Atlantis Online
September 21, 2019, 10:29:35 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: ARE Search For Atlantis 2007 Results
http://mysterious-america.net/bermudatriangle0.html
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

2nd Debate: FOX, CNN, CBS REACTION GROUPS: OBAMA WON

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: 2nd Debate: FOX, CNN, CBS REACTION GROUPS: OBAMA WON  (Read 83 times)
Colleen Gallion
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 2214



« on: October 07, 2008, 11:28:50 pm »

FOX, CNN, CBS REACTION GROUPS:
OBAMA WON




...WATCH: MCCAIN CALLS OBAMA "THAT ONE"...
MORE REACTION... Political Wire: McCain "Extremely Erratic"... Obama Was "More Substantive... Was More Presidential"...Washington Post: McCain Seemed Very "Self- Conscious"... Andrew Sullivan: "This Was... A Mauling"... Ross Douthat: "Debate's A Draw"... NY Times: Obama More "Forceful On Foreign Policy"...

DEBATE HIGHLIGHTS: McCain Makes No Mention Of "Middle Class"... Suggests A Spending Freeze For Government While Suggesting Government Buy Up Mortgages... Obama: "I've Got To Correct A Little Bit Of Senator McCain's History, Not Surprisingly"... McCain Suggests Ex-eBay CEO Meg Whitman For Treasury Chief... eBay Fired 10% Of Its Workforce Yesterday... McCain Starts With A Dig: "Senator Obama, It's Good To Be With You At A Town Hall Meeting"...
Report Spam   Logged

"Our challenges may be new. The instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends — honesty and hard work, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism — these things are old. These things are true."  President Obama

Colleen Gallion
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 2214



« Reply #1 on: October 08, 2008, 12:05:23 am »

Sam Stein stein@huffingtonpost.com
Who Won The Debate? Clean Sweep For Obama

 




The insta-polls, which provide viewers with a somewhat skewed but important insight into how each candidate fared say, by and large, that Obama scored a victory in the second debate.

NBC's focus group of undecided Pennsylvania voters had the Illinois Democrat winning by roughly a 60-40 split. Frank Luntz's focus group, over at Fox, showed undecided voters leaning towards Obama because of his position on health care. CBS's focus group of independents had the Democratic nominee winning the debate at 39 percent to McCain's 27 percent, with 35 percent of the respondents saying it was a tie. Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, a Democratic polling firm, had a focus group of undecideds leaning to Obama by a margin of 42 percent to 24 percent.

Meanwhile, SurveyUSA interviewed 741 debate watchers in the state of Washington, 54 percent of whom thought Obama was the "clear winner" compared with McCain's 29 percent. That same polling firm had the first debate as a tie. In tonight's survey: 42 percent of respondents said McCain was too forceful.

And the CNN focus group of undecided voters in Ohio had the margin at an even wider spread: Obama 54 percent to McCain's 30.



A look at some of the specific issues that these Ohio voters valued suggest that they prefer the candidate who, at least on the surface, appears less on the attack. When Obama discussed health care as a right for all Americans, his numbers were through the roof. At one point, female respondents were dialing in at 100 percent approval. When he talked about using diplomacy in Darfur and pursuing Bin Laden in Pakistan, he again enjoyed strongly enthusiastic responses.

McCain had his moments too, mostly when he was discussing economic matters and propping up businesses to turn around the economy. His low points came when he was on the attack. On MSNBC, Nora O'Donnell charted how independent voters and Democrats soured on McCain when he said that figuring out Obama's tax policy was like nailing Jell-O to a wall.

How solid was the consensus that Obama scored better tonight? Even Bill Bennett, ever the Republican optimist, conceded that the Illinois Democrat scored higher marks.



"I confess I so much admire McCain, but I just don't think the campaign is equal to the story,' he said. "I just don't think it's equal to the man, it hasn't been. ... We needed a breakthrough, talking about the economy. I think he was a little better than last time, but he didn't break through enough, and he's behind. So it just wasn't good enough for McCain in terms of what it had to be."
Report Spam   Logged

"Our challenges may be new. The instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends — honesty and hard work, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism — these things are old. These things are true."  President Obama
Monique Faulkner
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4107



« Reply #2 on: October 08, 2008, 11:10:51 am »


Arianna Huffington
Posted October 8, 2008 | 01:19 AM (EST)
The Winner of Debate II? "That One"


In Debate II, John McCain twice laid out the criteria for how the American people should judge the candidates: In tough times, we need someone with a steady hand on the tiller.

By that measure, Obama was the clear winner. He was centered where McCain was scattered. Forceful where McCain was forced. Presidential where McCain was petulant.

In the first debate, McCain wouldn't look at Obama. In this one, he referred to him as "that one." The contempt was palpable, and unpalatable.

In the run-up to the debate, McCain lowered himself into the sewer in a desperate attempt to portray Obama as dangerous, untrustworthy, a risk too big to take.

But Obama's measured reasonableness totally countered that caricature. You could fault Obama for not being particularly inspiring, but you could not miss the rock steady competence he exuded -- authoritatively delivering substantive answers to questions on the economy, health care, taxes, and foreign policy.

He scored with his history lesson, reminding voters of the economy the Republicans inherited, and how they squandered that inheritance.

He scored with his reminder of how much the war in Iraq is costing America and the enormous strain that puts on our economy -- as well as our national security.

He scored when he declared that affordable health care is a "right" of every American and not, as McCain put it, a "responsibility" of... he actually didn't specify who.

And Obama scored big when he gave voice to the vast gulf between the two candidates' -- and the two parties' -- position on the role of government in our lives, invoking JFK's commitment to put a man on the moon in 10 years as an example of what can be done in fueling a new alternative energy-based economy, and pointing out how government investment played a key role in developing the tech advances that have driven our economy for the last two decades.

McCain, like Palin last week, couldn't decide if government is the enemy or the deep-pocketed benefactor that is going to buy up all the bad mortgages in America.

Is "a government-bought house on every lot" the 21st century equivalent of "a chicken in every pot"?

McCain also provided the debate's strangest moments, twice chiding Obama for backing an "overhead projector" in a planetarium, and raising the idea of "gold-plated Cadillac" insurance policies that pay for hair transplants. Huh?

McCain also told us he knows how to fix the economy, knows how to win wars, and knows how to capture bin Laden. Is there a reason he's keeping all these a secret?

The debate ended on a question Tom Brokaw described as having "a certain Zen-like quality": "What don't you know and how will you learn it?"

Both men used the opportunity to pivot from the Moment of Zen into impassioned but familiar stump speech stories about single moms (Obama) and absent fathers (McCain), about the American Dream (Obama) and the country put first (McCain), about the need for fundamental change (Obama) and the desire for another opportunity to serve (McCain).

At the end of the debate, Brokaw asked McCain to get out of the way of his Teleprompter, so he could sign off.

Brokaw might as well have been speaking on behalf of the future: Senator McCain can you please get out of the way so we can get on with it?

Read more reactions to the Obama-McCain Town Hall Debate from HuffPost bloggers

John McCain
Presidential Debates
Barack Obama
Sarah Palin
Economy
In Debate II, John McCain twice laid out the criteria for how the American people should judge the candidates: In tough times, we need someone with a steady hand on the tiller. By that measure, Obama...
In Debate II, John McCain twice laid out the criteria for how the American people should judge the candidates: In tough times, we need someone with a steady hand on the tiller. By that measure, Obama...
Report Spam   Logged
Monique Faulkner
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4107



« Reply #3 on: October 08, 2008, 11:14:09 am »

Really a lousy debate performance by John McCain in this one.  He looked a bit lost and decrepit onstage, and, when the debate was over, he stepped in the way of Tom Brokaw's teleprompter so he couldn't finish his wrap up.  Then, ran off, as opposed to staying and answering any questions or talk to the audience. 

When he pointed to Obama and said "that one," it was viewed by almost everyone as a gesture of disdain.
Report Spam   Logged
Volitzer
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 11110



« Reply #4 on: October 08, 2008, 12:18:00 pm »

That's only cuz Chuck Baldwin was never allowed into the debates.

It's all a Bilderberg sham-showing cuz the Bilderbergers want their golden-child Obama in.

 Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Report Spam   Logged
Mishe Vanatta
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 5858



« Reply #5 on: October 08, 2008, 01:09:09 pm »

I don't think Chuck Baldwin, Bob Barr or any of the third party candidates would do any better,  All of them support a "hands off" policy when it comes to the markets.  We saw that philosophy play itself out with Herbert Hoover and we had the Great Depression, which took us over ten years to get out of.
Report Spam   Logged
Mishe Vanatta
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 5858



« Reply #6 on: October 08, 2008, 01:10:38 pm »

We'd actually be in even worse shape these days than we were in the 1930s because back then we had a strong manufacturing base (and now we don't make anything anymore) and all our oil was homegrown (and now we import most of it). 
Report Spam   Logged
Horus
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 461



« Reply #7 on: October 09, 2008, 11:03:28 am »


It's all a Bilderberg sham-showing cuz the Bilderbergers want their golden-child Obama in.

 Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

Agreed -- it's a farce but how is Obama the Illuminati's puppet? I think rather that he is the next JFK, will actually try to help this country, and be rewarded with a bullet in the head from the CIA who will then frame the KKK or a Neo Nazi group.

Report Spam   Logged

"For the greater individual is the one who is the servant of all. And to conquer self is greater than taking cities."

Reading 3253-2
Kristina
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4545



« Reply #8 on: October 09, 2008, 11:07:49 am »

Hopefully, that isn't the case.  Seems that every time someone comes along with genuine aspirations to change the system, they do end up getting assasinated. 

You'll notice that defenders of big business or the status quo never seem to be in any harm at all.
Report Spam   Logged

"Nothing gives one person so much advantage over another as to remain always cool and unruffled under all circumstances."

Thomas Jefferson
Volitzer
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 11110



« Reply #9 on: October 09, 2008, 11:32:02 am »

I don't think Chuck Baldwin, Bob Barr or any of the third party candidates would do any better,  All of them support a "hands off" policy when it comes to the markets.  We saw that philosophy play itself out with Herbert Hoover and we had the Great Depression, which took us over ten years to get out of.

Mishe:

Seriously take a look at the film the Money-Masters.  The Great Depression was engineered by the same banking families that have engineered today's fiscal crisis.

The Money Masters.


Report Spam   Logged
Volitzer
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 11110



« Reply #10 on: October 09, 2008, 11:37:48 am »

Hopefully, that isn't the case.  Seems that every time someone comes along with genuine aspirations to change the system, they do end up getting assasinated. 

You'll notice that defenders of big business or the status quo never seem to be in any harm at all.
Sure as long as you remain a slave to the Military Industrail Complex and do the bidding of the Bilderbergers you're fine.

However exercise any form of sovereignty and then out you go !!!

Many would volunteer to be Chuck Baldwin's body guard because the secret-service can be infiltrated from within as Kennedy's assassination has shown.
Report Spam   Logged
Mishe Vanatta
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 5858



« Reply #11 on: October 09, 2008, 01:07:42 pm »

I don't think Chuck Baldwin, Bob Barr or any of the third party candidates would do any better,  All of them support a "hands off" policy when it comes to the markets.  We saw that philosophy play itself out with Herbert Hoover and we had the Great Depression, which took us over ten years to get out of.

Mishe:

Seriously take a look at the film the Money-Masters.  The Great Depression was engineered by the same banking families that have engineered today's fiscal crisis.

The Money Masters.




You're partly right.  Actually, it was engineered by many of the same banking practices that are now in effect today:  looser regulations, policies that favor the rich at the expense of the Middle class, and more stealing on Wall Street.

They also printed lots of money back then, which made inflation rise and tried to bail out the banks so they wouldn't fail, all things that were tried in 1931, just like they are being tried right now.
Report Spam   Logged
Volitzer
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 11110



« Reply #12 on: October 15, 2008, 03:40:31 am »

So do your part and work to shut down the Federal-Reserve...

What You Can Do to End the Tyranny of the Federal Reserve

NaturalNews
Tuesday, October 14, 2008

(NaturalNews) The bailout opposed by so many Americans was nevertheless negotiated by the Federal Reserve with the help of Congress and the Administration. The final bill for the hotly debated rescue of the rich is over 1 trillion dollars including the ear marks and special interests sops that were included. But this is small change compared to the money that is being pumped into the monetary system by the Federal Reserve without any debate or consent. New money is being printed at record rates, insuring that the currency you have in your pocket will buy less and less everyday. As more people wake up to the threat to American’s future posed by the Federal Reserve, interest is being renewed in the Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act (HR2755).

This legislation introduced by Congressman Ron Paul in June, 2007 would kill the Federal Reserve Act and would then phase out the Federal Reserve altogether one year after the bill becomes law. Although legislators have yet to bring Paul’s bill to the floor, mounting interest in the bill in the face of recent Fed actions suggests it will be revived from its current state of languish in the House Committee on Financial Services.

Although people are just beginning to hear about this proposed legislation in the main stream media, the internet and alternative press reveal the depth of public support for this initiative. Even Constitution Party presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin has placed abolishing the Fed as one of the top planks in his platform that calls for a return to fiscal responsibility for the U.S.

(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)


What the Federal Reserve is all about

The Federal Reserve is called that to fool you. It is actually a private corporation run by bankers dedicated to controlling the nation’s money supply for the benefit of themselves and other wealthy and powerful people. Its mandate is to control the rest of the people by controlling their access to money and credit.

Since the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913, the American middle and working classes have been victimized by boom and bust monetary policy. Most Americans have suffered steady erosion of purchasing power at the hands of the Fed’s inflationary policies. The result of these policies represents an insidious and onerous tax imposed on the people on top of their already burdensome overt taxation.

The heavy hand of the Fed can be seen by any student of the Great Depression, the torturous stagflation of the 1970’s, the dotcom bubble, the housing bubble, and today’s financial panic and collapse. Its hand print is on every economic downturn that has robbed American’s of their money for the past 80 years, as the Fed has followed a policy of flooding the economy with their easy money and credit. When everyone is in debt up to their eyeballs, the bubble bursts and is followed by a painful recession or depression. To save us from the total devastation they have created, the Fed then rides to our rescue with its printing press causing excessive inflation and the erosion of the purchasing power of the dollar. These policies have made slaves of us all with the exception of the power elite.

A dollar created during the birth of the Fed in 1913 is now worth about a penny thanks to the policies of the Fed. The repeal of its mandate would signal the return of a stable currency. It would provide Americans with incentive to save as they would no longer have to fear inflation eroding their savings. These saving could then be used to return America to the status of producer and exporter to the world.

What Ron Paul tried to explain in the presidential debates

Between interruption, ridicule and unscheduled station breaks, Ron Paul tried to tell us how the Fed policy benefits a few at the expense of many. The beneficiaries are those in position to take advantage of the cycles in monetary policy, with the main beneficiaries being those who receive access to artificially inflated money and/or credit before the inflationary effects of the policy impact the entire economy. They are the people who get to use the newly printed money first.

Think of it like this. Suppose you are the first person in your town to be allowed to print money in your basement. You print up a million or two and go out to spend it. You can buy almost anything you want, because now you are richer than almost everyone else. Then permission to print money is granted to 25% of all the people in your town. They all print up a bucket full of money and go out to spend it. Obviously, there are only so many palaces and luxury cars available, so with that many people wanting to buy them the prices move up swiftly. And finally everybody in your town is allowed to print money in their basements. At this point the money has become virtually worthless because it has lost all meaning. This is the point at which an economy collapses.

The people’s appetite for big government has tacitly condoned Fed policy. It has allowed the politicians from both parties to use inflation to cover up the true costs of their welfare-warfare spending of American’s future.

The Congress has no authority under the Constitution to delegate control of the nation’s monetary policy to the Federal Reserve. The Constitution does not empower the government to erode the American standard of living through inflationary monetary policy. Constitutional mandate regarding monetary policy whould permit only currency backed by stable commodities such as gold and silver to be used as legal tender. Abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning to a constitutional system would enable America to return to a monetary system where the value of money is consistent because it is tied to a real store of value. This is the type of monetary system that is the basis of a true free-market economy.

Your money and gold

The dollar is nothing more that what it looks like – a piece of paper with some fancy design and some numbers on it. It has no intrinsic worth like a loaf of bread, a tank or gas, a person to fix the plumbing, or a gold coin. The name for it is fiat currency, meaning it is a currency that is backed only by thin air.

Throughout most of history, gold has served as the basic money of all people wherever it has been available. It has been chosen by the markets of the world as the most valuable commodity on earth. Why is this no longer the case? Governments have destroyed the gold standard because they regarded it as too inflexible. This inflexibility is the friend of free markets, making governments keep their financial houses in order. Banks are more careful about lending when they can’t rely on a lender of last resort like the Fed, with access to a printing press. Inflexibility means prices are more stable. The problems of inflation and business cycles disappear completely. Gold and economic freedom are inseparable. Deficit spending is a scheme for the confiscation of wealth and the enslavement of the people.

When money is as good as gold, the government cannot manipulate the money supply for its own ends. The gold standard puts severe limits on the government’s ability to spend, borrow, and create hair-brained programs. The government is forced to raise revenue through taxation, rather than inflation, a task not so easily achieved. Without a gold standard, the government is free to conspire with the Fed to print money without limit. Under the gold standard, the supply of money regulates itself. What the government and the Fed are doing now is creating the spread of mass misery for most people in the U.S., people they were mandated to serve.

Can the gold standard be reinstituted? Certainly it can. The dollar can be redefined in terms of gold. Interest rates can reflect the real laws of supply and demand. The doors of the Fed can be permanently shuttered and no one would miss it except for the few who benefited from its policies. What would motivate us to do this? We would have to be willing to renounce our enslavement. We would have to fall in love with freedom again.

What we can do

The outcry for the abolition of the Federal Reserve is growing louder. Commodities investor par excellance Jim Rogers is calling for the Fed to be abolished to save the world from massive inflation. TV host Glenn Beck is criticizing the Fed for its role in the current financial debacle. According to Beck, “When everyone was meeting with our Secretary of Treasury Henry Paulson, I thought to myself: ‘Who the hell is representing the American people?’”

Wall Street Journal financial editor Steven Moore is asking, “Who elected Ben Bernanke? Who Elected Alan Greenspan?”

The time is right. People have had enough. Now is the time for Americans to come out of their debt induced comas and start calling their congressmen and women, asking them to support Paul’s bill to abolish the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is as deadly to the future of Americans as the FDA and the pharmaceutical industry. There can be no end to these manufactured financial crises until the Fed’s rule is replaced by an honest, debt-free money policy.

See Mike Adam’s wonderful article about the threat posed to you by the Federal Reserve. It contains a listing of the members of Congress if you need to find out who your representatives are. Call them, email them and write them that you are vehemently opposed to the continuation of the Federal Reserve. Tell them you support the passage of House Resolution 2755.

Chuck Baldwin is the only candidate vowing to do this.

Not McCain, not Obama, not Barr, not McKinney, nor Nader.
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy