> gMoney wrote: > should McCain win, he wouldn't be a disastrous president. >
If that's true. Rolling Stone makes the case, with McCain's contemporaries, that's he's a whiny baby who's worse then Bush, but better spoken and better at building a facade. They go on to offer a similar psychology for Bush and McCain: they both are losers that failed up and have daddy issues. Now, is McCain closer to Rolling Stone's argument or just an expedient operator? My opinion of him is closer to Rolling Stone's and has shifted enormously from 2000; much as it has for Hillary. I think both Hillary and McCain would a dangerous president in the same way that Bush is. McCain more dangerous in that he has no clue about the economy and no interest in it. He'd essentially outsource that to Meg Whitman who is certainly smart, but I have no idea if she'd be up to the task. So here's the interesting thing about Obama for me. I'm a little biased because I know people that have directly worked with him and they are uniformly effusive and voting for him despite the fact that majority have been life-long republicans. So my question for the Obama haters would be, are there credible people that have worked with him that don't like him or have bad things to say? I'm not talking about legislators that are predisposed to hating him. Cause I don't know any and I've never heard of any. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:274244 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
