Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
ace...posting a partisan editorial from a Republican colleague of McCain's in the Senate doesnt change the facts.
|
My question is, does Obama really want this issue on the table? I don't think he does. I think his best course of action is to have his people ignore Palin and her record. Every shot taken at her, in my view, will negatively reflect back on him.
-----Added 11/9/2008 at 11 : 17 : 39-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by asaris
I like how in that article bicycle paths and the International Peace Museum are listed as wasteful earmarks. He also admits that she only changed her mind because of bad publicity: "But after witnessing the problems created by earmarks for her state and for the nation's budget, she did what others like me have done: She changed her position...." I'm not sure what relevance Obama and Biden's positions on the bridge have -- they're not running as the anti-earmark candidates. And as dux points out, it's an editorial, written by a Republican, so it's a bit biased. Don't you have any facts you can actually cite to?
|
They are people who could have been changing Washington, but did not. It is a reflection of their failure as Senators, it reflects on the emptiness of the "change" slogan. Again, I am not a fan of McCain either. No Senator has the right to say they are a "change" candidate in my view.
We know how dux feels about the WSJ and editorials that appear in the paper, he often comments on it. I am o.k. with liberals being dismissive of editorials or publications that many people respect. If I were a liberal I would actually be interested in what conservatives have to say and how they view "facts" and issues.