Wednesday, June 04, 2008

The Difference Between John McCain And Barack Obama

Sen. John McCain describes the difference between him and Sen. Barack Obama in a way that says so much about who the two men are:

"I don’t seek the presidency on the presumption I’m blessed with such personal greatness that history has anointed me to save my country in its hour of need,” [John McCain] said. “I seek the office with the humility of a man who cannot forget my country saved me."

17 comments:

tarrandwoolley said...

Actually, I like Obama's description of himself better than McCain's sarcastic approach to try to tear someone down:

"I face this challenge with profound humility, and knowledge of my own limitations. But I also face it with limitless faith in the capacity of the American people. Because if we are willing to work for it, and fight for it, and believe in it, then I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth. This was the moment – this was the time – when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves, and our highest ideals."

McCain's speech was robotic, hollow, anti-climatic and antagonistic.

roger61611 said...

Obama should have described how he engaged in the long Chicago tradition of dirty politics to claw his way up and then defeated a field of idiots and one tired hag to win the nomination.

Obama is at best a socialist, and the spokesmodel for partial birth abortion.

artfuggins said...

Why does Obama always commend McCain for his service and sacrifice to his country and yet McCain only ridicules and uses sarcasm toward Obama....could this be a McCain character flaw. No wonder he is one of the most unpopular Republican senators with the other republican senators. Wait till he starts throwing the F word around like he does with his fellow GOP senators....

Nick said...

Gimme a break! Obama thinks he's the messiah who has come to save us from global warming!

artfuggins said...

One difference you didnt mention is that McCain represents a third Bush term while Obama represents change.

Doug said...

McCain: "It's my turn, dammit." Did I mention, "me, me, me, me?"

Concerned Taxpayer said...

The only change Obama represents is higher taxes, more extreme liberalism, less security for this country, and a lot of empty words.

Concerned Taxpayer said...

Obama is a MASTER at using the system to help him, his church, his pastors, his political career, and his other liberal causes.

Concerned Taxpayer said...

If McCain represents a third Bush term, Obama represents a second Carter term.

artfuggins said...

Concerned Taxpayer, let's do a little review.....Carter's term....high oil prices, rising costs, housing slump, conflict in the Middle East..sounds like that was a mirror of what the Bush term has been.....so McCain can represent a return to Carter and a third Bush term. Fortunately Carter has redeemed himself as a former president.

Jeff said...

Is there a single issue of fact in these comments?

Peace

tarrandwoolley said...

Jeff, no, most things anti-Obama on Advance Indiana are not based in fact, just fear mongering. However, here is a fact for you Jeff, just announced by the DNC June 5, 2008:

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and the Obama for America Campaign today announced that the DNC will no longer accept Washington lobbyist donations, making the same commitment as Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee for president.

"The DNC and the Obama Campaign are unified and working together to elect Barack Obama as the next president of the United States. Our presumptive nominee has pledged not to take donations from Washington lobbyists and from today going forward the DNC makes that pledge as well," said Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean. "Senator Obama has promised to change the way things are done in Washington and this step is a sure sign of his commitment. The American people's priorities will set the agenda in an Obama Administration, not the special interests."

True Conservative said...

The truth is:

In the 2004 election, PACs provided about 10 percent of the DNC's total fundraising, or about $31 million. So far in 2008, less than 3 percent of the committee's money has come from PACs, or $2.1 million, but forgoing PAC money for the rest of the election leaves a lot of money from labor unions' PACs, especially, on the table. The DNC's opposition, the better-financed Republican National Committee, has been less reliant on PAC money--about 1 percent in both '04 and '08. (Will we see John McCain prod the RNC to match the Democrats' pledge? It wouldn't cost Republicans much to do so.)

As for lobbyist money, it's even less significant. Individuals who work at lobbying firms, as well as their families, contributed just under $1 million in 2004 to both the DNC and RNC, we at the Center for Responsive Politics calculate. In this election, the lobbying industry's contributions have barely exceeded $50,000 to the DNC and $135,000 to the RNC. (Lobbyists probably find better returns on their investments when they give directly to politicians.)

Note that these totals don't include registered lobbyists who work in-house for corporations, industry groups and unions--we classify them separately according to their industry--but our researchers are working to calculate how much they and all other federally registered lobbyists have given. Like Obama, the DNC will be refusing contributions from federally registered lobbyists only, not individuals who work in other capacities at lobbying firms and not their family members. Money from lobbyists at the state and local level will continue to be accepted, presumably.
Obama takes money from all these folks just wrapped ina diffrent package.

from opensecret.org. Maybe some of the liberal democrats might want to look at just where his money comes from. Why is taking money from Unions any different. I guess the only diffrenece is their members don't have a choice.

Lance Rasmussen said...

"Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and the Obama for America Campaign today announced that the DNC will no longer accept Washington lobbyist donations, making the same commitment as Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee for president."

Will the DNC still accept donations from the wives and families of lobbyists, just like Obama?

legaldiva said...

The difference...one is completely uninspiring and must bash his opponent to describe why he wants to be president...one believes that the American people should have a voice in the process and can relate to those people because he's been one of us...let me think...I'll go with the second option. Obama is going to be our next president, and I am proud our country is finally moving toward a positive future.

tarrandwoolley said...

Probably. Every donor has to be linked to a business or person in some fashion or another. Otherwise, where would they be employed - how would they make money? In any event, would should starting look at Cindy McCain and the Beer Wholesale lobby....hmmmm. Where are McSame's nearly 2 million individual donors?

Lance Rasmussen said...

"Probably. Every donor has to be linked to a business or person in some fashion or another"

There's a big difference between being the relation of a registered lobbyist and being the relation of "some person" at "some business". I don't even care that Obama takes money from lobbyists' families, it's that he tries to be all high and mighty about not taking money from lobbyists themselves that irks me.