"That One"

[babytrees]

As petulant as the "that one" comment was, it pales in comparison to the patronizing response to the young African-American man, when McCain said, "You've probably never heard of Fannie Mae or Freddy Mac." Unbelievable.

That's what I kept thinking....actually what I thought was "That was demeaning, you old goat"

 

[Mr Man]

well you should look back on the dis and see all of the whining about obama calling mccain "John"......
if you think this thread is whining....

Too much work....... this place has been extremely active the last few weeks..... plus, I live in the present with my eye on the future......reading the Tea Leaves and lamenting the past is not my thang.....

I do recall that Sarah asked if she could call Sen Biden "Joe" before the debate started though...... I thought that was nice.

 

[Quiksilvr]

Do you mean like Bush terrorized the Iraqi's for years and then invaded them under false pretenses? Like that? How 'bout those WMD's? How about that mushroom? All approved by John Mc Cain! Now we are threatening to bomb Iran and to music to boot!
Trying to make Obama the hawk is beyond absurd!

Getting so upset about "that one" is not beyond absurd, but I think it hits right at absurd.

Amazing that the only thing you can do is jump on Bush and say "well what ABOUT THAT?"

That's irrelevant. It had nothing to do with my point. My point was that Obama made an "offensive" comment to Pakistanis and I don't see you getting so upset on their behalf. Duh, this has nothing to do with President Bush or John McCain (or Obama, really). I'm trying to make the point that both candidates make remarks that someone out in the wide world might find "offensive", so getting so upset about such a minor remark like "that one" is ridiculous. I would think that irrespective of the candidate I support.

 

[Goofyluver]

I think JM's use of "that one" was disrespectful. If you take the use of "that one" in the context of his speech...it was disrespectful.

Do I find it offensive personally? No.

Do I think it was disrespectful? Absolutely.

Words alone are just that...words. Taken in context, meaning can change.

I thought overall JM came off as having ruffled feathers. Not angry per se...but annoyed.

 

[bicker]

So let me ask you - you are okay with ...

Those are a set of distortions of reality, as far as I'm concerned. They're twisted deliberately to make the reality sound nefarious, when it is not. It's intellectual dishonesty, and therefore not worthy of consideration.

 

[shortbun]

To me, he sounded like some petulant grandparent chastizing a child. If I have to listen to him say how 'proud' he is of Sarah Palin one more time, I'm going to scream. It's so condesending to her as if she's a high school kid having done well in a play. She certainly deserves more respect from her running mate than that!!! Where is the outrage on this from the women supporting her? Afraid to chastise the old man? Afraid he'll call you 'that one?' Someone needs to get to him and tell him to wipe that lecherous grin off his face while he's telling people how 'proud' he is of her at the very least. It's creepy. One more thing-I am NOT John McCain's 'friend.' If he doesn't get a thesaurus and find another term for it, he's going to cause me to join the drinking games being played round the country. He puts the phrase 'my friends' in the most awkward places and it's tired.

 

[bicker]

I am impressed that you are able to discern someone's "innate disrespect and inability to control himself" from two words in a boring debate.

I actually watched the whole debate, and have watched a lot of McCain's recent public appearances. So, yes, I have more than enough to make some evaluations of McCain's current demeanor. I'm sorry if those evaluations make you feel bad.

 

[corndog]

That's the essential disagreement here. Defend your assertion (in bold) if you wish, or accept that it is invalid.

I accept your disagreement as invalid. Further, it is intellectually dishonest, and, therefore, not worthy of consideration.

 

[bicker]

Do I find it offensive personally? No. Do I think it was disrespectful? Absolutely.

And for me, it wasn't a matter of the offense, but rather the fact that it showed that McCain is not able to accomplish this simple task which he most surely must have intended: appearing Presidential during the debate.

 

[akhenaten]

Too much work....... this place has been extremely active the last few weeks..... plus, I live in the present with my eye on the future......reading the Tea Leaves and lamenting the past is not my thang.....

I do recall that Sarah asked if she could call Sen Biden "Joe" before the debate started though...... I thought that was nice.

lol i did not expect you to actually look....
i've never seen you conduct such research on the dis.... and you notice i did not bother to find you a link....

I thought it was nice also and she did well..especially compared to some previous interviews....
as a woman ..i am happy that she did not fall on her face...
I strongly disagree with her on many issues ..and i don't like the tone of her campaigning lately.... but if you don't have facts and ideas ...you sling lots of mud...

 

[FayeW]

So let me ask you - you are okay with a man who associates with an unrepentant domestic terrorist? You are okay with the fact that he listened to his pastor speak of racism and hatred for our country for 20 yrs? You are okay with a man who says are troops are air raiding and killing civilians? Why is this "mudslinging"? I happen to call it the "truth".
.

Here's the thing. Bill Ayers did express remorse in a letter that he sent to the New York Times on Sept 15th, 2001. There was a link to that letter posted somewhere here yesterday, and if I can remember what post it was in, I will link it again, however, I am sure you can google it yourself if you wish. The man in question did some terrible things 40 years ago, but has since gone on to make amends to society by becoming a valued member of the education system in Chicago. They even named him Citizen of the Year in 1997. This man has been given a job shaping the young minds at a noted Chicago University, so sitting on a board designed to help fund education programs probably didn't seem like such a bad move for a young lawyer starting his political career, given that he was (and is) a respected educator.

As for Rev Wright, well , unless you have seen video footage of every sermon he has given in the last 20 years, that proves that A) he was "spewing racism and hatred from the pulpit" with each and every sermon, and B) that Obama was present for each and every sermon, you have no idea what Obama heard in church. Maybe Wright gets all fired up every now and again, but guess what, racism is alive and well in your country and I am sure that some of what he had to say in the last 20 years at least started out from a kernel of truth. I bet there was a fiery emotional sermon the day Rodney King was beaten in Los Angeles.

Air raids and killing civilians? It has happened. We've lost some people in Afghanistan to friendly fire, when your boys dropped a bomb on ours, so you have to accept and acknowledge that in war, sometimes innocent people are killed. To be outraged because Obama acknowledges it is ridiculous.

 

[HakunaMatata2]

So let me ask you - you are okay with a man who associates with an unrepentant domestic terrorist? You are okay with the fact that he listened to his pastor speak of racism and hatred for our country for 20 yrs? You are okay with a man who says are troops are air raiding and killing civilians? Why is this "mudslinging"? I happen to call it the "truth".

For John McCain's sake you'll be happy to see this end? John McCain doesn't need your pity. He's been through plenty. Last night he did just fine. He was tortured in Vietnam for 5 yrs....getting through a debate with the MOST LIBERAL senator in our country will not tire or weaken him dispite what many of you think or wish.

Well said!
McCain is a man that was tortured for 5 years and has permanent disabilities because of that. Yet, Obama's supporters are complaining because his feeling might be hurt since he was referred to as 'that one'. I'll bet McCain and all the other POWs would loved to have traded their torture for that phrase.

 

[bicker]

I accept your disagreement as invalid. Further, it is intellectually dishonest, and, therefore, not worthy of consideration.

Is that the new Republican tactic? Just take every valid objection by the other side and repeat it back.

 

[Quiksilvr]

There is no high horse here. "That one" is a big deal. This is the tenor of this election, a product mostly of what McCain's supporters have decided are "big deals". Obama was likely willing to just stick to the issues, but McCain felt the need to go down the path this election is now on.

I guess we disagree on the importance of this comment. I challenge you to name a presidential election in which the "tenor" was different from this one. Every presidential election is marred by smear tactics. You speak as if McCain was the first person to do this.

Weren't Democrats smearing president Bush as an idiot entitled drug addict in 2000 and then as an idiot, entitled drug addict warmonger in 2004? Didn't Bush swift-boat John Kerry? Didn't everyone smear Bill Clinton because of his extramarital affairs? Wasn't Al Gore smeared as a fat wooden statue who couldn't make people laugh if he had Letterman writing his jokes, and as a guy who dropped out of law school because he couldn't hack it, etc.? Come on, this is nothing new.

 

[robinb]

My mother is about the same age as Senator McCain and she occasionally uses the term "That One" to refer to people and it is never used in a respectful way.

 

[kristilew]

So let me ask you - you are okay with a man who associates with an unrepentant domestic terrorist?

Oh, please. I've served on boards with unrepentant Republicans, and I've managed not to be sullied. An "associate" is just that, not a privileged advisor. As POTUS, Obama will have to associate with every kind of person to do his job well. That doesn't mean he'll be influenced by all of them.

 

[shortbun]

Those are a set of distortions of reality, as far as I'm concerned. They're twisted deliberately to make the reality sound nefarious, when it is not. It's intellectual dishonesty, and therefore not worthy of consideration.

Intellectual dishonesty is perfect term for those things. Thank you Bicker for your thoughtful clarity. It's refreshing.

 

[bicker]

Weren't Democrats smearing president Bush as an idiot entitled drug addict in 2000 and then as an idiot

During which debate did Kerry call Bush an idiot, with Bush standing in the room?

 

[Quiksilvr]

During which debate did Kerry call Bush an idiot, with Bush standing in the room?

LOL. Good point. You win there.

Edit: I kind of wish he had... now that would have been funny.

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

And for me, it wasn't a matter of the offense, but rather the fact that it showed that McCain is not able to accomplish this simple task which he most surely must have intended: appearing Presidential during the debate.

I agree.

It was honestly surprising to me that he didn't blow Sen. Obama out of the water in this debate. When it started, I held my breath seeing all I've heard over the last few months is what a stud McCain is in the Town Hall format. He ended up looking deflated and a bit petty. Not his best night, and a shell, really, of the performance he gave at Saddleback.