dan because you love how Dan goes ranting on how Microsoft is so this and that, how they’re so fucking screwed in the future, etc. But when he points out the exact same rationale against Republicans, you just shout “bad boy”! It’s insane.
For the record, I ain’t a democrat nor a republican, nor a libertarian, etc. I just happen to think that Sarah Palin is a nut, of the scariest type, a christian fundie, creationist, an ignorant of a major scale. Her only good characteristic is her “image”.
If John McCain thinks that this is the way he should choose people, by aesthetics, by personality, rather than content, then hell yeah, it’s one of the worst tickets I’ve ever seen in the american elections. And it’s bad, because it turns the election from issues debate to personalities debate. Which is the first step towards Idiocracy.
But go ahead and continue to whine about Dan’s choice of bringing politics to this blog and to make silly threats on how you will unsubscribe. It’s far easier than to really confront yourselves with facts and arguments and present counter facts and arguments. I think that it is difficult because you still want to believe that McCain’s ticket isn’t the shitty mess that it really is, and when someone points that out to you, it hurts like hell. But that’s my 2 cents.
I want Obama to win so bad so we can see what a wonderful country he changes us into. I can’t wait for the great changes. Let the entitlements rain from the sky. I just hope we don’t get that same message about how hard change is once he is in office.
@Walter
You make a pretty good point. However, I’d like to point out that it may be more important that O’Reilly didn’t make an effort to carry water for McCain during his comments of disappointments for Bush’s reign. Given O’Reilly’s tendencies, I think that if he were a huge fan of McCain’s ascension, he’d countered his negative comments about Bush with aspirational talk of what McCain’s administration would do better. O’Reilly didn’t do that and the absence is noticeable. Overall, O’Reilly’s network has shown an obvious lack of enthusiasm for the McCain campaign (Paline, or course, being the exception). Fox news seemed to barely hide their disappointment when McCain won the primary brass ring and switched their focus to critiquing Obama. To me, this was a stark contrast to the rather pervasive Pro-Bush talk in the 2004 election. O’Reilly seems to be following the same play book.
Of course perspective is everything. McCain has never been the darling of the right wing of the GOP. In this campaign, McCain has changed his position on just about everything to appeal to hard-liners in his party and to some extent it has worked. However, his policy reversals are so blatant and obvious that he gravely risks looking disingenuous. Many things can be said of Bush, but you’ve got to give him credit for one thing: He was consistent. McCain’s lack of consistency and previous right-wing unpopularity is dragging him down below the waves.
@LuisDias
I just wanted to say bravo sir for your comments. The U.S.’s descent into person attack, wedge-issue politics is hurting our country to no end. When people will not longer acknowledge facts in deference to ideology, we are in big trouble and it’s really beginning to show.
@Kent “And Hillary’s supporters like her.”
You couldn’t possibly find two candidates who differ more on issues than Palin and Clinton, so I find your comment hard to believe. Got any facts or links to back that claim up? I’d sure be curious to read that. Otherwise, it seems like you’re suggesting that the women in this country are so stupid and shallow, that they’ll vote for any candidate that has breasts, regardless of what the candidate’s actual views are. And I know you’re not suggesting THAT, right?
I live outside of the US
What can I say is that in Europe the US is laughing stock and are looked upon as an embarrassment due to the actions of the last 7 years or so. Is this founded? I don’t know enough to say.
What I do see however is what LuisDias has said. People here are complaining about Daniel’s sketchy writing and facts.. But are happy when Apple is in the picture..
If you do not like the political articles, do not read them. Period.
Because you don’t like the political articles you are going to stop reading the tech ones? Your loss.
If you don’t agree don’t read, if you let that effect whether you read the tech articles. I don’t think your presence here within the Roughly Drafted citidal will be missed.
Please ignore the grammar and punctuation mistakes written under pressure.
Nick Barron – Regarding Europe’s low view of American. Consider this. In the last 150 years Europe has brought us 2 World Wars, Hitler, Mussolini, Communism, poor indoor plumbing, bad teeth, and smelly women, we don’t really give much creedence to your thoughts.
[150 years ago the US was still practicing slavery and mass murdering the native population in a planned genocide. US business leaders in the 30s supported Mussolini's fascism and our "science" supported Hitler's eugenics, up until things got so bad in Europe that we were embarrassed out of pursuing the very same things. And while European girls of your generation may have bad teeth and be smelly, you can always give them a bath. American girls are more likely to be obese and just not class (although big girls can be fun too).]
Hi
As I said before RDM is his site to do what he choses to do with it.
…but maybe it’s time to change the ‘about’ page then, as it lists
“I’m Daniel Eran Dilger, and I write about technology, Apple, motorcycles and the place I call home: San Francisco”
Personally I would rather read more about tech, and as a motorcyclist, some of that as well.
If the site is going to add politics to it’s ‘about’ then it would be nice to see Daniel apply some of that same tech analysis to both tickets. I think it’s easy to say ALL 4 of them have their short comings.
…but I would prefer we do not do that and stick to tech and add in more about motorcycles. :-)
Cheers
-wsn
Cheers
-wsn
@Kent
That mantra is old, like 60 years old. It also gave the world the renaissance, science revolution, industrial revolution, bikinis and Claudia Schiffer. So there! The mantra about how the US is the “laughing stock” is also an hyperbole and should equally be dismissed. It’s also another idiotic distraction. That’s no monopoly of the US, you know? It’s politics.
What I find distressing is how people shut off because things are being discussed, rather than being praised or adored. If you want that shit, turn off the internet and go watch Fox news or other MSM sitcom soap opera as known as “news”.
@GGT
I think your response is accurate. As a conservative, I can barely hide my own disappointment that McCain is the right’s answer to Obama. The fact is that both sides scare me right now, because I’m a small-government guy.
I remember a little while ago (but I’d be hard-pressed to come up with a valid citation) a speech Obama gave about how people shouldn’t have to worry about failure. And Pelosi talks about buying up bad investments from firms. Biden runs around telling the “wealthy” it’s their patriotic duty to pay more to the government to help out. If helping out your fellow man is so important, why has Biden only given $3000 to charity in the past 9 years? The government isn’t the only place you can go to help out in need!
But then McCain (during the Republican convention) talks about re-educating people who lost their factory jobs… at the public’s expense! And giving wage supplements to “make up the difference” if these people have to take lower-paying jobs while they are being educated. My jaw dropped when I heard his quotes. This is socialism. And it scares me.
The bottom line is this: while the left complains about Sarah Palin’s lack of experience, none of the candidates except Palin has any real executive experience. You may not like her record, but none of the others in this race have anything of substance to look at. They are just a bunch of senators. And Obama is a new one, at that.
Both the Republicans and the Democrats got sucked into mediocre candidates. The argument for Obama on the left often times boils down to attempting to make history and combat racism. Chris Matthews made a comment that arguments against Obama are just manufactured cover for an implicit racism.
But what is the argument on the right? Vote for McCain, because he’s not Obama. But he’s not on the right, either.
What has our country gotten itself into?
Well thank the Gods you could find some Republicans somewhere who are siding against McCain. On the other side of the aisle, we had to look no further than the Colorado DNC to find anti-Obama Democrats. Obama has every possible advantage going into this fight: Debt reform, message of change, not the incumbent, supporting organized withdraw from Iraq, energy policy and he can pin the financial crises of Enron/Worldcom and today squarely on the Republicans.
Yet still he is neck and neck in the polls at best. If Obama and the Democrats are incapable of delivering a winning message they should be absolutely ashamed.
[I think you are forgetting that Obama is also black. Plenty of Americans are still racist.]
Oh and congratulations to Obama on picking a running mate that makes him look LESS qualified for the job.
[How's that? Biden has the political experience that Obama lacks, but both have an education in law. Both McCain and Palin have already proposed things that are illegal.]
Geez, Daniel, you think selectively quoting people who agree with your views on things constitutes objectivity? And getting Ed Koch’s party affiliation wrong just shows that you are out of your element. You are of course perfectly entitled to hold and publish your opinions. But quit trying to pass them off as “objective fact.”
[I though you threatened to leave? This article presents that siding with Obama and having problems with McCain does not make one "an extremist leftist," and prominent and articulate conservative voices have said the same thing. ]
Well look at that. Just after I get done talking about how the left tries to claim anti-Obama sentiments are racism, we see Daniel pointing out to hmciv in post #20 that “Obama is also black. Plenty of Americans are still racist.” This in response to hmciv’s suggestion that Obama should have no trouble winning this election.
Is Daniel really going to pass off a potential Obama loss as pure racism? Please. Maybe Olbermann is writing these columns for Mr. Dilger!
[I'm pointing out that Obama faces pretty seriously entrenched barriers to entry. I have never shouted down any rational criticism of Obama as being "racism" in the way that looking into the illegal behavior of Palin is called "sexism." If you think it is a cakewalk to get where Obama is while being a minority, well then I'll just have to disagree with you. And if you don't think a lot of Americans are knuckledragging racists, well then travel around the country. ]
JGross – you ask for evidence of Hillary Democrats supporting McCain. Here is a fundraiser who raised millions for Hillary.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS4br_fM96c
[Yes, "Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild" the billionaire wife of a knight who calls Obama an "elitist"! She thinks McCain will support abortion and gays and other issues she supports. Clearly, she isn't just a dumb broad voting for boobs, but a real thinker. Ether that, or just doesn't like blacks!]
I liked this article, and I’m sending it to someone else that I’ve discussed the election with. I thank Mr. Dilger for bringing these statements to my attention.
Oh man…I love how uptight everyone gets when something other than MS and Apple are mentioned.
Look, people, Daniel is an open-minded guy. He lives in SF. There’s a bit more progressive thinking up there. He can say whatever the fuck he wants on this site – it’s his.
I find it amazing that this is “hateful” and “vitriolic” writing and that it just gets all your panties in a bunch. But, you’ll listen to hateful and vitriolic speech from Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and those other fear mongers. They have nothing to run on or speak about so all they can do is try to wedge a divide between citizens and attack others. When your done with your 3rd grade playground games, “Conservatives” and “Values-based” people, you come wake us up so we can have a real talk.
Dan is presenting his view on politics. Are you really gonna cry about it? Why do we even have freedom of speech if he can’t talk about what he wants? Are you really asking him to censor his writing? Isn’t that a bit, um, *gasp* Communist? You know, that thing you all hate unless it can suit you or keep the ‘bad things’ away? Yeah…
Look, you don’t want to read it? Don’t. The title of the article clearly states what he is writing about. If it’s not your cup of tea, move the fuck on. If it is, or if you’re just interested in reading it, by all means, go for it.
In the meantime, enjoy your last two months or so of incompetence and stupidity, it’s all going to come crashing down on you come November when someone who is actually articulate and smart, as opposed to someone you “want to get a beer with” is elected to the most powerful position in the country. As it should be.
Obama ‘08!
And, Dan, keep it up man. I’ve been reading your site for about 3 years now since I bought my first Mac and I’d googled sites for opinions and reviews of Apple products. Your writing is damn good and I’ve even linked to the site on my own page. Good job and get better!
Shawn
Oh…and FYI, to everyone saying that Caribou Barbie single-handedly brought McCain neck and neck with Obama, check again. That bounce is already gone as she’s effectively providing her credentials by showing she is exactly the same as the other corrupt members of the current administration. The public is already tired of it. So, yeah, go away with that argument.
Gee, Daniel. I have asked you on multiple occasions to tell me what Obama has done, and yet you cower behind anti-Bush rantings and then point to McCain/Palin and says they are nothing but the same thing. When are you going to tell us all about Obama and what specifically he has done as a senator in less than two years holding that position?
That’s what I thought: you won’t.
@LuisDias
Absolutely right!!!!
Long-time lurker, first-time poster.
Thanks for the site, Daniel. I don’t agree with everything you say–your Mac pieces sometimes are TOO one-sided, which subtracts a little of the credibility from your meticulous and detailed analyses. (They could occasionally do with an aside of “but there IS still a problem with what Apple’s doing–here’s the REAL problem.”) But that quibble aside, they tend to be a lot more thoughtful and in-depth than most coverage of tech issues, and I that’s a very good thing!
Now you’re veering into politics. People come here for what they know to expect: tech articles. They oftendon’t like when a tech blog adds politics to the mix.
But they can easily skip the unwanted articles, and this is YOUR blog. This country needs to discuss the issues (not just the soundbites) MORE, not less.
You would be irresponsible NOT to raise these issues on your own blog. They’re off-topic, but also very important, and if you have something to say, this is a perfectly good place to say it. People who don’t like seeing political headlines can return after November, or not. No biggie.
As for Obama-Biden vs. McCain-Palin… even if someone believes a lot of the misinformation being spread about Obama, they can hardly find him LESS ready to be president than McCain and Palin!
McCain will drive the economy so far into the ground, and waste so many brave American lives… and then, when he’s in chemo for another bout of his cancer, we’ll have Palin who has NO understanding of foreign policy, and didn’t even run her own small town (she hired a city manager to do it).
Look at who Obama picks for his team: seasoned Biden. Look who McCain picks: Palin as a publicity stunt. Which kind of judgement do we want in charge of our economy and our diplomacy?
If you’re ideal candidate isn’t running, vote anyway. It’s too important to sit this one out.
From someone who lives in Alaska and has watched our governor first hand, here are some real answers to the Republican myths surrounding our governor.
@qzg
“She is a frugal spender and has experience identifying and getting rid of wasteful spending”
She hasn’t shown any particular fiscal discipline. Up here their is no need to. The state is awash in oil revenue and we pay no taxes.
This year every Alaskan (man, woman and child) received their permanent fund dividend of $2069 plus another $1200 energy bonus she spearheaded.
The only supposed “wasteful spending” she vetoed was funding for programs she didn’t philosophically believe in such as a long running program to help young unwed mothers.
Also, the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere” was stopped by congress not be her. And she didn’t give the money back to the taxpayers, however, she kept the $200 million to spend on other things in Alaska.
@qzg
“She has experience pushing OUT the old guard who were standing in the way of progress”
She has done nothing to push out the “old guard” the FBI is doing that for us. Any corruption being weeded out of Alaska has been and is still being done by the Feds.
Our governor runs Alaska like a small town dictator. If you disagree with her you land on her enemies list.
Her staff and Republican friends are now in the process of obstructing an investigation, authorized by a majority, bipartisan group of legislators, into the firing of a public official. Her staff is now trashing the good name and reputation of everyone who disagrees with her.
If our Governor seems too good to be true be assured she is.
The truth is, she is a blatant opportunist, capitalizing on good looks and supposed conservative credentials to advance a rapacious thirst for power.
@ Blad_Rnr
Well, I’m not Daniel, but a very brief summary of his Senatorial work work look like this:
Senator Obama has sponsored or co-sponsored 570 bills in the 109th and 110th Congress.
Senator Obama has sponsored or co-sponsored 15 bills that have become LAW since he joined the Senate in 2005.
Senator Obama has also introduced amendments to 50 bills, of which 16 were adopted by the Senate.
Most of his legislative effort has been in the areas of:
* Energy Efficiency and Climate Change (25 bills)
* Health care (21 bills) and public health (20 bills)
* Consumer protection/labor (14 bills)
* The needs of Veterans and the Armed Forces (13 bills)
* Congressional Ethics and Accountability (12 bills)
* Foreign Policy (10 bills)
* Voting and Elections (9 bills)
* Education (7 bills)
* Hurricane Katrina Relief (6)
* The Environment (5 bills)
* Homeland Security (4 bills)
* Discrimination (4 bills)
I did lift this from a web site, but saw it on many and I’m sure it can be cross checked with the official Senate websites.
I’m curious, Blad_Rnr, what is your point? That we’re all too lazy to look up Obama’s record? That Obama hasn’t done anything? Clearly he has done something. My guess is you would attack Biden for being a Washington insider for being in the Senate too long. So what is the right answer here? How many years and how many bills and how many fact-finding trips should a Senator take to be qualified to run for president, but not become a Washington insider? Be careful, McCain is in the Senate too. Also, you may want to avoid discussion on his “recent” attendance counts. And for the good of future discussion, please define “anti-Bush ranings”. In particular I would like to know criteria you require to establish a fair Bush criticism.
I can’t hardly play your game unless I know your rules.
Hey I’m not an American. I’m from way over the opposite side of the world and frankly I’m a little worried about you guys over there.
America today is really on the ropes. If you guys don’t vote the right person into the White House for the next four years your country is going to go down the drain. And if that happens its going to be bad for the rest of the world as well.
So if Daniel wants to voice his concerns using his blog I say good for him. Obviously he is worried enough about what is happening in his country to want to do and say something that can help in any way.
So I’m really disappointed that some of the people here prefer to do take offence at Daniel discussing political issues rather than engaging him in robust exchanges of viewpoints if they really disagree with him. I say that we can all learn new ways of looking at things.
Hi Daniel:
I’ve been lurking around here for a long time and have enjoyed your vehement advocacy of Apple. I am disinclined to take issue with your objectivity on that issue, as I find your writing to be well supported. This, my first post, has been inspired by your latest article.
It is curious, those who threaten to stop reading this blog because you have decided to opine on other topics. I guess to me it is akin to canceling your subscription to the local newspaper because it ran an editorial you disagree with. The interchange of ideas, particularly those you don’t agree with, has always been a key part of learning. Personally, I find that listening to the arguments from the other side often challenge me to buttress the arguments for my side. So, while I”m inclined to disagree with you politically, I’m not going anywhere, as I enjoy the banter.
While we could all go on and on in defending our point of view, I’d like to share just one opinion on the election and an inherent contradiction that I see coming from both sides. Experience has become a major bone of contention with the Palin pick, a pick that has refocused attention on Obama’s experience as well. With both camps now running on a “change Washington” theme, it strikes me as contrary to value experience to a high degree. I think we can all agree that, as I believe Bill Clinton has said, one can not possible prepare to be President. It’s a job that you learn once you get there. There are certainly skills and experiences that, assuming one possessed them, would give them a leg up on successfully handling the job. But I question the contention that such skills and experience need to be practiced on the kind of macro level both campaigns accuse the other of lacking. The key issue to me is judgement. Has the candidate exercised good judgement on the key issues of the day, and can the judgement be demonstrated.
I do think Palin’s activity as a small town mayor can provide insight in the judgment she would use as VP. I also think Obama’s work in the Senate, and as a community advocate can inform on the topic. I also don’t think that the presence or lack of “executive” experience is a big deal on the resume. I think one could make a pretty strong argument that being, for example, a principal of a large inner-city high school provides one with a lot of skills and experience in performing the job of President.
Finally Daniel, while you certainly don’t owe it to anybody to be objective in your analysis of anything, I bet you could write a very similar article as today’s about Obama, finding prominent Democrats or liberals who have concerns about his winning the election. While today’s article was certainly entertaining, it didn’t tell me anything I didn’t already know, and it didn’t persuade me to rethink my choices. Having read your blog for a long time, I know that you have the skills and talent to do both. I look forward to that political article in the future.
Best wishes in your recovery!
BK
[Thanks for restoring my faith in the health of intellectual argument.]
Daniel-
[He says "If," indicating that even if there were cause for worry, Obama would still outweigh greater problems. He's a good writer, don't knock his subtly.]
Yes, he said “If” but he also but he also labeled Obama’s economics as “well-intentioned but misbegotten Obama economic schemes” sorry if Obama’s economic policies are misbegotten schemes I want no part of it.
[Our air defenses were weak in terms of our lack of sophisticated air traffic control technology. But 9/11 was a taunt, and the taunt was clearly an attempt to draw out the US into a bankrupting war by an extremist who hates western culture. Ignorantly playing into his hand and failing is not an example of strength, but of foolish bravado. ]
I almost don’t know where to begin with this comment. 9/11 was a taunt? I can’t believe thats how you characterize an attack that took the lives of 3000+ people. Two of those people were my friends and some other of my friend’s family were murdered there that day. So you are blaming that on our lack of air-defense. I’m sorry but it had been our failure to react when our people had been hit by terrorists in the past that gave the extremists the bravado to attack us.
[Or how about Clinton, an example from the last 30 years, who ushered in the longest peacetime expansion in US history?]
Also incorrect, a recession was declared shortly after Bush took office and that was the legacy of the Clinton administration along with a badly incapacitated military that required spending to put back to a descent fighting capacity.
I think the only thing lower than President Bush’s approval ratings are the approval ratings of our Democrat controlled congress.
I have to be honest, I don’t believe for a second that either side of the political divide has all the answers or have all the right strategies for all situations Some Republican policies excel in certain areas and some Democrat policies in others. We need a balance.
Your comments regarding the 9/11 taunt make me question whether you might be a self-hating American. I am not accusing, but I am questioning. Somehow I perceived your tech and business insight to be a sign of a much more conservative point of view. I feel the your party of choice would want to make something like Apple, or Microsoft for that matter impossible.
Gosh Daniel, the political slant you have taken here on roughlydrafted is disappointing. I hoped that this was a temporary trend, but it appears that you are switching roughlydrafted to a political blog with some technical sprinkles. I have to say that I have really enjoyed your blog and I am really bummed that I will no longer have this outlet to immerse myself in all things technical and Apple without the distraction of politics. Daniel, please don’t take this the wrong way. I love your work, but DAMN THIS SUCKS! I want my old roughly drafted back. Ok, I will shut up and go sit in my corner now. @#!$%^&*&^$((*^&%#$@#!
Ha, ha, told ‘ya so Daniel.
Personally I hope you keep posting your biased and democratic talking point views now. They are Sooooo amusing and entertaining.
You USED to have a good blog on Macs and technology. That is in the past now. Many of your readers have sadly turned the page Daniel. (You have yet to understand that.) Sadly you’ve lost your focus – don’t change a thing though – please!
I’ve moved onto other sources for Mac news. I’m sure you’ll find the same with about half of your other readers. Your site is now just a side entertainment to see how deluded the liberal side can be.
The only negative thing about posting your one-sided, biased views is that it dilutes your typical “on the spot” analysis of all things Macs.
If I were not a seasoned Mac user since 1984 your political rants and ill-conceived logic would lead me to believe that your conclusions of the superiority of Macs over Windows is also flawed — after all it’s coming from the same person. How could that be?
I actually quite like this article. It’s good to hear some “conservative” thinkers (which given the AmericaEurope translation makes them “hard line” and then some) more or less along the same line of opinion as myself.
McCain 2000 was a whole other story. America wouldn’t have suffered so spectacularly under his leadership the last 8 years. But that never happened, and given all that time to think about his defeat: he’s very, very clearly playing every W card he can.
I have to hope that if he wins – and it’s very possible now – he’ll revert to his true colours as soon as campaigning is over.
So frustrating for anyone truly right of centre, wherever they may be. George W gave conservatism the very worst kind of name.
OH, take care of yourself. I hope you feel better.
I retract my endorsements and comments regarding Palin. Obviously I’ve been misinformed. I appreciate comments which have shared apparent facts (which I’ve not verified).
The problem is, WHO KNOWS? Stats and “facts” and quotes seem to be so slippery during election time. Every possible way in which we receive information from which to make decisions regarding politics seems to be tainted – on all sides.
Furthermore, who knows what the world will bring to the new president’s doorstep? Who knows if the future winner even intends to (or will be able to) carry out the platform he’s claiming he’ll be following? So what do we have to go on that is “real”? Can we find any sort of clear-cut absolute that can at least be a good guide of who these people really are and what they really plan to do?
How about ‘what they have done’? History. Actions. What I know of what Obama has done, very little do I like. McCain, there is plenty to not like, but more that I do.
That being said, I will be voting what I believe to be the lesser of two evils: McCain/Palin.
This isn’t normally the kind of comment that requires posting, but reading the comments in the past several posts. I guess I have to…
I do not agree with everything you write, Daniel. But I find you to be an interesting writer, compelling thinker, and someone who really wants to fuel intelligent conversation. So, I will continue to read your blog, I will maintain your RSS feed in my reader, and will also check by randomly when the spirit moves me.
Seriously, people… maybe one of the problems in our country right now is that grown-ups can’t have grown-up conversations about the body politic. The ideal of democracy is that you advocate fiercely for your perspective, I advocate fiercely for mine, and we are able to come to a decision somewhere between our two extremes. You don’t sacrifice your position by listening to someone elses. You don’t compromise your views by considering humbly that some part of what you say may be overstated. That’s exactly how we grow and learn.
Get a grip people! Neither Obama nor McCain are ideal. But we have to choose one (unless you can get all 23 million of your friends to vote Ron Paul or some other third party). Whatever the next President brings us, America will continue to degenerate unless we can actually have conversations together that allow space for learning and compromise.
@glenngrafton – go away
I can’t believe how many people are so upset because out of about 5-6 years of work, Daniel has posted 3-4 political blogs and now this is the liberal version of andrew sullivan’s blog! OMG! Something not tech related! Run! We mustn’t read for our virgin eyes will burn out if we read opposing opinions.
You all need to put your big girl panties on and get over it. Geez…
OK Dan
This works.
You are getting other people’s words wherever they fit to support your chosen outcome. You would strongly disagree with most of these folks on most issues, but at least you’re showing that there is a multiplicity of thought and ideas in the world.
Overall, this is a strong piece. It will be much more effective in convincing fence-sitters than any liberal diatribe that you may want to regurgitate. This kind of piece will achieve results that your other rants would never be able to match.
It would be nice to read a similar piece about prominent Democrats and Independents who support McCain. They also exist and are numerous. That’s what I would consider balanced; this piece of yours not so much, because it it still only supporting the same one viewpoint – yours. I don’t expect you to do the opposing view. Further , I don’t suggest that you do, because your heart wouldn’t be in it. It would be nice if someone else did so.
Your strongly liberal rants only serve to fire up those that are already in Obama’s camp and to alienate those who are decided against, but also to scare those of us who in the middle who may be undecided and may not be so excited by the current state of affairs, but are not at all interested in a liberal manifesto. So today’s piece, although still not balanced, at least has a much better chance of convincing others.
To run and embrace liberalism instead of reform would be like burning down the house because you find a couple of cockroaches in the kitchen.
I consider myself an Independent. I have volunteered for numerous local Democratic candidate campaigns, including a young Black Ivy League-educated laywer-turned mayor (who just happens not to be Barak).
I have attended a number of local Obama meetings and even went to an Obama rally just a few miles from here, just before the primaries here. I’ve never gone to a McCain event. I was scared by the wackiness of the move-on type anti-war liberals that came to the Obama get out the vote meetings. The Obama rally had lots TV cameras and only 2 of 36 sections in the arena with any people – those sections in the sight lines of the the areas of TV cameras. There were lots of students bused in from urban districts, who’s political leader(s) supported Obama, and some Union Local members, who’s job that day was to to show up at the TV photo op. That night, the evening news coverage pictures made it look like a packed house. In fact, I knew it was a bunch of kids who basically got the day off and a bunch of hired help from a local union. To be fair there were a few others, some very excited ( see above section about move-on hippy types) and others who seemed to wrinkle their noses a bit during the speeches. I suppose they were curious folk like myself that were a bit disappointed.
Obama ran off a list of bolier-plate liberal Democrat programs that he wanted to put in place, many of which even Bill Clinton did not enthusiastically endorse or even support in his elections or Presidencies.
I am an Independent who was excited by Obama’s message of hope. But at those voter organization meetings with the hippies and at the rally with the kids taken out of school and hired help from the union halls, I felt like a fish out of water. He was talking Democrat, and I was excited because I had been hearing an Independent message of hope in the press.
The next day I voted for McCain in the primary. He seemed the most Independent candidate from either party primary.
Like many others, I also find Obama to be a smart individual. Intellectually and theoretically, one would think that Barak should be smart enough to make up for his lack of experience in public office, or executive experience of any kind. But I still have my reservations.
1) With all this talk of Palin not having enough experience, with almost 8 years of executive public service experience more than both Obama and Biden combined, makes one wonder about Obama’s lack of experience. Yes, I also wonder if Palin has enough experience to be Vice President, but I’m more concerned about the Presidential slot. Six years as mayor and two years as governor is still that many years more than Obama, and Obama’s running for Pres.
2) We often hear, “Don’t worry, Obama isn’t as bad as he seems. He won’t actually do half of the crazy liberal stuff that he’s promised.” The premise is that even though he’s running on a liberal platform and has the most liberal record of any US Senator in office currently, that he’ll actually be a centrist in office. Unless Obama himself publicly disavows his liberal record and liberal positions during a debate, I would personally find it very difficult to vote for the man.
3) He says that he’s against free trade and that he’s going to renegotiate NAFTA with Canada and Mexico, greatly upsetting both of our neighbors, just to placate Ohio voters. Then he sends aides to Canada to smoothen the ruffled feathers caused by his remarks, saying that he didn’t really mean it. So is Obama lying to the American people, or are his aides lying to our Canadian ally government to the north. Note that global trade is extremely important to your favorite tech company Apple.
4) Obama says that he’ll immediately pull our troops out of Iraq regardless of conditions on the ground. Even after meeting with our Generals who tell him to his face that his stated position is dangerous, he still doesn’t admit that if he were elected President, he would have to more or less follow McCain position. That is, to remove our troops from Iraq in a slow and orderly process, as conditions on the ground allow. And possibly or likely leaving a permanent base or two, to both support the freely elected government of Iraq and to provide a friendly base of operations for future peace-keeping and observatory roles for US and or UN forces, like in Germany or Korea. This is not a controversial idea. Obama just hints that maybe everything isn’t exactly black and white; that he may have to re-evaluate his options once he gets into office. All this, knowing full well that for the good of the country he’ll need to roughly follow the plan already outlined by McCain long ago.The generals already told Obama what is necessary, McCain has the courage to be straight with us. Obama still pretends, so that his most ardent anti-war supporters don’t get upset, and so that other more reasonable people hope that he too will take a more rational position. Shrewd politically. Good for Obama, not so good for America.
5) Obama for understandable political reasons did not support the Surge in Iraq. He needed the political support of liberal move-on types to win the Democrat primary. This is in stark contrast to McCain, who politics be damned, supported the Surge because it was the best solution militarily and strategically for America, even if it meant he wouldn’t win the election. This, so that we could leave Iraq in victory instead of defeat. McCain was right about the Surge and showed political courage. Obama was wrong about the Surge and is being a coward about admitting that he was wrong about the Surge, only to save face politically. Everyone knows the Surge worked. Why is Obama so afraid to admit it.
6) Obama doesn’t seem to have that instinct necessary in a Commander-in-Chief. He seems uncomfortable reacting to current international affairs that have surprised us like the Georgian conflict. McCain’s reaction was immediate and succinct, and better than anything to come from either Bush or Obama. Obama seemed quite out of his element; it took him three tries over three days to finally adopt McCain’s position. That unease seems to have contributed to his drop in the polls. McCain was actually ahead of Obama in the consensus poll average for most of last week, even though you jumped up and down and said it was not true. This fluctuation was widely reported in all the various media because it didn’t fit with your version of reality so you blocked it from your reality.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html?utm_source=rcpwidget&utm_medium=widget&utm_campaign=guardian2
You would be glad to note that the trend has reversed a bit this week in Obama’s favor. But the lead has changed twice in the past 2 weeks. That does not suggest an electorate that has decided strongly for either candidate yet. It’s not a runaway success for Obama in a year that it ought be.
7) Obama is making promises of all kinds of traditional Democrat programs. But he’s not telling us how he plans to pay for all the goodies he’s trying to bribe us with in order to be voted President. On top of all the increased spending, he promises us all $1,000. And he complains about the current deficit. Plus here in America, we already have some of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. Then we wonder why our jobs are going overseas. This one is kind of important because Silicon Valley needs a business environment that is conducive to the creation of new businesses. Start-ups are the life blood of the Valley and of our great country. My companies have not paid much in taxes yet, but I’ve hired a lot of people, and given them opportunities to earn a great living. We didn’t pay much in taxes because most every dollar was plowed back into the business for growth. I closed most operations over the last year. The finance-mortage-housing-construction axis has been most heavily hit by this downturn. Most other still have their jobs and are just paying more for food and gas. I pretty much lost everything. My days are consumed searching for new opportunities so that I can put people to work, and so that I can finally power down the remaining struggling skeleton operations. My attitude is that I’ve got to do my part to create new opportunity and new value for all of us.
8) The negative spin of Obama, Democrat leaders, and short sellers is helping to erode confidence in our capital market. It’s easy to play Wall St against Main St, and even I blame he investment bankers for our subprime housing mess. But if we keep poo-pooing an economy that grew by over 3% last quarter, and completely dry up all confidence and the little remaining liquidity in the market, it will be the rest of us on Main St that will feel it. The Great Depression was caused by a similar freeze up in liquidity. It’s nice to play rhetorical games for political gain. But it will suck to erode all confidence, win an election and preside over a Depression.
The irony is that whoever wins this election may have less fun as President than they had hoped. The implications for our economy of having the capital markets implode would be like having the kid with the ball (the capital) to go home, then it’s game over for the rest of us. There will be no time for training wheels for this next President. It is crucial to pick whoever is ready to go Day 1. There’s little more than a month left to go to the election.
I believe in democracy and the values of our country. It is a civic duty of each person to make their own informed decision. I resisted giving my own political position because it is immaterial to good balanced coverage. But since you keep questioning my sincerity, I lay it all here for everyone to read. Straight up Independent leaning toward McCain. Obama hasn’t made the case, even though as the opposition candidate, this should be his race to lose. And he may lose, if he doesn’t show that he’s ready to lead.
May you each be properly informed and may God bless you everyone.
@ batonking
ditto
@Realtosh
Thank you.
@ danieleran
No kidding!!
There are tons of Republicans and Democrats who don’t like McCain. Many of these are in the White House and the Congress.
That is the very reason to vote for the McCain. He’s not afraid to challenge he system.
The person who I would vote for President is not running, whom I know him personally.
By far, one of the best individuals to be President in such a challenging environment is Bobby Jindal, the current governor of Louisiana. Back in college he got dual degrees in 3 1/2 years. He then went on to be a Rhodes Scholar, and management consultant; helping other companies find solutions to their problems. He went on to run the Department of Health and Hospitals of the State of Louisiana, taking a bankrupt system and created surpluses each year, while improving outcomes. University of Louisiana System, essentially the Department of Higher Education and th Bobby did all of this in his 20’s. He’s a young guy like us, in his 30’s.
It is a shame for Louisiana that the first time Bobby ran for governor he narrowly lost to Kathleen Blanco. Blanco together with the Mayor of New Orleans Ray Nagin showed complete incompetence and cowardice during Katrina. I can assure you that Katrina would have been devastating no matter who was governor in Baton Rouge. I can guarantee you that if Bobby had been elected governor prior to Katrina, the response would have been organized and more effective. I’ve not spoken to Bobby since years before those unfortunate events, so my comments should not be attributed to Bobby.
No mater which of the 2 candidates for President should win the election, they should both hire Bobby Jindal for a cabinet-level position. McCain or Obama, whichever wins, should give Bobby whichever they feel will be the toughest department; he’ll handle it with grace and competence.
This country is going to need a bunch of Bobby’s going forward.
Thanks for all the GREAT posts in the past. Unfortunately, not interested in politics here (either side).
Unsubscribed (I’ll check back in a few months when this stuff will hopefully have ended).
Bobby has already been Under Secretary of Health and Human Services in Washington prior to being a Representative in the House and Governor in Louisiana.
We all lost the opportunity to meet Bobby Jindal this year. He was scheduled to speak during the convention on Monday. Unfortunately, Hurricane Gustav, heading for Louisiana, had other plans. So even if the Monday convention schedule hadn’t been cancelled, Bobby would’ve had to stay in Baton Rouge to coordinate the disaster response.
McCain met with Bobby in the months before choosing his running mate. So my guess is that we have a better chance to get Bobby Fix It Master Jindal in the Cabinet under McCain.
But I challenge Obama and McCain to bring the best talent to the White House regardless of party affiliation.
Realtosh, I agree with a lot of what you said in that post. One’s experiences growing up definitely shape our views later on. And what we choose to do when we get older also has a powerful effect.
As a fellow small business owner, I have to vote for the candidate who’s policies I feel will do the least harm (or, provide the most incentive). That’s typically lower taxes, less regulation (small business red tape is destructive), and a govt. that basically gets out of the way.
Abortion is important. Gun ownership is important. But overriding all that is the economy. So for those fence sitters, consider the overall tone of the candidate.
Obama wants to take care of everyone from cradle to grave. This requires high taxes. And if he lowers taxes for those that pay very little and raises them for those that pay the vast majority, that imbalance will have unintended side effects on our economy in the form of lost jobs, less risk taking (i.e., starting a business), and a generall pullback as the rich assume a defensive position and wait out the current admin.
McCain wasn’t thrilling me during the primaries, but Obama’s liberal views are costly and destructive and naive. As good as he speaks, I don’t want to find out just how liberal he leans after he’s elected and enjoys a democratically controlled congress. In fact, for that one reason alone, maybe we should all think hard about having Dems in both branches of govt. in control.
I hope we end the war soon. I can’t stand the idea of using our treasure and wealth to build another country that is running 100 billion dollar surpluses. The sooner we end that, the better. The REAL meat will be tackling Social Security & Medicare and other entitlements as everything we are discussing here is a small chunk of the overall budget.
Think about what we want to incentivize. Hard work and ambition and risk taking and business creation/entrepreneurialism? Or a more liberal approach of taking from the rich for the benefit of the poor. Is welfare a success? Is it better to get people working or better to just extend benefits? Should we all pay taxes, if even just a little? How much more can America give to the U.N. and other nations to help their poor? Don’t we have infrastructure domestically that could use some rebuilding?
We can grow our way out of this but big issues need to be tackled. Wall Street needs intelligent regulation. I think we’ve hit the sweet spot for tax rates as revenues were flooding into the treasury. That is, I think we’re good… no need for cuts or hikes. Finding that sweet spot is luck, as most economists will tell you. If anything, our corporate tax rates stand out as too high. If we value jobs here, we need to even the playing field and increase our competitiveness by matching rates enjoyed by other industrialized countries around the world (25%).
Just a few ideas. In the meantime, go out and buy an iPod touch. It’s amazing and really hammers home how great Apple is at producing world class products!
The point of Palin being the only one with executive experience is irrelevant. Some great and not so great presidents had no executive experience.
Abraham Lincoln – not even a senator, a House Rep.
James Madison
John Q Adams
John Kennedy
Many didn’t even have executive xp until they became VP
Lyndon Johnson
George H.W. Bush – director of the CIA
Harry Truman.
Richard Nixon
Herbert Hoover was Secretary of Commerce, alot of good that experience did for the economy.
Generals have a lot of executive experience. All of them are lousy presidents.
The point is that the US Presidency is unique. Nothing can prepare you for this role. Our Founding Fathers had the vision to give the president a group of adviser to make up for the lack of experience in any one area.
I have no problem with your political takes as some here seem to have. And I would encourage you to continue. There is no reason you should limit your exploration of good vs. mediocre, or fake vs. real to the tech world. This is your blog. Say what you have to say. Those who are not interested can simply ignore the political, civil, or social commentaries.
It would be alright to lose a chunk of your audience. Not everyone is worth convincing: people with trivial concerns, such as who can marry whom and how many times and where we should pray or sing the anthem or display the ten commandments.
I really value – and thank you – for your analysis and opinion.
I am taking a trip this week and will be passing through SF. I’d like to buy you lunch or dinner and meet you in person.
By the way, qzg’s comment makes my stomach turn:
“I believe that America would be better off with “more of the same” no matter how bad it is right now….”
Wow! I will pass this around to make sure folks know how important their vote may be this november.
walter,
What we have here, especially under Bush, is entitlement for the very rich and well connected. Corporations, get incentives from the government on a regular basis. We have to pay for the weapons and services we don’t need, the food we can’t consume. Our government routinely spends money on what corporations want to them to. And at times of crisis, these companies transfer their risk and losses to our government.
You should be concerned about the socialism that exists when government contracts and market risks are negotiated. When it comes to making profits hand over fist at taxpayer’s expense, you want capitalism, but when it comes to dealing with risk you want socialism.
Charities (except a handful including UNICEF) are very inefficient compared to the services the government can provide. And many of them have turned out to be swindlers. So I am with Biden on that one.
Again, all the “I’m outta here comments” are by people who buy into Bush/Cheney/McCain’s “we’re the only ones who are right” mode of thinking (if one can call what they do “thinking”). They abhor dissent of any kind and do everything they can to intimidate those who speak opinions different than those of their own. Remember the Dixie Chicks, who did not more than say they were embarrassed Bush was from Texas.
Think about it, the United States is the only country in the world where being seen as intelligent and well-informed is actually bad for a candidate running for political office. If you show a modicum of smarts, give the slightest hint of a breadth of knowledge beyond football and stock car racing, or reveal an ability to distinguish nuance, you get mocked as a wine-sipping elitist. If you, however, show no ability to grasp ideas beyond two-word slogans, and proudly wear your ignorance and incompetence as a badge of honor, then you’re a great guy to sit down and have a beer with and by golly we’ll vote you in as president.
I have two aunts who actually voted for George the Thick. Twice. Because, get this, “he’s so charming”. That’s it. They had no idea what policies he stood for. They just know he’s “charming”. And these women are college graduates.
Welcome to the American Stupidocracy. God help us.
@pa re: your stomach
I wasn’t saying that American needs more of the same, I was saying that Obama would be WORSE than “more of the same”.
@tundraboy re: no idea of policies
LOTS of Democrats, particularly the 60+ variety, vote that way because that is the way they’ve always voted. The irony is that the Democrats of their youth, that got them into that mindset, would be Republicans today, IMHO.
I’d be much quicker to criticize over half of the American population that doesn’t even bother to exercise their right to vote, regardless of how well versed (or not) they may be about a candidate.
For some reason I feel like chastising you for referring to our government as a “stupidocracy.” Shame on you. WHATEVER it is, or has been or whatever its immediate future may be, what we have is nothing short of AMAZING and a tremendous privilege. The fact that our government has survived as long as it has, thrived like it has and endured and recovered from events and leaders which *should* have destroyed it is a testimony to it’s strength. There is an abundance of REALLY crappy governments around this world with SERIOUS problems that may never be solved. We’re just trying to continue a path of growth and improvement. WE HAVE A GREAT LIFE IN A GREAT GOVERNMENT.
One comedian I heard recently put it perfectly: “If you are broke and can’t make it in America, YOU ARE SCREWED!” [because there isn't anywhere else in the world where it is easier to 'make it']
thgd,
So you are saying every man, woman and child in Alaska got $3269 last year (that’s over $2 billion) but Palin kept the $200 million that she didn’t even need for the bridge? Why does the rest of US have to spend all this money for folks who get over $3000 a year from their state? Palin with five kids got $22,883 for the couple and the five kids!
“The truth is, she is a blatant opportunist, capitalizing on good looks and supposed conservative credentials to advance a rapacious thirst for power.”
Sounds like a typical hockey (or soccer) mom alright in my neck of the woods.
I find it interesting that opinion here is so evenly divided here between R and D. Somehow I thought that people who agreed so strongly about the sins of MS and the virtues of Apple must be supremely rational and therefore agree politically!
Personally I think we’ve had such a bad run for the past 8 years that it’s only rational to give the other side a try. In fact it’s quite rational to believe that D’s are better for the economy: historical growth data shows that the US economy grows over 1% faster per year, on average, under the D’s. Even the rich have done significantly better under D governments (they get more benefit from the faster economic growth than from tax cuts). Maybe the D’s should call this “trickle-up economics”! I also happen to believe that at this juncture in history we badly need a smart president who is calm under stress and will listen to dissenting voices. This sounds like Obama to me.
My theory about why the R’s are so reluctant to let the other side have a try is the natural tendency of people to rationalize an expensive decision. People hardly ever conclude that a decision that has consumed a large chunk of their life or their wealth was a mistake. That’s one reason that people who were so in favor of the war in Iraq still think it was a good idea. Lately they love the idea that the surge is working and that makes the people who opposed the war all along wrong. I would bet they won’t believe recent studies that have shown that the surge had little to do with things quieting down — it just happened to coincide with a peak in ethnic cleansing that “eliminated” a lot of the conflict.
GGT writes:
“Senator Obama has sponsored or co-sponsored 570 bills in the 109th and 110th Congress.
Senator Obama has sponsored or co-sponsored 15 bills that have become LAW since he joined the Senate in 2005.
Senator Obama has also introduced amendments to 50 bills, of which 16 were adopted by the Senate.”
And that makes Obama more qualified than Sarah Palin?
NormM writes: “Somehow I thought that people who agreed so strongly about the sins of MS and the virtues of Apple must be supremely rational and therefore agree politically!”
There’s nothing irrational about either side’s position. If you think there is, then you’re drinking too much of your kool-aid.
@ NormM
“I find it interesting that opinion here is so evenly divided here between R and D.”
Looks much like the makeup of the American electorate.
But you overlook that most people don’t walk around thinking they are Repubs or Democs. But they tend to vote for candidates 1) with whom they can identify and 2) with whom they share values and 3) with whom they share ideas and policies, usually in that order.
That’s why Obama is running on Bush. Obama would rather run against Bush who is unpopular, rather than against McCain, who has been known as a reformer for longer than Obama.
Also why McCain is getting back to his reform brand that he has been advocating for years.
But why do so many commenters ignore comments that call for common ground, and for finding solutions rather than partisans politics.
I finished a recent post that didn’t advocate for either Obama or McCain, but rather another another young pol under 40, who has much more experience (almost 2 decades of executive experience in both public and private sector) than either McCain or Obama, with the following statement,
“But I challenge Obama and McCain to bring the best talent to the White House regardless of party affiliation.”
@pa
You misunderstand my views. I mentioned in my first post in this thread that I am a small-government guy. I do NOT want socialism on any level. I don’t want the government to bail out businesses that made bad investments. I don’t want Republicans in bed with whatever businesses can pony up the dough for good lobbyists. I want the government to do what I think is right, which is keeping its damn hands out of everywhere it doesn’t belong.
I am a strict constructionist of the Constitution, and so I believe that the government should only be doing what is explicitly stated. I don’t believe they should be clamoring for more power or money by making weak links to Constitutional principles. For example, it is wrong for the feds to attempt to regulate a mom-and-pop business with a single store in a single state by claiming it is “interstate commerce” because some out-of-state resident may conceivably do business with the store. Interstate commerce, to me, means an organization with a retail presence in multiple states. Nothing more, nothing less.
It’s not that a bailout of AIG doesn’t pose some dilemma. Do you really let them fail and risk tanking the economy? I can’t really answer that. But when the government says they just bought an 80% stake in the world’s largest insurance form, I hang my head in shame and think that this is all gone wrong. What are we coming to?
The simple fact is that I call myself a conservative because I identify these values with the core conservative ideology. Less government. Period.
People call me a Republican, and I tend to vote Republican because the liberal Democrats are open about being big-government guys. This scares me more than the average Republican. But make no mistake about it: the average Republican these days does not embody the sort of conservatism with which I identify. Look at how the lousy Republicans in charge have spent the hell out of all of us!
I guess I’d call myself a libertarian, but all they seem to do these days is run around complaining about legalizing drugs and dismantling the Federal Reserve. I can’t get behind a party of loonies.
It all boils down to personal responsibility. Nobody seems to value that anymore. I just want to be left to my own devices. To manage my life as I see fit, and risk failure all the way. Why does the government want to stop me?
Fiscal conservatives seem particularly upset about the current financial-system “bailout” in which the government buys up risky real-estate-backed investments but I think they shouldn’t be. The government gets these investments at a big discount from what the investors originally paid and so it’s quite likely they will eventually make money, not lose it. Thus the reckless investors are punished, the financial system is kept afloat, and the taxpayer doesn’t suffer.
@NormM
Indeed. At times like this even a fiscal conservative like me agrees it’s better to get down and dirty than to pull a Herbert Hoover.
The Market has a haircutigger fir feedback right now. Domino effects are the last thing anyone needs.
Well, I created an account just so that I could post.
I USED to frequent joyoftech.com daily. I would buy their items and forward their comics to friends. But they started to get wayyy to political and failed to ever do anything to stop the political enthusiasts on their sight from hammering anyone who ever expressed a different opinion. It got oppressive and stifled good communication.
A while back, I just gave up on their site. Period. I no longer visit it and if and when it pops up on Stumble it gets a thumbs down rating from me.
I have enjoyed RD Mag for a long, long time so please, PLEASE stay away from the political crap. I don’t care whether you are blue or red or pink, just don’t mix it up with the rest. Daniel, I like what you have to say about all things Apple and I’d like to keep coming back her for that but if you are going to begin using your site as a platform for your political points of view I’ll find other places to get my Apple related content.
Please, keep it to your focus. Do what you are doing and keep doing it well. Don’t mix politics in. I just don’t want to hear it at all.
Thank you,
Dan
[This is not a commercial blog selling trinkets. It's whatever I think to write about. If you aren't interested in a particular article I write about advertising, corporate history, technology, product reviews, current events, potential products, legal fights, economics, or whatever else, you can skip it, voice your own opinion about it, or run away and make a point to hate me for the rest of your life, but don't tell me what I can and can't write about. It just makes you look small minded and arrogant, and it's completely inappropriate.]
Daniel,
Thanks for your replies! “Plenty of Americans are still racist.” This may well be true. I have never found a good poll that accurately measures this. http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/12/racism.poll/index.html
However plenty of Americans are also black. I’d be willing to bet Obama gets a disproportionate number of black votes in November just as Hillary would have gotten a disporportionate number of female votes. I’m further willing to go out on a limb and say this ultimately helps him more than it hurts him. Barak’s message from the start has been change and even his mixed heritage reflects this. What he has to convince the rest of America though is that his convictions are more than skin deep, AND that we need change. The Democratic party so far has not done this well in my opinion.
On your second point, Biden’s politial experience vs Obama’s is actually the issue I’m driving at. Biden has been in the game for a very long time. He knows the ins and outs of Capitol Hill he knows what can and can’t be done. Obama on the other hand has had very little time in the Senate. So why is old Joe playing second fiddle to Obama? The ticket seems backwards except for Obama’s charisma. Would anyone have seriously supported an Edwards/Kerry ticket in 2004? Standing side by side with their resumes, Biden looks like the presidential candidate with Obama the VP. In contrast when Palin stands next to McCain he looks more presidential rather than less.
Bottom line it looks like Obama brought Biden to the party so he could get in the door at the Good Old Boy’s Club. McCain is the PRESIDENT of the Good Old Boy’s Club and he brought the hot chick everyone can hit on.
Of course I must now nullify my argument now that I discovered Carly Fiorina is [was?] one of McCain’s top economic advisors. John what were you thinking!?!?
Excerpted from:
http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/politicalinsider/2008/09/obama-vs-palin.html
If you want to know why Gov. Sarah Palin drives liberal Democrats crazy — and is helping Sen. Barack Obama raise money at a record pace — here’s an excerpt from an viral email making its way around the country:
* If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you’re “exotic, different.”
* Grow up in Alaska eating moose burgers, a quintessential American story.
* If your name is Barack you’re a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.
* Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you’re a maverick.
* Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.
* Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you’re well grounded.
* If you spend 3 years as a community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate’s Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran’s Affairs committees, you don’t have any real leadership experience.
* If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you’re qualified to become the country’s second highest ranking executive.
* If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising two daughters, all within Protestant churches, you’re not a real Christian.
* If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you’re a Christian.
* If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.
* If , while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state’s school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant, you’re very responsible.
* If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family’s values don’t represent America’s.
* If you’re husband is nicknamed “First Dude”, with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn’t register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.
@MarkyMark
Come on. That’s the stupidest stuff anyone’s ever written. The fact that people post this misinformation, including larger venues like HuffingtonPost, only shows how detrimental the internet has become for sussing out fact from fiction.
You’re proof that we’re living in the misinformation age.
[Your arguments would have more merit if you could articulate them using facts and reasoning rather than name calling.]
LuisDias said: I find it funny when people begin to cry like babies when Dan speaks against their own set of beliefs, like “Dan, I love your rants against X, but then you started gunning against Y and that’s not cool man, you just lost yourself.”. It’s baby talk, gentleman. And the threat to “unsubscribe” the blog is ridiculous, too.
For me, it wasn’t a “threat” to unsubscribe — I did unsubscribe. So, to the extent that I visit roughlydrafted.com from here on out, it will be at wider intervals, and I’ll be late posting comments, if I post at all. Let’s face it — Daniel has a pretty sketchy reputation in the tech blogosphere outside his core Mac partisan base. And I freely admit to being part of a Mac partisan base. So I cut him some slack before, because we were on the same side about the Mac. But seeing him botch the facts in his political posts — for example, identifying Ed Koch as a Republican — it made me reconsider. The phrase I used before was “toxic tunnel vision.” I think it’s apt.
[...] Various Republicans [...]
What bothers me is all the people & groups who knowingly break rules and then start crying when things don’t go the way they wanted them to go. A few examples: Hillary Clinton voters from Florida & Michigan, Bush, Palin and all her scandals, bankers, Enron, etc.
Please continue these political postings, Daniel. You are obviously being very effective since all trolls can’t stop fussing and complaining.
How many people plan to vote for Obama just to ‘punish’ the Republicans?…
Are you thinking that the Republican party should have nominated a ‘real conservative’? Lots of people over the years have lamented that John McCain has ‘played nice’ with legislators on the other side of the aisle too often. …
You must log in to post a comment.