Looks like Obama's handling of Egypt is not the shining example of his foreign policy prowess he would like us to believe it is...

Michale.....

Michale.....

Nope. At the time of the speech, the forecast was for clear skies and 0% chance of rain..

Which is EXACTLY what occurred..

- Charlotte airport issued a weather warning on the day of the speech.

On the MORNING of the day of the speech. A speech that was going to occur more than 12 hours later. In a LOCATION that was more than a dozen miles away from the SPEECH location..

As usual, your "facts" are suspect and even the facts that ARE correct are utterly irrelevant to the issue at hand...

The FACT was, it was a clear night with NO RAIN when Obama gave his speech...

Obama panicked.. Simple as that...

Whether he panicked because of the weather, as YOU claim, or he panicked because he couldn't fill the stadium, the fact of the matter is...

Obama panicked...

A panicky leader is a failed leader...

Michale....

The very facts that PROVE my point..

FACT: DNC officials stated that Obama's speech would be in the BofA stadium "RAIN OR SHINE".

FACT: Approx a week later, the venue was changed to a much smaller location.

FACT: In between the time of the two afore mentioned facts, NO CHANGE IN THE PROJECTED WEATHER OCCURRED.

So, the DNC makes one determination one week and a totally opposite determination the next week and absolutely NO CHANGE IN THE FORECAST HAD OCCURRED.

So, please explain exactly how the change in venue was the "weather" when NO weather change occurred??

"I would LOVE to hear this!"
-Vincent Gambini, MY COUSIN VINNY

The only FACTS we are agreed upon are:
- Weather stations were reporting a 30-40% chance of rain and thunderstorms
- Charlotte airport issued a weather warning on the day of the speech.
- Many media sources have reported a 17,000 person waiting list - including this very media site that you post on.

But of course in Michale-world these are all giant media-Google-CW-weathermen conspiracies. You can respond if you like I'm done with this stupid argument - you can't see any logic or anything that doesn't fit your own bigoted Obama-is-evil world view...

Do you have ANYTHING to dispute the facts???

No, you don't...

Ergo, you are wrong..

There is NO POSSIBLE WAY that the decision to change the venue was based on the weather.

NO..... POSSIBLE..... WAY.......

It's really THAT simple....

Michale.....

Lol ok. You are a lost case. Even when clear facts prove otherwise, you can't see the light. Apparently Democrats can't count very well and didn't know from their ticket sales that the stadium was going to be empty until 2-3 DAYS before the speech... Then, despite the logistical/security issues, they made the last minute decision to switch the speech citing weather as the reason, leaving thousands of people with tickets missing the speech... Sounds perfectly feasible in 'Michale-world' where the President is so well organised he can fake birth certificates for fun! Lol.

Actually, as I note later in the comment, CW's observations support the idea that an empty stadium was not the concern that prompted the change of venue...

CW's observations have absolutely nothing to do with the issue of weather being/not being the reason for the change of venue..

Sorry for not being clearer...

Michale.....

Speaking objectively, it's not suffecient to override the behavior and tendencies of Obama for the last four years..

NEVER, in the last four years (when Obama had control to do so) did he EVER change a venue due to weather...

NEVER.. Not ONCE...

So, we have Obama's history..

Further, we have the DNC saying ONLY a week before that Obama's speech will be at the BoA "RAIN OR SHINE"... It should ALSO be noted that from the time the DNC made that "RAIN OR SHINE" comment until the decision was made to move the venue, *THE WEATHER FORECAST HAD NOT CHANGED*

The weather forecast at the time that the "RAIN OR SHINE" statement was made was the EXACT SAME weather forecast that was in place when the decision to change the venue was made...

Given these FACTS, it is simply IMPOSSIBLE to come to the conclusion that weather was the factor in the decision to change the venue..

NOW...

You MIGHT have an argument that the reason for the change was NOT because of the fear of an empty stadium.

THAT is an arguable point. Especially in light of CW's on the ground observations..

So, we CAN debate THAT point..

But the change of venue was NOT due to the weather forecast, as the DNC claims..

It simply cannot be, due to the facts...

Michale....

I'd hope this would be a lesson but I imagine when you return from your hiatus I will find out it hasn't...

That's better than Democrats who always worry about what the definition of 'is' is :D

wwc.instacam.com/instacamimg/CHRPV/CHRPV_l.jpg

wwc.instacam.com/instacamimg/CHRMS/CHRMS_l.jpg

It's a beautiful clear evening in Charlotte, NC

http://tinyurl.com/9syfenv

No storm clouds whatsoever on Doppler...

Ya know... Even though the facts are clearly and unequivocally on my side...

They DON'T matter....

The PERCEPTION is that Obama panicked when he realized he couldn't fill the venue..

And here we are....

Michale.....

I am.... honored..... :D

Michale.....

But the point is, he has NEVER done that!

Not ONE single time has Obama canceled a speech or moved a speech because of the weather...

NOT ONE SINGLE TIME...

NOW.... When there is evidence that Obama can't fill the venue, NOW all of the sudden, the weather becomes an issue???

There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE to support the conclusion that the venue was changed due to weather..

NO EVIDENCE, sans the DNC's say so...

Yet, there is PLENTY of evidence to support that, RAIN OR SHINE, Obama gives his speeches... PLENTY OF EVIDENCE, up to **AND INCLUDING** the DNC's own words a week or so ago...

A week or so ago, Obama would give his speech at Bank Of America Stadium ***RAIN OR SHINE***....

But, once it was realized that Obama couldn't fill that venue, ALL OF THE SUDDEN, the weather became a factor..

What would Spock say???

Irregardless of all that... Will you still get in???

Michale......

Really don't have time for this, but...

So I thought you always laughed at lefties for saying "Obama is godlike" and yet here you are saying he should have known what the weather would be like 48 hrs before it happened.

Now who is ascribing godlike powers to Obama? Or expecting them?

Give it up -- it's sheer conspiracy theory that Obama cancelled for any other reason than concern for people's safety. After all, if lightning had struck at his speech, what would the right have said then, hmmm?

Sheesh. I mean, really.

-CW

Charlotte's Doppler shows clear..

I have a feeling that Obama is going to look like an ass....

The GOP is going to have a FIELD day with this...

Yea, I have become more partisan, more bitchy, more competitive...

Dunno if it's the Conventions, the closeness of the actual election or the fact that Democrats seem to be frak'ing up left and right... (no pun intended)

But you are correct.. I am more aggressive...

What are Democrats afraid of???

Michale.....

Obama didn't cancel the speech.. He simply cut it short..

Under the cover of a large umbrella, he told thousands gathered before him that while "a little rain never hurt anybody," nobody wanted "anybody struck by lightning." He asked people to return to their cars for their safety, and he retreated briefly to an administration building on the cemetery's grounds. Obama a few minutes later boarded a pair of buses to greet military families that came for the event.

You prove my point for me.

If Obama was as worried about weather as YOU claim he is, he would have never even STARTED the speech. He would have canceled at the first report of possible rain..

Obama has NEVER let weather cancel a speech or cause a change of venue...

This is FACT..

Therefore, such an abundance of caution so far out over weather is completely atypical of Obama.

This is FACT....

Ergo, the only LOGICAL conclusion is that there were other factors that were in play...

And, just so we're clear...

http://wwc.instacam.com/instacamimg/CHRMS/CHRMS_l.jpg

Charlotte is too... :D

This is a losing issue for you. The facts are all on my side..

All you have is the word of the DNC...

I'de fold...

Michale.....

The FACT that Obama has NEVER let rain stop a speech, NEVER let rain cause a speech to be moved

Fact-check: FALSE

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/05/31/storms-force-obama-to-delay-memorial-day-speech/

So Michale how you going to feel tomorrow when Obama delivers a top speech that goes down well then the jobs numbers come out in the morning to really hammer the point through? I think you and Mr Romney will be rather deflated...

Amazing. You provide an article that is pure rhetoric with no facts, evidence or any data at all; I provide a link to actual facts, evidence and data. But I'M the one who has no evidence! Well done.

There is absolutely NOTHING weather related that justifies moving the speech indoors... Especially in light of Obama's personal history of making speeches without ANY regard to weather...

This is a losing issue for you.. Accept it and move on...

Do you realize how far Douglas Airport is away from Bank Of America Stadium??? :D

"Of course, you can PROVE that right!?? Oh that's right, I forgot. You were absent the day the taught LAW at Law School!"
-Tom Cruise, A FEW GOOD MEN

Show me the ad where Romney is saying that Obama is "robbing little old ladies"...

I expect something similar to the DEM ad that has Ryan pushing little old ladies over a cliff...

Besides, if you have a beef with the report, take it up with Politico...

But I am glad to see you acknowledge you have no evidence...

AIRPORT WEATHER WARNING FOR A CLOUD TO GROUND LIGHTNING THREAT AT
THE CHARLOTTE DOUGLAS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
- National Weather Service.

Well, well, well... What have we here??? :D

You are kidding right? My God you are so blind to reality. The CENTRE-PIECE of Romney's campaign is now two (blatantly false) attack ads saying that Obama is just handing out welfare cheques for fun and that he is robbing old-ladies of their Medicare...

No actually we have one piece that is pure rhetoric and opinion compared to another piece with solid factual analysis of numbers (with no OPINION on the numbers - just presenting the facts), with the underlying data based on an external company (the Campaign Media Analysis Group). You might have worked out by now that I'm always going to go with the solid factual non-opinionated analysis over the rhetorical opinion based piece lol.

Amount spending for negative ads..
Barack Obama $90,655,300
Mitt Romney $55,193,460

Sure this is correct. But percentages provide context. It's like saying MILLIONS of Americans believe in rape with no exceptions. Without context and percentage this statement of fact makes the US electorate look very extreme.

Besides, your report only discusses NEGATIVE ads, NOT personal attacks, which is the subject of the Politico report.
NOW do you have anything to dispute the report??
Other than the fact that you just don't like it?

Lololol wow now you're reeaaaally struggling to rebut the fact that Romney uses negative ads more than Obama does. It's not negative it's personal! Lol what do you think a negative ad is? What do you think negative ads attack - Romney's horse??

Here's the difference, Michty..

When Romney goes "negative", he says that Obama is a bad president, that he has messed up the economy, he has not been competent...

When Obama goes "negative", HE says that Romney is a criminal, a cheat, a liar, a felon, a murderer...

Do you see the difference???

What is it about the Left that they refuse to stand their ground and explicitly put a red line in the sand???

"I will not sacrifice the Enterprise. We've made too many compromises already; too many retreats. They invade our space and we fall back. They assimilate entire worlds and we fall back. Not again. The line must be drawn here! This far, no further!"
-Captain Jean Luc Picard, STAR TREK VIII, First Contact

I bring up a piece about bad apples and you respond with, "NO!!! YER WRONG!!!! THE ORANGES ARE AWESOME!!!"

Which is all fine and dandy...

*IF* we were talking about oranges....

Michale.....

NOW do you have anything to dispute the report??

Other than the fact that you just don't like it??

Michale.....

Amount spending for negative ads..

Barack Obama $90,655,300

Mitt Romney $55,193,460

Ya see, I can make stats say whatever *I* want them to say too!! :D

So much for your politico rhetorical piece...

Ahhhh.. OK So we have ONE news outlet that says one thing and we have ANOTHER new outlet that says the opposite..

And, of course, YOU believe the one that supports YOUR position..

WHY am I not surprised!!!! :D

As opposed to the Dem one who looked like it was written, re-written and written again by a bunch of ball-less twits... :D

Michale.....

Obama: 71% negative ads
Romney: 79% negative ads

So much for your politico rhetorical piece...

I actually know there are sites that track the number of negative ads so we can use some of those facts that are much better than rhetoric, let me see if I can find it...

Lol nope I didn't. As I repeated many times, I ignored the Republican platform because it's largely symbolic. If you want to discuss platforms then sure let's do it because the Republican one looks like it was written by people on drugs or a bunch of absolute maniac nut-caes on the right (or both)...

Cue the indignant denials from the kool-aid drinkers... :D

Michale.....

wwc.instacam.com/instacamimg/CHRMS/CHRMS_l.jpg

wwc.instacam.com/instacamimg/CHRPV/CHRPV_l.jpg

No doubt about it..

That's some pretty impressive weather...

http://wwc.instacam.com/instacamimg/CHRLG/CHRLG_l.jpg

Them are some pretty impressive storm clouds...

Yet, you sure had a lot to say about the Republican platform...

Funny how that is, eh?? :D

Michale.....

http://pub2.camera.trafficland.com/image/live.jpg?system=pub&webid=7210&pubtoken=43535ef4aa2f91a7a9085b40f21b2b36&0.11294409630337088

Looks like I-77 @ Brookshire is getting some rain...

Anyone in NC can tell me where the Convention Center is????

Yes I do..

The FACT that Obama has NEVER let rain stop a speech, NEVER let rain cause a speech to be moved..

That is evidence that RAIN is NEVER a factor in Obama's speeches...

Past behavior is certainly evidence, whether you want to concede it or not..

The fact is, Obama has NEVER let weather interfere with his speeches..

This being a FACT, obviously something else was in play..

Do you know what it is??

No, you don't...

Given that there is NO evidence to support ANY other conclusion, then the ONLY logical or rational conclusion is that it was something OTHER than the weather that prompted the decision to move the venue..

Now, ADD to that, the FACT that people had to be bussed in from as far away as Georgia, then what is the ONLY logical conclusion that would fit ALL the facts??

Yep, you guessed it..

Now that THAT is settled...

Ya wanna talk about why Dems flip flopped on god and Israel??? :D

Michale.....

http://www.trafficland.com/city/CLT/camera/12199/

Weather doesn't look too bad at all... :D

My last post on this stupid argument.

Well, I have (and posted) the weather reports for that day

I doubt they'd have made the decision ON THE DAY. That'd be beyond stupid. Like I said without a time machine you don't have any access to the information they had in 2008 when making the decision and are purely speculating. Of course your speculation due to your anti-Obama bias only leads you in one direction.

You have absolutely NO evidence, save the DNC's say so, that the weather is the sole determining factor.

Wow for once I can agree. I don't have evidence that it was just due to weather, just like you don't have evidence that it WASN'T just due to weather. You are speculating based on your own biases. I am not speculating either way but pointing out to you that you are CLEARLY not correct in determining it 'MUST' be due to numbers.

You arguing against the facts like this is just making you look like a bigger moron than Obama will look like at 2200 hrs tonight...

Your idea of a fact is: well I believe the same weather forecasts were present in the days before his speech in 2008 (lol). As if you have some magical time machine that can take you back to 2-3 days before the speech in 2008 to examine the weather forecasts and other factors that led them to make their decision back then.

Link???

And when tonight??? Do you have an exact time frame??

It's kinda relevant, if you want to make your case...

Michale.....

Well, I have (and posted) the weather reports for that day (which is a LOT more reliable than your time machine) and they say that there was a 29% chance of storms (not rain, but storms) on the day of Obama's speech in Colorado...

Because the weather forecasts were not the same. You seriously SERIOUSLY believe that the weather forecast for one evening in 2012 when Obama is presenting a speech is the EXACT SAME as a weather forecast in 2008 when he was presenting a speech? You SERIOUSLY believe this crazy coincidence???

Oh my gods, REALLY!!???

NOW I know you are just being obtuse..

Of course, the weather isn't EXACTLY the same. Are you HONESTLY going to tell me that the 1% difference makes ALL the difference..

And you say that *I* am too far down the rabbit hole???!!!

Why can't you just admit it, michty.. You're wrong.. You have absolutely NO evidence, save the DNC's say so, that the weather is the sole determining factor..

You arguing against the facts like this is just making you look like a bigger moron than Obama will look like at 2200 hrs tonight...

Michale......

http://tinyurl.com/9b4y24q

Obama might pull this out and not look like a maroon....

Michale.....

Lol nope. I jumped in my magical time machine and went back and the weather forecast for that day was different.

If weather is indeed the ONLY factor, then why the two different results?

Because the weather forecasts were not the same. You seriously SERIOUSLY believe that the weather forecast for one evening in 2012 when Obama is presenting a speech is the EXACT SAME as a weather forecast in 2008 when he was presenting a speech? You SERIOUSLY believe this crazy coincidence??? You are so far down the rabbit hole, I don't know if you'll ever make it out...

You mean tonight, right?? :D Or is it tomorrow for you??

Regardless, no it won't mean I was "right"...

Well, it WILL mean that I am "right" insofar as it was a moronic call by the DNC..

But regardless of the weather actually is tonight, the simple fact is that the SAME weather conditions were as probable in 2008 as they will be tonight..

Yet the venue WASN'T moved in 2008...

If weather is indeed the ONLY factor, then why the two different results???

You STILL haven't answered that...

Michale....

Lol nope. I would like to find out how your magical time machine works though. Do only the right-wing media have access to it?

You have similar weather circumstances between Aug 2008 and Sep 2012.

You have similar locales between Aug 2008 and Sep 2012.

Yet, the action taken by the DNC is completely different between Aug 2008 and Sep 2012.

Since the locale is similar and the weather circumstances are similar, WHAT IS DIFFERENT??

WHAT would cause the DNC to do one thing in Aug 2008 and a totally different thing in Sep of 2012..

There is only ONE thing that would cause the different actions...

And THAT is the size of the crowd... The size of the crowd was a LOT bigger in Aug of 2008 than it was going to be in Sep of 2012...

The simple fact that they can fit the crowd in an area made for only 20K people PROVES that...

I know you think that Democrats can't do no wrong, but for gods' sake, face the facts...

Michale.....

Really? You have a time machine that allowed you to go back in time and check the weather forecast in the days preceding Obama's speech? Could I have access to this time machine so I can travel back to yesterday and get my life back from before this stupid argument about your bias began?

Let me ask you this: If it doesn't rain and thunder-storm tomorrow will you be proved correct?

Those same logical and rational reasons existed in 2008..

Why wasn't the speech moved then??

Do you have an answer???

Incidentally here's a good Clinton video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5knEXDsrL4

For the love of the gods, michty!! PLEASE hang around thru the end of the year, k!?? :D

Michale.....

Besides, the LA Times was simply reporting what the DNC has said..

So, once again.. I have to ask..

Do you have ANY evidence besides the words of the DNC to support the claim that WEATHER was the factor that caused the move??

ANY evidence at all???

Michale.....

http://tinyurl.com/c3ztk8v

More people in America were interested in the NFL Opener than in Bill Clinton....

:D

But Clinton's speech did beat out SUBURGATORY and (ACK!!!!) SUPERNATURAL.... But they were repeats, so.....

As an aside, Oct 3!! SUPERNATURAL SEASON PREMIERE!!!! :D

Michale.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-21wrrmpxzE

But, hay...

If you WANT to talk about what Bill Clinton said about Obama, by all means, let's do so..

"A few years ago, this guy would have been carrying our bags"
-Bill Clinton, talking about Obama

"This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen"
-Bill Clinton, talking about Obama's campaign

So, are you SURE you want to talk about Bill Clinton??? :D

If tickets were sold out, why did people have to be bused in from Georgia???

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2198695/Democrats-forced-Obamas-big-speech-74-000-seater-outdoor-stadium-20-000-seater-indoor-arena.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

theblaze.com/stories/dems-to-bus-in-college-students-churches-over-fears-of-a-small-convention-audience/

If you actually read outside of right-wing news sites you'd find these things yourself. But you are completely blind to the world outside of these sites.

As opposed to the Left Wing news sites, like the LA times??? :D You might as well have quoted HuffPo or DailyKos..

So, you DON'T have any real evidence to support the conclusion that weather was the factor, other than the DNC say so...

Like I said... If this were court, yer client would hang.. :D

Michale.....

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/sep/06/bill-clinton/clinton-says-obama-cut-taxes-95-percent-people-thr/

Do you have ANY evidence, other than the DNC say-so, that indicates that weather is the reason for the move??

ANY evidence at all, other than the dubious source of the DNC???

I don't think you do...

Yet, I have built a logical and rational and, above all else, FACTUAL case to support the conclusion that weather was NOT the reason for the move...

If this were a court and you were the defense attorney, yer client would fry... :D

Michale.....

I already presented the facts on the other side. But you're obsessed with whether or not the rain percentage is high enough or what weather channel I'm relying on for my data or other confused-right-wing-nonsensical arguments to disprove it.

There are media reports showing the event as sold out and some with a waiting list of 19,000 tickets. And a bunch of the 65,000 meant to attend were people who volunteered just to get a ticket in exchange. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-dnc-severe-weather-20120905,0,6228317.story

If you actually read outside of right-wing news sites you'd find these things yourself. But you are completely blind to the world outside of these sites.

Live Doppler (WunderGround) shows clear... Weather Dot Com says ZERO percent chance of rain..

Obviously weather was NOT the reason for the move, regardless of what the DNC wants us to believe...

Michale.....

Thunderstorms predicted, but staff says President Obama's acceptance speech at the 2012 Democratic National Convention will be held outdoors 'rain or shine'
nydailynews.com/news/politics/thunderstorms-predicted-staff-president-obama-acceptance-speech-2012-democratic-national-convention-held-outdoors-rain-shine-article-1.1150555

fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/05/is-bad-weather-really-the-reason-to-move-obamas-speech-indoors/

Pay particular attention to the weather description in Denver in August...

Democrats: Rain won't move big Obama speech indoors
Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 2:09pm MDT - Last Modified: Wednesday, July 9, 2008, 1:03pm MDT
An August evening rainstorm will not move the convention's climactic moment back to the Pepsi Center, which was to have been the site of the Aug. 28 speech until a venue change was announced Monday, Theodore LeCompte, director of media logistics for the 2008 Democratic National Convention Committee, said at a media "walk through" at the Pepsi Center.

LeCompte did say that especially severe weather might delay Obama's speech "until it's safe." He did not say how bad the weather would have to get to trigger a delay.

There is a 29 percent chance of at least some rain on Aug. 28, based on statistics for the last 14 years, according to Weather Underground, a website providing climate data. It rained on that date three years in a row from 2002 to 2004, but has been dry the last three years, the website says.
http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/2008/07/07/daily16.html

Thunderstorms in Denver are a LOT more fierce and a LOT more dangerous than in Charlotte, NC...

Notice how that article said that weather wouldn't CANCEL the speech, but rather just delay it...

So, you were saying something about Denver not being an equivalent to Charlotte??

Well, you were right. The threat was a LOT higher in Denver... Yet, the show went on...

So, what is different between now and then??

NOW the crowds are a LOT smaller...

It's the ONLY conclusion that is logical, rational and fits ALL the facts...

"Dem's da facts, Jack!!"
-Bill Murray, STRIPES

Fact-check: FALSE.

Prove it... :D I have the facts on my side... But I'll enjoy seeing you search frantically :D

I am not agreeing with ANYONE's spin... I asses the FACTS and make my own determination..

But hay, I can play your game..

Is there another conclusion that fits ALL the facts???

If there is, now's the time.... :D

Michale...

That shoulda been said with a smile..

So..... :^D

Michale

Fact-check: FALSE.

But if you want to believe Dem spin doctors over your own eyes, you're more far gone than I thought

Your view that you are independent/objective is increasingly deluded every single day. The funny thing is I am not agreeing with the Democratic spin, I just am not agreeing with the Republican spin either. You are far, far, far gone to the extent that when right-wing media says 'hate Obama' you say 'how much?'...

But if you want to believe Dem spin doctors over your own eyes, you're more far gone than I thought...

Michale.....

It seemed to be a fine idea in August of 2008...

In 2008, Obama did his speech with MORE chance of rain than is possible tonight.. No one seemed to care about rain or lightning back then...

Obama has done many MANY speeches in the rain..

So, why is this different??

When given all of the afore FACTS and given the fact that it has been WELL REPORTED that Obama has had to bus people in from as far away as Georgia, let's ask ourselves again...

WHY is this speech any different than all the other speeches Obama has given in the rain..

To a logical mind, the answer is clear..

Obama was afraid of seeing a half-filled stadium or even less...

That is the ONLY conclusion that fits ALL the facts...

We'll see how it plays out. Even though it's WAY past my bed-time, I'll be up checking the Doppler all the way thru Obama's speech.... And, you can bet, if it's a cloudless starry night, ya'all are going to hear about it loud and clear... :D

Michale.....

Partly cloudy with thunderstorms and rain showers. Fog overnight. Low of 21C. Winds less than 5 km/h. Chance of rain 30% with rainfall amounts near 1.3 mm possible.

I'm sure conducting your most important speech in years, with 40 million+ watching, outdoors in potentially thunderstorms and rain is a GREAT idea lol.

Doesn't look good for Team Obama :D

Michale

Apparently you and I agree on 60% of the stated issues.. :D

Michale.....

Who!??? :D

Crazy, iddn't it?? :D

Michale

Apparently if I lived in America I should be voting for Jill Stein! http://www.isidewith.com/results/92884157

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=GvT7566_L9s

It wouldn't be much of a discussion as I likely agree with you on the advisability of all of those things. :D

Yea, I guess I AM in a crazy mood.. :D

Great. Bush was unlucky to have such a bad attack on America during his Presidency. Do you think he handled it well? Because I don't.

Actually, yes I do... Considering the CT success Bush had, ESPECIALLY considering he had to fight Democrats as much as Al Qaeda, I would say Bush did a helluva job... And that's speaking from a position of more than a passing knowledge in the field..

Obama 4/4 since we're keeping score...

Two things are in Obama's favor.. He didn't have to fight fellow Americans as much as Al Qaeda, as Bush had to do.

And Obama got DAMN lucky with the ineptitude of the attacks that DID go down...

We have to be "lucky" EACH AND EVERY time... Terrorists only have to be lucky once...

Michale.....

isidewith.com/presidential-election-quiz

My results were a bit surprising..

isidewith.com/results/92805081

Seems like the Democrats aren't the only ones dumbing down their Israel policy on the platform. Difference is the right-wing-nut-jobs didn't bother screaming out when the shoe was on the other foot...

Actually, I want YOU to talk about the Dem problems..
Because, if you can't acknowledge the problems, HOW do you expect to fix them?

Just like I gave Republicans a break last week because the platform is merely symbolic, I will with Democrats this week. I couldn't give 2 cents about the platform - it is ignored by the President just like the Republican platform is ignored by Romney.

Want to talk about platforms? Ok how about banning civil unions, banning gay people from serving in the military, bringing back the gold standard, banning ALL abortions (no exceptions) and contraception, public displays of the 10 commandments etc. You really want to discuss all these things that are in the Republican platform?

They claim that Dem Presidents create more jobs when that is NOT what the facts say.. The facts say that more jobs are created under Dem presidents and that's it.

I don't know how many times I have to repeat this: READ THE FULL ARTICLE. You and CB seem to just glance over things.

When the fact-check sites go against you (as in the ObamaCare/Tax issue) then you decry that fact-checkers

Nope this is your view. I read both fact-check and politifact daily. I disagree most with politifact because they have a stupid rating system and I don't understand how they rate some things, but generally agree with the true/false part of their ratings...

I would love to see you address them and convince THEM that their issues are "pointless"....
Go ahead.. have at it

Sure this will be the easiest discussion ever. None of these people think this issue is pointless. But they think what the Democratic platform says is POINTLESS. What they care about are what their leaders believe in and say (which, just like Republicans, vastly differs from the platform).

That SHOULD read, "OK, let's start with 8+ years w/o a terrorist attack on US Proper, post 9/11.

Great. Bush was unlucky to have such a bad attack on America during his Presidency. Do you think he handled it well? Because I don't.

So Bush 7/8 years with no terrorist attacks.
Obama 4/4 since we're keeping score...