Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

McCain gets owned ... by the View?!

Comments

  • #2
    bobbyjoe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 798 ✭✭✭bobbyjoe


    It is depressing that a chat show exposed more of his bull than so called journalists.


  • #3
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,729 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    my that video is quiet
    It is depressing that a chat show exposed more of his bull than so called journalists.

    What bull now?


  • #4
    utick
    Closed Accounts Posts: 562 ✭✭✭utick


    im gona vote for mcain, too many celebrities telling everyone to vote for obama


  • #5
    The Raven.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,008 ✭✭✭The Raven.


    Overheal wrote: »
    my that video is quiet

    I found it quite civilised. It makes a welcome change from the irritating tactics of O'Reilly and the boring, condescending posturing of Gibson. Why do they have to try so hard to tear these people to shreds? Surely the objective of these interviews is to provide useful information regarding the aspirations and intentions of the nominees, rather than a display of ruthless humiliation by sadistic interviewers.

    I must say McCain made a very vigorous entrance, not at all what one might expect from a man with one foot in the grave, as painted by the chorus of vultures.


  • #6
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,729 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    The Raven. wrote: »
    I found it quite civilised. It makes a welcome change from the irritating tactics of O'Reilly and the boring, condescending posturing of Gibson. Why do they have to try so hard to tear these people to shreds? Surely the objective of these interviews is to provide useful information regarding the aspirations and intentions of the nominees, rather than a display of ruthless humiliation by sadistic interviewers.

    I must say McCain made a very vigorous entrance, not at all what one might expect from a man with one foot in the grave, as painted by the chorus of vultures.
    I meant the Volume. I had to turn off the TV and put on headphones.

    I agree it was civil and fun a bit. I dont see how he got owned though? Hobbes you seem to have it out for McCain and Palin.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Hobbes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,264 ✭✭✭✭Hobbes


    Overheal wrote: »
    I agree it was civil and fun a bit. I dont see how he got owned though? Hobbes you seem to have it out for McCain and Palin.

    You didn't hear the parts where he was pointed out he was lying about Obama on the lipstick on a pig and the sex to toddlers.

    For those that don't know. Obama said "You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig" when referring to the economy. The McCain camp jumped on it and tried to claim that he was referring to Palin when he wasn't. Also pointed out the irony that he had done the same when referring to Hillarys plans.

    As for the sex-ed for Toddlers which Obama supported. It was in relation to teaching toddlers how to watch out for pedophiles/sex abuse. It wasn't explicit sex ed that teenagers would get. Yet McCain camp trying to sell it as the latter.

    Or how about pointing out asking McCain what Palin is going to reform and he can't answer.

    Or pointing out that Palins choices of Pro-life are far more extreme then McCain.

    Or McCain lying about earmark spending in regards to Palin.

    Do I need to go on?

    Out for Palin/McCain? o_O All I have to do is post them talking to show how wrong they are for the country.


  • #8
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,729 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    and Obama is Right for it?


  • #9
    Hobbes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,264 ✭✭✭✭Hobbes


    Overheal wrote: »
    and Obama is Right for it?

    See thats the problem with the US. You only get to choose between two people (even though the Republican party has more then McCain running for president).

    Even if Obama is not right for it, McCain certainly is not at all. Even Greenspan has said that McCains economic plan is going to seriously fuk up America more it is already.

    Of course like the woman on the view it would be great if McCain magically turned into older McCain that was before running for president. But that is unlikely to happen, and god forbid if he did get into office and something happened to him having Palin as president is downright disastrous for America, if not the world.


  • #10
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,729 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Hobbes wrote: »
    For those that don't know. Obama said "You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig" when referring to the economy. The McCain camp jumped on it and tried to claim that he was referring to Palin when he wasn't. Also pointed out the irony that he had done the same when referring to Hillarys plans.
    I didn't know that one. But I did know the difference between a pitbull and a hockey mom.


Advertisement