US News
Report: McCain abandoning Michigan
Oct 2, 2008, 21:45 GMT
Washington - Presidential hopeful John McCain is withdrawing his campaign from Michigan after concluding there's little chance of defeating Barack Obama in the working class state.
McCain, the Republican nominee, will halt television and mailing campaigns, Politico reported Thursday, and shift staff to other states that are still competitive, some of them ones that Democrats typically win.
A McCain aid told Politico the decision was based in Michigan's preference for Democrats and because of the resources the Obama camp has poured into the state.
'It was always a long shot for us to win,' the aide said of the northern state.
McCain will focus more on Wisconsin, which went Democrat in 2004, and improve his defences in Ohio and Florida, two states that backed President George W Bush, as well in Pennsylvania, where the race remains tight.
McCain's pullout should also free up some resources for Obama, but his campaign said will remain focused on Michigan.
'We will continue to fight for every vote in Michigan because middle class families there just cannot afford more of the same,' Obama spokesman Bill Burton said.
COMMENT
blog comments powered by DisqusLatest Headlines in US
- 1. Mitt Romney Addresses Tea Party Summit Pictures
- 2. Seven injured as US Navy plane crashes into apartments
- 3. At least three injured in US Navy plane crash
- 4. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, others to face death penalty trial
- 5. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, four others to face death penalty trial
Older Talkback
page: 1
49 to go. A winner never quits and a quitter never wins!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws
Yes, that's right: Obama doesn't know how many states there are in the USA.
So what? Exactly what does this have to do with the old man quitting in a state he said less than a month ago he needed to win?
One down
'49 to go. A winner never quits and a quitter never wins!'
So much for a 50-state Obama campaign. Now down to 46 max
Exactly 44 years after Lyndon B. Johnson became the last Democrat to capture the state of North Dakota in a presidential election, it looks like Barack Obama won't be the next.
The Associated Press reported this evening and an Obama spokeswoman confirmed that the Chicago-based campaign is pulling its 50-some staffers out of the heavily Republican state full of embittered small towns...
Obama supporters hope that their months of work, 11 closing North Dakota field offices and widespread television advertising in the rural state may benefit down-ticket Democrats on Nov. 4. The Obama staff evacuation comes as early balloting is about to start there.[...]
Earlier, Obama halted television advertising in Georgia. Idaho was conceded a Democratic write-off early on, as is Alaska now, given the presence of its popular Republican Gov. Sarah Palin as the vice presidential running mate on the GOP ticket.
latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/09/
'So what?'
So what if Obama doesn't know how many states are in the union? Right, fools like you will still support him.
'Exactly what does this have to do with the old man quitting in a state he said less than a month ago he needed to win?'
It means Obama is an idiot and he is only running to get a slice of the money he helps other people like Jim Johnson, Franklin Raines, Penny Pritzker, Jamie Gorelick and Tony Rezko steal.
and jackasses like you would vote for a turkey if the GOP(Graft Obfuscation Perfidy) ran one for president. Oh, wait. You already did.
It's name was G W Bush.
Only because the defeat-o-crats ran another traitorous disgrace by the name of Kerry.
The first Bush election I wrote in McCain.
Wrong, A-hole. Im not voting for a republican.
So you have a long history of backing losers. What an idiot you are. No wonder you vote republican. I am amazed that your brain generates enough electricity for you to use a keyboard. Or, is EssPee doing that for you?
Wrong, A-hole. Im not voting for a republican.
No, you aren't even an American you basement dwelling creepy loser. You will be voting for whomever is going to lose to Paul Martin...
'So you have a long history of backing losers.'
In case you haven't noticed, Bush won the second election, you moron.
' Or, is EssPee doing that for you?'
No, unlike you, you pathetic, sad waste of a life I don't hang on SP4's every word. I hope that he uses a little reverse psychology on you and tells you NOT to eat all the pills out of your mothers medicine cabinet.
I bet you are that Smiley D a-hole, the stalker who can't get things right. Go play with your imaginary friends. If they won't play with you, go play with yourself. If that limp litle thing won't play then go off yourself, imbecile.
You say: 'No, you aren't even an American you basement dwelling creepy loser. You will be voting for whomever is going to lose to Paul Martin...'
I am an American, jackass. If you knew anything about foreign countries, you would realise that Paul Martin has been out of politics for years. As for Bush 'winning' the second term, is still does not fly in the face of the fact he is a turkey. As for the being the basement dweller, that must be you. Your head is a permanent resident up your anal orifice. Now that is a REAL basement dwelling, crap for brains.
EssPee Drug Addict doesn't know any psychology. However, he is in need of the services of a trained professional. And, unlike you. I'm not stupid enough to fall for it. I'd advise you to see a Psychiatrist as well. You have some real serious issues to deal with, if I get on your one and only nerve. By the way, EssPee claims to be an adult. As such, he doesn't need an wimpy little scumbag like you to try and play big brother and protect him from the big, bad world. Go bag and play in you cat's litter box, there's all sorts of treats in there for you to taste. As for your hopes, keep enjoying your fantasy world, a-hole.
And again idiot, what does that have to do with the old man being a quitter? ND, AK, ID and GA were never States that Obama (or anyone in his campaign) said he needed to win? The old fart is even running TV ads in Arizona---Arizona!!!
Do you realy need an outsider to tell you that it was not Obama who made a mistake on the number of states that make up the USA ?It was Biden,and I guess there are more important issues to be debated with for more important consequences like :why adopt a bail out plan that will cost every single US citizen ten thousands of dollars without any inquiry about the responsibility of the corporate tycoons involved or any return on your mone ?
By diverting from these issues you allow yourselves to be mocked by those that have every reason to do so.
so mccain doesn't like michigan i live in michigan so we now forget mccain and vote for obama..
Announcement of The American Republic policy platform, after the elections is done on purpose. Americans are too busy fearing the bailout, presidential mud wrestling contest and other contrived obstacles. We are offering Americans a clear choice only after they realize that the elections and promises are but a strategic propaganda tactic to give false hope to all Americans. Changing a government is risky business, and requires an honest exact approach. There are lives at stake if we fail. This is all real, as is everything around us. The internet is an excellent tool to be used to get a new message to the people. You know in your hearts that America has failed itself and the rest of the world. Killing people, framing people, using the military to defend business interests, not taking care of the middle class and the poor, lying, cheating, and only serving those that have much is not acceptable. Search the internet for the discord of those Americans that are truly unhappy, and yearn for a legitimate change unlike Obama and McCain promise. The US Congress has done nothing but fill their own houses with the riches of the land.
As crazy and insane as this American Republic sounds, it will happen in America. It happened in 1770, and its time to happen again, and it will, except this time all Americans will help.
...you have asked a very good question:
Why not indict the tychoons (no such thing anymore) for their ...what?
was any money embezzled?
was anyone defrauded?
what part was against the law? You remember the law, right Tonny?
One other thing Tonny: go watch O'Reilly tearing into Rep. Barney Frank the other night and then ask you question again. If they start indicting folks, which Congressmen will have to show up for the hearings...
Frank
Dodd
Biden
Obama?
Here are the guys who tried to stop it all:
This was preventable.Sep 21st, 2008 - 01:59:13
John McCain predicted Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac crises, pushed 2005 legislation to prevent trouble:
The 'FEDERAL HOUSING ENTERPRISE REGULATORY REFORM ACT OF 2005' would have headed this off but it was killed in the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs by Chris Dodd who recieved the most money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
President Bush sought to rein in Fannie and Freddie in 2003.
The Democratic response to Bush in 2003:
“These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. “The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”
Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.
“I don’t see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,” Mr. Watt said.
Be sure to get back to us, Tonny. We're dying to hear the response.
Well then here I am,still wondering why you give taxpayer's money to the Wall Street tycoons without anything in return.If you would only care to read the european section you'd notice the solution we applied to Fortis for a similar problem.Very simply it was nationalized.The governments of Holland Belgium and Luxemburg bought 49,9 percent of the shares at current value,a bargain.In the contract it was arranged for the government to have the majority of the voting power on the direction board,the right to install auditing and controlling boards,the CEO was sacked and the golden parachute that he had tied up to his contract was revoked .A simple solution for a simple problem .The result .The shares have already gone up 20 percent in 2 days,making this operation profitable for the taxpayer .The money invested could well be tripled in a short time frame .Now tell me SP4,why not do the same .
As for the penal responsibility of your own greedy bankers,your conclusion is that ...there should be no investigation,is that correct ?
Please inform the FBI on this,they are already busy....
...not until it is proven that they broke the law. Unlike you Tonny, I accept the fact that we live in a Constitutional Republic, and my whims for retribution must still fall within the confines of the law.
Hey SP4 ... have you forgotten your rants supporting the detention of people without charge and denying legal due process (i.e. habeas corpus) as has been done by George Bush ?
And because of your impulsive zeal .... You have gone on and on about people being guilty of supporting terrorism ... without it being proven in a legal process.
And in those instances ... you thought it was great.
To read your rant above about 'not guilty until proven guilty' is laughable.
You make yourself a joke.
You talk in circles around yourself.
You sway positions with the wind.
You have no guiding principles.
Morality guides my principles professor, not the law. The Constitution is a statement of a collective morality that is supposed to serve liberty.
Go chew on that, and be sure to get back to us.
By the way, everyone at Gitmo is there legally, and if not, their hearing, which they are guaranteed, will determine their status.
does anyone know sp4's location?
we need to pay him a visit .
this person has to be taken out .seriously
Take your best shot, dickhead!
You write 'The Constitution is a statement of a collective morality that is supposed to serve liberty.'
Well, we agree on that.
The only thing is you are selective in when you want to apply it ... or not apply it, as the case may be.
re: your other comment '... everyone at Gitmo is there legally...'
They're not there in accordance with the Constitution SP4 ... you want people arrested and imprisoned without charge ... you supported Bush and Cheney's denial of due process ... the right to see the evidence against them ... You have judged ALL of them guilty without it being proven. etc
NONE of that is according to Constitutional principles.
Like I said SP4 ...
You have no principles.
And you certainly have no understanding of the application of justice outlined in the Constitution
On page two of this article you wrote:
'my whims for retribution must still fall within the confines of the law.'
I couldn't agree more.
But you've shown us, over and over, that you don't even come close to living that principle.
Your comment directly contra-dicks YOUR previous posts, (esp when you support people being arrested and denied due process - for years! - without charge).
You sure do talk circles around yourself SP4
Before you rant again in reply SP4 ...Oct 3rd, 2008 - 20:37:05
On page two of this article you wrote:
sp4 - I know what I wrote
'my whims for retribution must still fall within the confines of the law.'
sp4 - that is correct
I couldn't agree more.
sp4 - see, you can learn if you try
But you've shown us, over and over, that you don't even come close to living that principle.
sp4 - how so?
Your comment directly contra-dicks YOUR previous posts, (esp when you support people being arrested and denied due process - for years! - without charge).
sp4 - under the conditions of the law, these people, being charged as illegitimate combatants i.e. terrorists, or even legitimate combatants, are not entitled to civilian due process, a fact upheld by the highest court in the land.
You sure do talk circles around yourself SP4
sp4- perhaps, you just cannot seem to explain exactly how, unless you include that weak-assed excuse for logic above..
Try again
... you're just to friggin dense to get it.
Let me type it slowly for you.
Even the courts have said Habeas Corpus must be applied (something you oppose) ... when it wasn't, it was outside the confines of law.
The Constitution clearly prohibits arresting and holding indefinitely without charge ... and the constitution has no geographical boundaries specified in it ... it DOES specify how our government is to act in ALL matters of justice ... NOWHERE does it say our government can act differently on foreign soil.
AND ... It's a known fact that arresting without charge and holding indefinitely has not been limited to people overseas ... it's happened to US citizens, taken on US soil ... so be careful when preparing another nonsensical response SP4.
And You SP4, support arresting without charge and torturing people who have not been proven guilty of anything. (most rational people call that 'retribution')
(Let me pin you down and pour water down your throat and see if it feels like torture and retribution to you SP4)
Now don't get your panties in a wad SP4 ...
Guilty people will still be proven guilty through a Constitutional application of justice.
So don't go spewin' about me wanting to let guilty people free. To do so, would not be correct and you'd look even more stupid.
The fact is you prefer to argue about what is proper soldiers 'fashion' ... and if someone isn't dressed like you think they should be, then anything you do to them is justified.
Like I said ...
You have no principles.
You think evil in the world justifies you being equally evil.
You'll never grasp the greater concepts ... you can't grasp the most basic.
I showed you how SP4 ...Oct 3rd, 2008 - 22:25:18
sp4 - yes, and Liberace' died of the Flu...
... you're just to friggin dense to get it.
sp4 - that, I'm afraid does not make me wrong, either.
Let me type it slowly for you.
sp4 - I have a feeling you do a great many things slowly...very slowly..
Even the courts have said Habeas Corpus must be applied (something you oppose) ... when it wasn't, it was outside the confines of law.
sp4 - no, only in cases where the defendant is clearly under civil law and not a military incarceration. - Your Failure to Differentiate
The Constitution clearly prohibits arresting and holding indefinitely without charge ... and the constitution has no geographical boundaries specified in it ... it DOES specify how our government is to act in ALL matters of justice ... NOWHERE does it say our government can act differently on foreign soil.
sp4 - yet the Supremes said exactly that, in the case of a foreign combatant...unless he's proven to be a domestic criminal. - Your Failure to differentiate
AND ... It's a known fact that arresting without charge and holding indefinitely has not been limited to people overseas ... it's happened to US citizens, taken on US soil ... so be careful when preparing another nonsensical response SP4.
sp4 - except, again (..and again, and again) in the case of a combatant. If a 'citizen' is working for a foreign government or entity, a reasonable person would conclude he is, no longer, a simple criminal, and therefore not subject to civilian law, in it's strictest form - Your Failure to Differentiate (just like Bush)
And You SP4, support arresting without charge and torturing people who have not been proven guilty of anything. (most rational people call that 'retribution')
sp4 - I've never advocated torture as a means to get information, although I cannot say I'm against certain types of interrogation. I do however, in the day and age we live in advocate reciprocity of treatments as retaliation for treatment of our own combatants by the enemy. - Your Failure to Differentiate
(Let me pin you down and pour water down your throat and see if it feels like torture and retribution to you SP4)
sp4 - take your best shot...so far your zero for..well...everything...
Now don't get your panties in a wad SP4 ...
SP4 - This is the most useless, boring conversation with the densest libnazi child this site has to offer, and THAT is really saying something here...
Guilty people will still be proven guilty through a Constitutional application of justice.
sp4 - what Fairey tale are you living in? If this Constitution has a legal nexus, and it has one the size of Ohio, how on earth is your fantasy f--k supposed to happen? - again, Your failure to differentiate
So don't go spewin' about me wanting to let guilty people free. To do so, would not be correct and you'd look even more stupid.
sp4 - No, what you want is for everyone, regardless of their status, to be extended the same rights, a simplistic, naive', childish and dangerous premise in the day and age we live in. Fortunately, the courts have yet to agree with you. - again, your failure to differentiate
The fact is you prefer to argue about what is proper soldiers 'fashion' ... and if someone isn't dressed like you think they should be, then anything you do to them is justified.
SP4 - What I believe, is that, in the day and age of the illegitimate combatant, these people should have no rights. Geneva was supposed to define this and it has been perverted to protect those who are not the legitimate combatants of any legitimate nation. This was Bush's biggest mistake after 9/11, in not defining this with a Constitutional Amendment and now it is a twisted path in the courts. Just like you - His failure to differentiate.
Like I said ...
You have no principles.
Sp4 _ none, apparantly that you can grasp, which seems to cover a great many things.
You think evil in the world justifies you being equally evil.
SP4 - only if it serves good - again, your failure to differentiate
You'll never grasp the greater concepts ... you can't grasp the most basic.
SP4 - This is because you are a relativist, a circular thinker i.e. you keep going in circles, never reaching a conclusion of merit. You live in a fantasy world where you imagine YOU have a grasp of the law, of justice and right, while the real picture eludes you. I feel it is you who refuses to grasp the simple concepts, because if you did, you would not like the outcome. - again, your failure to differentiate
Me? I've done the math here, so to speak. I can pick a side and be satisfied I've made the right choice. I can differentiate, and you...simply...very simply...cannot.
So retort,...I cannot wait for you to reply...
we are still seeking information on the location of this sp4 person .
...take off your tinfoil hat, shut off all the Jonas Brothers kiddie porn on your laptop, run upstairs out of your basement, and get one of your three stepdaddies to help you look for me, right after he's done entertaining your mommie and/or your other mommie. Just pick the latino one or any of the other two african-ameircan one's to help. I'm sure they'll just give you some advice about where to look and send you to the street corner to look for me, so they do not have to put their pants back on! Remember, I'm not responsible for the bitch-slapping you will get for interupting them, I only wish that I were.
we are still looking for sp4's whereabouts
..is what happens when libnazis lose the debate...
looky every one sp4 typed a big word.
..is what happens when still other libnazis lose the debate...
page: 1
Obama gives up 50 state strategyOct 2nd, 2008 - 23:45:25
the Obama campaign has apparently scaled back its outsized electoral ambitions. It is already shifting staff abandoning some states, and putting others on notice. If they once technically played in all 50, they're now down to 48 - you can cross Alaska and North Dakota off the list and two other states, Montana and Georgia, are on life support. The choice of Palin not only crushed Obama's hope of winning the Frontier State - the campaign has withdrawn most of its staff and ceased advertising there - it also had repercussions in North Dakota, another hockey-crazed northern state where snow mobile racing and moose burgers apparently resonate. The Obama campaign announced this week that they are redeploying their staff - estimated in some press reports to be more than 50 people.
'We always knew it would be an uphill battle, but because people across the country in Red States and Blue States are hungry for change, we built a grassroots movement we are proud of and an infrastructure that will help candidates up and down the ballot,' says Amy Brundage, an Obama spokeswoman, of the decision to pull out. The news isn't entirely a surprise, as Obama cut advertising in North Dakota by 50% in recent weeks. And the moves come as Obama has been forced to mount more serious defenses of Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin - states where it spent nearly $1.5 million in television advertisements last week.
news.yahoo.com/s/time/20080923/us_time/obamascalesbackhis50statestrateg y
Report this comment