McCain supporters up to dirty tricks
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
Trish Hugunin
Published: October 12, 2008
This morning I awoke from my Bristow home to discover that the campaign sign representing candidates Barack Obama and Joe Biden had been stolen from my front yard where I had placed it two weeks
ago. John McCain signs on a lawn directly across from my house remain untouched.
Anger was my first reaction to the theft, pulled off in the dark after I returned home late last night. Reflection reminded me that this tactic, an attempt to remove transparency and help steal an election
from my candidate of choice, is a mirror image of the nasty TV commercials sponsored by the McCain campaign that disparage the personality and qualifications of Obama.
McCain needs to be held responsible for the content of these attempts at character assassination in the media and by his spokespeople and handlers, who are trying to avoid the real issues Virginians
and voters across America want to be debated by presidential candidates. We are asking our elected officials and government to provide answers to our troubled economy, health care delivery systems,
energy and environmental deficiencies, as well as employment and other issues that impact Virginia’s economy.
I appeal to McCain and his campaign to knock off the mudslinging and character assassinations and start talking about the issues we are really concerned with. And, to the sign stealer in my Northern
Virginian neighborhood: I replaced my Obama sign early this Saturday morning, the day after it had been ripped off, with a duplicate I picked up from the Obama campaign headquarters in Manassas. By
the way, they have an ample supply of additional campaign materials.
TRISH HUGUNIN
Bristow
Post a Comment
The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.
Can't find what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
Reader Reactions
Posted by ( Sammy B ) on October 23, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Irishlad,
You misread my comment on Sen. Biden. Although he has had his foot in his mouth on occasion, in this case I meant that in this case not everything that was on his mind was said.
By the way, this right-wing notion that refusing to work as al-Queda recruiters by spouting all manner of inflammatory rhetoric like “Bring it on!“ is equivalent to appeasement is not doing us any good.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Irishlad ) on October 23, 2008 at 1:31 pm
What Biden means is that Obama is going appease the terrorists if we have a terrorist attack. That is why he said it will be viewed as the wrong response. Joe said it was up to the Dem supporters to work in their communities to gain support for the decision.
We agree on two things, Bush can’t wait to get out of town, and Joe Biden’s mouth is sometimes faster than his brain.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Sammy B ) on October 23, 2008 at 9:53 am
Well, Irishlad, I cannot really say what Sen. Biden was talking about. Every president is at some point faced with a situation that has no pleasant or popular solution. If I had to bet I would say it is something economy-related. It may have been one of those times that only part of what is going on in Joe Biden’s mind makes it to his mouth.
I think you hit the nail on the head in saying that Bush is probably just leaving the Gitmo detainees for the next guy to handle. It took us just over a week, but we finally found something to agree on.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Irishlad ) on October 21, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Sammy,
I think the trails will start soon, or maybe not. I have no doubt this is an issue Bush just wants to ignore and pass off to the next guy.
Even Joe Biden knows Obama is not ready for the White House. He thinks Obama will be tested in the first six months and thinks we, Americans, will not support and or disagree with his response. Hmm, I wonder what Biden means by that?
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Sammy B ) on October 20, 2008 at 7:41 pm
Irishlad,
I would say that one attack is too many. However, I would say that many more terrorist attacks have happened under Bush since they are the ones who have killed over 4,000 of our soldiers. As for our detainees, where do folks on the right get the idea that the only options are to keep them in Guantanamo indefinitely or release them outright. I do not want to see them arbitrarily released. I want to see them indicted and brought to trial in federal court. What is wrong with that?! I do not know where the idea comes from that following the Geneva Conventions and our own Constitution is mutually exclusive with being strong and not appeasing aggressors, but it is wrong.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Irishlad ) on October 20, 2008 at 6:18 pm
Sammy,
How many attacks happened under the watch of Clinton? Too many.
The World is quick to jump on us, yet nary a word is spoken when other Nations do much worse. I wonder why? It is easy to jump on America and blame us for all the ills of the World. Europe will respect a strong America, after all, it was only twice we had to bail out Europe after the appeasers were allowed to lead there.
We are at war and we have POW’s. Of the few that have been released, some have been recaptured on the battle field. What does that tell you? Do you want them running around here or elsewhere or locked up?
Obama will be just like Jimmy Carter. Or sure, we may have been liked by the rest of the World, but we sure paid a price. I don’t want to experience another four years like that.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Sammy B ) on October 20, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Irishlad,
Are you sure you did not see the Obama comment on an edited newscast? That may explain why the rest of the quote was cut off. Besides, everything he has said at the debates and on his web site indicates that he understands that Iran is a threat. His web site also expresses support for national missile defense. You brought up Clinton to show how a Dem reacts to attacks? Well, in the wake of the 1993 WTC bombing the Clinton administration obtained in absentia indictments against Osama bin Laden, pressured Sudan to extradite him and attempted to capture him in Afghanistan.
As for respect from the rest of the world, I would say that is rather important as we do need some friends to take on modern challenges. The international community does not dislike us for defending ourselves. We had carte blanche for the invasion of Afghanistan and an actual “coalition of the willing” to fight there with us. Under Bush, we have lost respect for invading Iraq for causes that have continuously become more vague and not worth the tremendous investment and loss of life. Bush lost the world’s respect for imprisoning hundreds of people; many for legitimate reasons but others for just being in the wrong place at the wrong time; and simply keeping them locked up without even bothering to press charges. Why we have not sought indictments against Gitmo detainees is beyond me and, I would guess, most other people in the world. And I cannot imagine that the torture that has gone on at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and who knows where else has gone over too well either. This torture, by the way, has been criticized by scores of veteran psychologists, criminal investigators and retired military officers as being ineffective in addition to inhumane. I think that is the damage to our reputation that Sen. Obama seeks to remedy.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Irishlad ) on October 20, 2008 at 11:37 am
Sammy,
I have heard Obama say Iran is not a threat without adding what you said he said. Iran also does not need to have a sub to be a threat.
The point about bringing up Clinton and terrorism is to show how a Dem reacts to attacks.
Obama says he wants to gain the respect of the “World”. The “World” says they love Obama. Why? Because he is different then Bush and I suppose McCain. The “World” dislikes our foreign policy which in part is to take a tough stance on terrorism. Now, why would the “World” dislike us defending ourselves? Why would they like Obama? Maybe because they know he will not be so quick to use force to defend our Nation?
Many on the left simply do not see a threat from terrorism. I can’t recall who said it,but someone on the left made the comments regarding the war against terrorism is just a bumper sticker or something to that effect.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Sammy B ) on October 20, 2008 at 10:12 am
Irishlad,
It is rather silly hyperbole to suggest that Sen. Obama and his supporters “do not see a problem with the terrorist.“ Of course both candidates want to take on both terrorism and Iran. I know we have had a pretty lengthy dialogue here, but I do believe I said somewhere that Sen. Obama’s comment on Iran was that it is not a threat to the same degree that the USSR was and yet we still engaged in diplomacy with the Soviets. Now unless the Iranian navy has a multiple-hulled nuclear submarine armed with ICBMs hiding under the arctic ice pack, I would call that a fair assessment. Sen. Obama has talked about pressuring Iran diplomatically, in particular by proposing a blockade of Iran’s gasoline imports, and has said that military options will remain on the table. I do not recall hearing any such details from Sen. McCain on how to deal with Iran. The best that we have heard from Sen. McCain is that he knows how to get Osama bin Laden. If that were true, it would have been useful to know at some point over the last seven years.
Clinton did pursue al Queda, by the way. The CIA began efforts to capture bin Laden in Afghanistan during the Clinton administration. Obviously, they failed to do so, but then again he has remained free during the Bush administration as well. The whole notion that Clinton turned down offers to receive bin Laden is nonsense. The Taliban claimed to not know his whereabouts. Sudan began secret talks with the Saudis in early 1996 about expelling bin Laden and US diplomats encouraged the Sudanese government to do so. Unfortunately, the Saudis failed to make it happen and bin Laden left Sudan in May of 1996. The fairytale about Clinton refusing a handover of bin Laden is based on a claim by a Sudanese defense minister for which the 9/11 Commission did not find any credible evidence.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Irishlad ) on October 19, 2008 at 8:02 pm
Sammy,
Of course this is not a a traditional war. However, Obama and many on the left simply do not see a problem with the terrorist. They think if we are nice they will not attack us. Obama has said Iran is not a threat. The left in this Country, thinks we can just extend the hand of peace and all will be fine. The left says it is our own actions that have caused us to be attacked. Recall under Clinton how often we were attacked? That is what inspired Sept 11, because Clinton refused to go after them.
Report Inappropriate Comment