babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » rabble content   » news by the rest of us   » Concession or Confession Speach?

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Concession or Confession Speach?
Red Rambler
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15703

posted 06 November 2008 07:19 AM      Profile for Red Rambler   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
John McCain and his running mate, Sarah Palin have repeatedly insinuated that Senator Obama has a socialistic economic approach and is pursuing a socialistic agenda. They have also on numerous occasions charged that Obama has close ties to terrorists whom he allegedly “pals around with”. McCain has urged Obama “to come clean” about his terrorist associates.

Let's take what McCain/Palin say at face value, after all McCain prides himself on “straight talk”. That is, at minimum Obama is a closet socialist who befriends terrorists and their anti-american views. However, a voter can be forgiven if she, based on McCain's remarks, concludes Obama is indeed a real, dyed-in-the-wool socialist. After all is not a socialist one who pursues a socialist agenda? Certainly McCain/Palin have never accused Obama of being a full-fledged terrorist but they certainly hinted at his supposed terrorist sympathies.

So, what are we to make of McCain's concession speech? It has been described by pundits as compelling, gracious, upfront, classy and as one of the best concession speeches ever delivered.

In his talk McCain warmly congratulated Obama, pledged to do all in his power to help him and urged his supporters to offer “...our next president our good will and earnest effort.” So why would McCain offer the socialist and terrorist leaning president-elect his support and urge his followers to do likewise?

Does McCain really want to help advance a socialist agenda on America? Should he not have urged his supporters to be wary and vigilant of their new leader who has yet to come clean about his terrorist ties?

McCain did not warn the American people to be fearful of the president-elect. He did quite the contrary, he urged them to support their new leader.

We are left to conclude that either McCain doesn't believe the charges that he and Palin levelled against Obama are true, which makes his campaign a fraud. Or else, he stands behind his sleazy allegations and insinuations which means his concession speech is a fraud. Take your choice!


From: St Albert AB | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 06 November 2008 07:28 AM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
All campaigns are frauds, really. I very much like Obama, but he said stuff I'm sure he had to say during he campaign. Barney Frank said as much in an interview I saw.

It's the game, and it's why I always say elections will be the death of democracy.

McCain's consession speach was made with posterity in mind, and McCain knew he was speaking to an audience that during the campaign he was talking over, to tell Joe the Plumber about Comrade Barak bin Laden.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
AmericanWoman
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15694

posted 07 November 2008 10:20 AM      Profile for AmericanWoman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Red Rambler:
Does McCain really want to help advance a socialist agenda on America? Should he not have urged his supporters to be wary and vigilant of their new leader who has yet to come clean about his terrorist ties?

McCain did not warn the American people to be fearful of the president-elect. He did quite the contrary, he urged them to support their new leader.

We are left to conclude that either McCain doesn't believe the charges that he and Palin levelled against Obama are true, which makes his campaign a fraud. Or else, he stands behind his sleazy allegations and insinuations which means his concession speech is a fraud. Take your choice!


I never thought of it that way, but you make really good points. I have to conclude that McCain never believed the charges he and Palin leveled against Obama are true, so I think he may have been trying to undo some of the 'damage' that they'd done with their false charges now that the election is over. I think a lot of people thought he was waging a less than honest campaign, and I think that helped him lose the election as decidedly as he did.


From: usa | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
pogge
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2440

posted 07 November 2008 10:43 AM      Profile for pogge   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
McCain has a history of bad behaviour followed by earnest and sincere apologies. The institutional media in the U.S. have a history of buying into it and assisting him with his rehabilitation.
From: Why is this a required field? | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca