NationStates Jolt Archive

We know that McCain supports dudes who joke about rape (one time Texas gubernatorial candidate Clayton Williams) being like the weather (”you might as well lay back and enjoy it”). We know he mocked 17-year-old Chelsea Clinton for being ugly, and said that Janet Reno was her father (ha. ha). So we know he’s a jerk with no sense of humor. But he’s also apparently fond of the occasional rape joke:

Did you hear the one about the woman who is attacked on the street by a gorilla, beaten senseless, raped repeatedly and left to die? When she finally regains consciousness and tries to speak, her doctor leans over to hear her sigh contently and to feebly ask, ‘Where is that marvelous ape?’

…yeah. That’s our potential future president. How can anyone want a president who says this crap?

Says that crap, and is basically a hollowed out human shell containing the Third Dubya Term?

Basically Busheviks and people who buy into the "Obama iz teh ebil mozlem wit a Whitey-hatin' Christian Pastor" crap.

As George Carlin is my muse, I do believe that it's possible to joke about rape and be funny.

That joke sucked.

I wouldn't call it support (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/06/13/mccain_cancels_fundraiser_with.html).

Nor would I judge a candidate on something that someone thinks they might have said 22 years ago.

I support neither McCain or Bush so don't try and claim that I've been blinded to the truth.

this may be old, but i thought this was a good read http://www.progressivepuppy.com/the_progressive_puppy/2008/07/elitism-thy-nam.html

I shall point out that this is a bit old, and you may want to provide a link before the rabid right start their denial fest.

Is that really how he told it because I could see some humour in that joke if told a little better - 'rodgered senseless' rather than 'beaten senseless, raped repeatedly and left to die'.

Are we really going to hold politicians to such high standards, that telling an insensitive joke, which I'm sure we're all culpable of, is reason not to vote for him?

I mean, I don't personally think he's the better candidate but more on various issues than his sense of humour, less when it's people he associates with.

Is that really how he told it because I could see some humour in that joke if told a little better - 'rodgered senseless' rather than 'beaten senseless, raped repeatedly and left to die'.

Are we really going to hold politicians to such high standards, that telling an insensitive joke, which I'm sure we're all culpable of, is reason not to vote for him?

I mean, I don't personally think he's the better candidate but more on various issues than his sense of humour, less when it's people he associates with.

If a stumbled-across incident of adulterous fellatio in the midst of failing to find truly criminal activities is sufficient to hold impeachment hearings on a standing President, then why would a Presidential candidate making insensitive jokes that would stain his diplomatic reputation deserve a free pass?

I think it's perfectly fine to reject a candidate based on the fact that he finds women beaten and raped funny. And how in the hell did he miss the line that basically lost Claytie the governorship of Texas. Everybody of voting age knows about it. (in that general part of the country)

I think it's perfectly fine to reject a candidate based on the fact that he finds women beaten and raped funny.

Maybe it's the gorilla part that amuses him. Maybe the raping and beating of women is only funny to him when gorillas do it. :confused:

Maybe it's the gorilla part that amuses him. Maybe the raping and beating of women is only funny to him when gorillas do it. :confused:

so it's beastiality charges now?

Is that really how he told it because I could see some humour in that joke if told a little better - 'rodgered senseless' rather than 'beaten senseless, raped repeatedly and left to die'.

Are we really going to hold politicians to such high standards, that telling an insensitive joke, which I'm sure we're all culpable of, is reason not to vote for him?

I mean, I don't personally think he's the better candidate but more on various issues than his sense of humour, less when it's people he associates with.

Maybe it's the gorilla part that amuses him. Maybe the raping and beating of women is only funny to him when gorillas do it. :confused:Maybe. But I have no problem with consentual gorilla sex.

If a stumbled-across incident of adulterous fellatio in the midst of failing to find truly criminal activities is sufficient to hold impeachment hearings on a standing President, then why would a Presidential candidate making insensitive jokes that would stain his diplomatic reputation deserve a free pass?

No one tried to impeach him for adultery.

I think it's perfectly fine to reject a candidate based on the fact that he finds women beaten and raped funny.

The evidence of that is pretty sketchy.

And how in the hell did he miss the line that basically lost Claytie the governorship of Texas. Everybody of voting age knows about it. (in that general part of the country)

The McCain campaign already described the remarks as incredibly offensive and has cancelled all future associations with him - although he never actually made any donations for McCain in the first place.

No one tried to impeach him for adultery.



The evidence of that is pretty sketchy.



The McCain campaign already described the remarks as incredibly offensive and has cancelled all future associations with him - although he never actually made any donations for McCain in the first place.
So you're telling me that he told a joke he didn't find funny? I feel so much better now.:rolleyes:

so it's beastiality charges now?

There's a difference between twisted humor and sexual fetish.

I'm a perfect example. Nearly all of my favorite hobbies and pastimes have a sexual kink version. I've even tried a few for variety's sake. Meh. So I'm not going to judge a man who thinks a gorilla raping a woman is amusing, but I would like to point out that even I have enough tact to keep such things to myself; especially if I'm a politician. If I hadn't questioned his ability to lead years ago, I might question it now. *nod*

So you're telling me that he told a joke he didn't find funny? I feel so much better now.:rolleyes:

Who are you referring to when you say he? Williams or McCain or both?

If he said that (and I haven't read about it) it's in incredibly poor taste and unfunny, but if we're going to not vote for him for any reason, it should be for the Keating Five scandal and not a sick joke.

How about both.

Maybe it's the gorilla part that amuses him. Maybe the raping and beating of women is only funny to him when gorillas do it. :confused:

I'm no humour scientist but I suppose it comes from the juxtaposition of the perceived forced sex turning out to be highly enjoyed, hence I find the wording somewhat unlikely as told in the OP, I'm happy to be corrected.

Is there confirmation that these were his exact words?

Again, Senator McCain has a dark sense of humour, when asked whether he'd pressured Charlie Crist for support he replied, 'just a little waterboarding'. This from someone who'd turned on Giuliani for similar 'humour' on torture.

Yet I just don't find it something to get too excited about, it just seems that these are the stories that are blown up in the media, one's that can make or break a career when I find them relatively unimportant.

We had the Bernie Mac joke the other week, are we going to call these the joke elections, or is that term implied for any election?

How about both.

Well, I don't know if Clayton Williams finds his own joke to be funny. I'm not really sure whether thats relevant anyway because the McCain campaign has already disassociated themselves from it.

As for McCain's joke, like I said I need something a bit more substantial than a rumour that he might have said something 22 years ago.

We had the Bernie Mac joke the other week, are we going to call these the joke elections, or is that term implied for any election?

More and more so as the years go by it seems. :p

We know that McCain supports dudes who joke about rape (one time Texas gubernatorial candidate Clayton Williams) being like the weather (”you might as well lay back and enjoy it”). We know he mocked 17-year-old Chelsea Clinton for being ugly, and said that Janet Reno was her father (ha. ha). So we know he’s a jerk with no sense of humor. But he’s also apparently fond of the occasional rape joke:

Did you hear the one about the woman who is attacked on the street by a gorilla, beaten senseless, raped repeatedly and left to die? When she finally regains consciousness and tries to speak, her doctor leans over to hear her sigh contently and to feebly ask, ‘Where is that marvelous ape?’

…yeah. That’s our potential future president. How can anyone want a president who says this crap?

Since this thread was clearly tailored made for me, inspired by me, based on my excellent comments on some previous posts. (at least in my view)

I am just pointing this out for the record. No amount of so called insults will ever make me use that kind of language or be so called insulted. Besides rule number 1 is never use language that might get one banned.

While the charge of taking positions on issues just to get your votes can be applied to either candiates. Barack Obama is not above taking positions on issues just to get your votes. From Cuba, Iraq, Afghanistan to Israel and other subjects. Disassociating himself from other public figures.

At least MCcain unlike Obama does not talk like he is the only one for change and good unlike his opponents. Or campaigns as is he is already the president.

Those who want a liberal for president will vote for Obama as he is, no doubt no argument there.

New polls out show Mccain leading Obama among likely voters. I hope and trust Independent voters are beginning to see Obama is a fake. Not the saint of change you can believe in he claims to be.

From his bitter voters remarks in Pennsylvania on, a very self righteous arrogant person, that makes Bush look like Mother Teresa, to paraphrase a fellow poster.

Vote 1 Mccain.

He Will Defend The White Power Structure.

Since this thread was clearly tailored made for me, inspired by me, based on my excellent comments on some previous posts. (at least in my view)

I am just pointing this out for the record. No amount of so called insults will ever make me use that kind of language or be so called insulted. Besides rule number 1 is never use language that might get one banned.

While the charge of taking positions on issues just to get your votes can be applied to either candiates. Barack Obama is not above taking positions on issues just to get your votes. From Cuba, Iraq, Afghanistan to Israel and other subjects. Disassociating himself from other public figures.

At least MCcain unlike Obama does not talk like he is the only one for change and good unlike his opponents. Or campaigns as is he is already the president.

Those who want a liberal for president will vote for Obama as he is, no doubt no argument there.

New polls out show Mccain leading Obama among likely voters. I hope and trust Independent voters are beginning to see Obama is a fake. Not the saint of change you can believe in he claims to be.

From his bitter voters remarks in Pennsylvania on, a very self righteous arrogant person, that makes Bush look like Mother Teresa, to paraphrase a fellow poster.

What did any of that have to do with McCain's joke?

Since this thread was clearly tailored made for me, inspired by me, based on my excellent comments on some previous posts. (at least in my view)

I am just pointing this out for the record. No amount of so called insults will ever make me use that kind of language or be so called insulted. Besides rule number 1 is never use language that might get one banned.

While the charge of taking positions on issues just to get your votes can be applied to either candiates. Barack Obama is not above taking positions on issues just to get your votes. From Cuba, Iraq, Afghanistan to Israel and other subjects. Disassociating himself from other public figures.

At least MCcain unlike Obama does not talk like he is the only one for change and good unlike his opponents. Or campaigns as is he is already the president.

Those who want a liberal for president will vote for Obama as he is, no doubt no argument there.

New polls out show Mccain leading Obama among likely voters. I hope and trust Independent voters are beginning to see Obama is a fake. Not the saint of change you can believe in he claims to be.

From his bitter voters remarks in Pennsylvania on, a very self righteous arrogant person, that makes Bush look like Mother Teresa, to paraphrase a fellow poster.

So your fine with a guy who thinks bestial rape is funny, but not with a guy saying that bitter people cling to guns and religion? Let me give you a hint: the first one makes you a probably misoginist and an all-around jerk. The other is a very accurate description of some voters.

Of course, many Republicans probably long for the day when a woman's place was in the home, and her husband's bed. Just like many of them secretly wish for the days of lynch mobs and segregated schools. Not all, or perhaps even most. But quite a few.

Skyland Mt, if you only knew what a heck of nice guy, dude I really am.

Originally Posted by Miami Shores
Since this thread was clearly tailored made for me, inspired by me, based on my excellent comments on some previous posts. (at least in my view)

I am just pointing this out for the record. No amount of so called insults will ever make me use that kind of language or be so called insulted. Besides rule number 1 is never use language that might get one banned.

While the charge of taking positions on issues just to get your votes can be applied to either candiates. Barack Obama is not above taking positions on issues just to get your votes. From Cuba, Iraq, Afghanistan to Israel and other subjects. Disassociating himself from other public figures.

At least MCcain unlike Obama does not talk like he is the only one for change and good unlike his opponents. Or campaigns as is he is already the president.

Those who want a liberal for president will vote for Obama as he is, no doubt no argument there.

New polls out show Mccain leading Obama among likely voters. I hope and trust Independent voters are beginning to see Obama is a fake. Not the saint of change you can believe in he claims to be.

From his bitter voters remarks in Pennsylvania on, a very self righteous arrogant person, that makes Bush look like Mother Teresa, to paraphrase a fellow poster.

Skyland Mt, if you only knew what a heck of nice guy, dude I really am.

Just like you supposedly represent a vast majority of Cuban Americans who voted Bush out of spite for Clinton, you're now going to vote for McCain aka Bush Term Number Three because Obama sounds too "elitist" for you.

:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Miami Shores
Skyland Mt, if you only knew what a heck of nice guy, dude I really am.

Just like you supposedly represent a vast majority of Cuban Americans who voted Bush out of spite for Clinton, you're now going to vote for McCain aka Bush Term Number Three because Obama sounds too "elitist" for you.

:rolleyes:

Most Cuban Americans vote republican on the Cuba, Fidel issue, at the time there were polls indicating Al Gore had more support among Cuban Americans than most Democrats usually get. Most Cuban American voters were very angry at President Clinton, Slick Willy's appeasement of Fidel, hiding behind Janet Reno, to answer your question. Now back to the main subjects of this thread, McCain & Obama.

I will not vote for Obama because he is a liberal. Not above taking positions on issues just to get your votes, talking and acting like he is already president. Talking like he is the only want for change and good unlike his opponents.

A very self righteous arrogant person to say the least. Perhaps those are the reasons for the new polls out.

That would make President Bush look like Mother Teresa, to paraphrase a fellow poster.

New polls out show Mccain leading Obama among likely voters. I hope and trust Independent voters are beginning to see Obama is a fake. Not the saint of change you can believe in he claims to be.

I hope and trust independent voters are beginning to see Obama is not the saint of change he claims to be.

My last post on this issue for now with you my fellow NS poster friend. I usually dont get much attention for my views, so gracias for our democratic exchange of views.

Gauthier, if you only knew what a heck of a nice guy, dude I really am.

Now back to the main subjects of this thread, McCain & Obama.

Actually, the subject of the thread is tasteless jokes by presidential candidates and their major supporters.

Actually, the subject of the thread is tasteless jokes by presidential candidates and their major supporters.

I think this thread was inspired as just an anti McCain thread by my comments on another thread. I think I am right, that said, I could be wrong.

Its still about MCCain & Obama. Good comment by you Lunatic Goofballs.

I really am a heck of a nice guy, dude. Even if I say so myself. lol.

I think this thread was inspired as just an anti McCain thread by my comments on another thread. I think I am right, that said, I could be wrong.

Its still about MCCain & Obama. Good comment by you Lunatic Goofballs.

I really am a heck of a nice guy, dude. Even if I say so myself. lol.

I'd also like to point out that anti-Obama doesn't have to automatically make one Pro-McCain or vice-versa. In fact, the original post never even mentions Obama.

Maybe. But I have no problem with consentual gorilla sex.
Aren't you worried that if we relax the moral prohibitions against bestiality, it might lead to homosexuality?

first of all mccain is going to win the election by a mile and i was raped so shut the fuck up just kidding lol

This incident should be just as disavowable as Bill Clinton's "I didn't inhale" comments. No one cares what the hell you MIGHT have done 20+ years ago (unless of course it's a felony, then those DC attorneys will tear you apart)

Says that crap, and is basically a hollowed out human shell containing the Third Dubya Term?

Basically Busheviks and people who buy into the "Obama iz teh ebil mozlem wit a Whitey-hatin' Christian Pastor" crap.

You'll just swallow whole anything that disparages Republicans, won't you? Just swallow it right up and ask for seconds.

What did any of that have to do with McCain's joke?

Nothing, just another attempt to stop Obama dead in his tracks.

You'll just swallow whole anything that disparages Republicans, won't you? Just swallow it right up and ask for seconds.

May I have some more, please?

I'm currently reading a book of essays detailing some of the cultural myths we swallow in the US. It's called You Are Being Lied To (http://www.mindpollen.com/yablt.htm), edited by Russ Kick. In it is an article called The War Secrets Senator John McCain Hides (http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/cin_secretworldofmccain.htm).

It details the lengths that Senator McCain, a POW, went to stop Congressional inquiries into POWs in Vietnam, going so far as to berate a testifying relative of a POW. This article is kinda disturbing to me, given how much of a hero McCain is purported to be. It's true that McCain has had one hell of a lot more experience in life and politics and is sure to have more skeletons in his closet. I give him the benefit of that doubt. However, if the things in this article are even remotely true....well...yikes.

The whole conspiracy-theory cult about the secret POW's and the evil government cover-up was highly offensive to people who had actual experience of what was going on.

We know that McCain supports dudes who joke about rape (one time Texas gubernatorial candidate Clayton Williams) being like the weather (”you might as well lay back and enjoy it”). We know he mocked 17-year-old Chelsea Clinton for being ugly, and said that Janet Reno was her father (ha. ha). So we know he’s a jerk with no sense of humor. But he’s also apparently fond of the occasional rape joke:

Did you hear the one about the woman who is attacked on the street by a gorilla, beaten senseless, raped repeatedly and left to die? When she finally regains consciousness and tries to speak, her doctor leans over to hear her sigh contently and to feebly ask, ‘Where is that marvelous ape?’

…yeah. That’s our potential future president. How can anyone want a president who says this crap?
i dont think that taking bad jokes that were said over the past 25 year or so is a good way to judge a candidate.

i find the way many public figures talk in private to be shocking. i accept that it does not make them bad people or bad at their jobs.

I'm currently reading a book of essays detailing some of the cultural myths we swallow in the US. It's called You Are Being Lied To (http://www.mindpollen.com/yablt.htm), edited by Russ Kick. In it is an article called The War Secrets Senator John McCain Hides (http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/cin_secretworldofmccain.htm).

It details the lengths that Senator McCain, a POW, went to stop Congressional inquiries into POWs in Vietnam, going so far as to berate a testifying relative of a POW. This article is kinda disturbing to me, given how much of a hero McCain is purported to be. It's true that McCain has had one hell of a lot more experience in life and politics and is sure to have more skeletons in his closet. I give him the benefit of that doubt. However, if the things in this article are even remotely true....well...yikes.
i wish i knew the back story on that. it is very disturbing.

i wish i knew the back story on that. it is very disturbing.The basic back-story is that a lot of people in Vietnam just flat-out disappeared and nobody knows what happened to them. This is not unusual in war: we still have 14,000 unsolved cases from World War II, and will never know about most of them; but no conspiracy theories arose about those, since we held the field at the end of WWII (with a few exceptions, like nutty theories about Joe Kennedy Jr.'s disappearance: not much of a mystery, really, he was a hot-dogger who was last seen flying upside-down). In the case of Vietnam, however, people who just could not accept that soldiers go missing and are seldom found built up this elaborate saga about how North Vietnam was still keeping prisoners in secret (why??? the whole point of holding hostages is to let everyone know you have them, hmmm?) and evil conspirators in our own government were concealing this fact (again, out of "motiveless malignancy", as in the usual conspiracy theory). They were not without some bits of evidence in their favor: several soldiers who disappeared did so, in fact, because they were captured and murdered by their captors (particularly in the case of irregular VietCong units, but it could happen among the North's regular army also) and the North was not very willing to come clean about such cases. But most of their "evidence" came from a cottage industry in Indochina of forgers who found they could make good money on this.

Those in the government who got shrieked at by these people (anybody who didn't buy in to the theory was, of course, obviously part of the conspiracy) tended to get very tired of them. McCain has never been known for his skill in keeping his temper under the best of circumstances, and really lashed out at these people.

Those in the government who got shrieked at by these people (anybody who didn't buy in to the theory was, of course, obviously part of the conspiracy) tended to get very tired of them. McCain has never been known for his skill in keeping his temper under the best of circumstances, and really lashed out at these people.
thanks.

So your fine with a guy who thinks bestial rape is funny, but not with a guy saying that bitter people cling to guns and religion? Let me give you a hint: the first one makes you a probably misoginist and an all-around jerk. The other is a very accurate description of some voters.

Of course, many Republicans probably long for the day when a woman's place was in the home, and her husband's bed. Just like many of them secretly wish for the days of lynch mobs and segregated schools. Not all, or perhaps even most. But quite a few.

Amen, and thank god for some common sense.

You'll just swallow whole anything that disparages Republicans, won't you? Just swallow it right up and ask for seconds.


Anything? There are so many things out there its hard to choose from. And for good reason too.

What is your point?

As I posted.

I will not vote for Obama because he is a liberal. Not above taking positions on issues just to get your votes, talking and acting like he is already president. Talking like he is the only want for change and good unlike his opponents.

A very self righteous arrogant person to say the least. Perhaps those are the reasons for the new polls out.

That would make President Bush look like Mother Teresa, to paraphrase a fellow poster.

New polls out show Mccain leading Obama among likely voters. I hope and trust Independent voters are beginning to see Obama is a fake. Not the saint of change you can believe in he claims to be.

I hope and trust independent voters are beginning to see Obama is not the saint of change he claims to be.

I will not respond to a counter post. Besides I have to go right now and govern my many different nations, Capitalists, Socialists, Communist, Monarchist, ect, ect, ect.

As I posted.

I will not vote for Obama because he is a liberal. Not above taking positions on issues just to get your votes, talking and acting like he is already president. Talking like he is the only want for change and good unlike his opponents.

A very self righteous arrogant person to say the least. Perhaps those are the reasons for the new polls out.

That would make President Bush look like Mother Teresa, to paraphrase a fellow poster.

New polls out show Mccain leading Obama among likely voters. I hope and trust Independent voters are beginning to see Obama is a fake. Not the saint of change you can believe in he claims to be.

I hope and trust independent voters are beginning to see Obama is not the saint of change he claims to be.

I will not respond to a counter post. Besides I have to go right now and govern my many different nations, Capitalists, Socialists, Communist, Monarchist, ect, ect, ect.
and who will you vote FOR?

I don't get the joke. :(

The whole conspiracy-theory cult about the secret POW's and the evil government cover-up was highly offensive to people who had actual experience of what was going on.

Understood. Two sides to every story. I try to take things I read that are potentially damaging to someone, even someone I'm not supporting, at much less than face value. The only thing I've taken from the Schanberg article is that McCain sometimes has temper issues. Not remotely a DQ for the presidency, as anyone who's listened to Nixon's tapes can attest.

As I posted.

I will not vote for Obama because he is a liberal. Not above taking positions on issues just to get your votes, talking and acting like he is already president. Talking like he is the only want for change and good unlike his opponents.

A very self righteous arrogant person to say the least. Perhaps those are the reasons for the new polls out.

That would make President Bush look like Mother Teresa, to paraphrase a fellow poster.

New polls out show Mccain leading Obama among likely voters. I hope and trust Independent voters are beginning to see Obama is a fake. Not the saint of change you can believe in he claims to be.

I hope and trust independent voters are beginning to see Obama is not the saint of change he claims to be.

I will not respond to a counter post. Besides I have to go right now and govern my many different nations, Capitalists, Socialists, Communist, Monarchist, ect, ect, ect.

Bolded = exact phrases, down to the letter, I've heard on Hannity, Rush, Larson, and Beck.

Sorry, but isn't the point of trying for the Presidency to sell oneself as at least having the appearance of being qualified for the job? Also, arrogant? The President damn well better be. Arrogance doesn't exclude humility and has often existed side by side with it in US presidents. But if the citizenry is going to throw around phrases like "greatest country on Earth", shouldn't SOME arrogance be part of the leader's personality? We're choosing the person to lead the whole country. If that very notion doesn't SCREAM "elite", I don't know what does. And it should, by the way. We've seen what happens when we elect someone "we'd like to have a beer with". Fuck that. Give me someone who knows more than I do about lots of things and is proud of it. Highest office in the country and he shouldn't be elite? Fuck that twice.

If the election process demands a candidate do whatever he can to win the office (well demonstrated by both W and Bill Clinton), how can you castigate the candidate who does so? That's like throwing a life ring to an overboard boat passenger and then yelling at him for getting the ring wet.

No, I don't think you will respond to any counter posts. Not because your're busy, but because you are simply unable.

New polls out show Mccain leading Obama among likely voters.

What new polls are these? Source please.

I think it's perfectly fine to reject a candidate based on the fact that he finds women beaten and raped funny. And how in the hell did he miss the line that basically lost Claytie the governorship of Texas. Everybody of voting age knows about it. (in that general part of the country)

Well, than don't jump on me for saying that it is fine for someone to not support Obama based on the fact that he said that half of America is a bunch of "bitter people clinging to their guns." or that he sat in the pew for twenty years as his pastor spewed anti-American rhetoric. Both are equally offensive to what McCain allegedly said.

What new polls are these? Source please.
Just one poll shows that:
USA Today/Gallup 07/25 - 07/27 791 LV 45 49 McCain +4.0 (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html)

Well, than don't jump on me for saying that it is fine for someone to not support Obama based on the fact that he said that half of America is a bunch of "bitter people clinging to their guns." or that he sat in the pew for twenty years as his pastor spewed anti-American rhetoric. Both are equally offensive to what McCain allegedly said.

To you.

To those of us who can understand context, those statements are inflammatory, but hardly unjustifiable.

Someone explain the joke. It's not funny. I don't get it. It's bothering me.

Just one poll shows that:
USA Today/Gallup 07/25 - 07/27 791 LV 45 49 McCain +4.0 (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html)

I'd love to see a comparative chart showing who owns each of the media or polling organizations that were complied, in the interest of full disclosure.

Someone explain the joke. It's not funny. I don't get it. It's bothering me.

Perhaps if you'd tell us what joke you're talking about. There are more than a couple in this thread. One or two of them even intentional.

To you.

To those of us who can understand context, those statements are inflammatory, but hardly unjustifiable.

Because "God Damn America" in the wake of September the Eleventh was taken out of context by me, right.

And also, the Bitter Americans comment was not taken out of context, any way you cut it.

Perhaps if you'd tell us what joke you're talking about. There are more than a couple in this thread. One or two of them even intentional.

Never mind I inserted a pronoun where there wasn't one. In my defense.....I haven't one.

So your fine with a guy who thinks bestial rape is funny, but not with a guy saying that bitter people cling to guns and religion? Let me give you a hint: the first one makes you a probably misoginist and an all-around jerk. The other is a very accurate description of some voters.

Of course, many Republicans probably long for the day when a woman's place was in the home, and her husband's bed. Just like many of them secretly wish for the days of lynch mobs and segregated schools. Not all, or perhaps even most. But quite a few.

If thats not a flame I don't know what is.

Because "God Damn America" in the wake of September the Eleventh was taken out of context by me, right.

And also, the Bitter Americans comment was not taken out of context, any way you cut it.

Uh...right. :rolleyes:

Might it not be possible that a minority preacher (whose entire race was only fairly recently fully emancipated by law, if not yet fully by practice), speaking to his base in a position of influence just might say some things to rile them up?

Also, I hate to break it to you, but 9/11 was not the national tragedy we're all supposed to believe it was. It was a regional tragedy at best. A tragedy, to be sure, but a faith-based initiative on the part of Islamic Wack-a-Loons that anyone who's paid attention to US foreign policy over the last 50+ years could have predicted, as Chalmers Johnson mentions in his excellent book, Blowback.

Somehow, the fact that American lives were lost has to be acknowledged, mourned and remembered...but also kept in perspective. I'm not holding my breath.

The "bitterness" comment was given as what CAN happen in the rural US when things are bad. Having just spent three years there, I can attest to seeing exactly what Obama said in action, so you're not going to convince me that lambasting him for being observant and having the balls to call his own nation on its bullshit is not taking him out of context.

Really, it's not too hard to read the whole context of any phrase taken from it. It just takes a little integrity.

Notice I'm not bashing McCain for the jokes mentioned in the OP, and even in the link I posted, I stated that I take such accusations with a grain of salt. You can rage and rant all you like, but it won't change the fact that rhetoric in the service of one's base is just that. You would have Rev. Wright be an albatross around Obama's neck. That's fine so long as you're willing to acknowledge the clutch of seabirds around McCain's.

Again, not holding my breath.

If thats not a flame I don't know what is.

First thing you've said in this thread with which I can wholeheartedly agree.

Not even close. "The first one makes you" -- the "you" is the general "you", not Crimean Republic. Sir, if you want to see flames that badly, you'll see them on a packet of Corn Flakes.

Uh...right. :rolleyes:

Might it not be possible that a minority preacher (whose entire race was only fairly recently fully emancipated by law, if not yet fully by practice), speaking to his base in a position of influence just might say some things to rile them up?

And the "post-racial" Obama just stood their and shouted Amen with everyone else. I am sorry, but I think that the leader of our nation ought to think that it is the greatest thing on the planet, and should NOT support rhetoric that insults it.

Also, I hate to break it to you, but 9/11 was not the national tragedy we're all supposed to believe it was. It was a regional tragedy at best. A tragedy, to be sure, but a faith-based initiative on the part of Islamic Wack-a-Loons that anyone who's paid attention to US foreign policy over the last 50+ years could have predicted, as Chalmers Johnson mentions in his excellent book, Blowback.

Ah, yes, the classic lets blame America for everything defense. Terrorists are taught to hate us, and there is nothing that we can do to stop that cycle.


The "bitterness" comment was given as what CAN happen in the rural US when things are bad. Having just spent three years there, I can attest to seeing exactly what Obama said in action, so you're not going to convince me that lambasting him for being observant and having the balls to call his own nation on its bullshit is not taking him out of context.


As a proud member of rural America, I would like you to please enlighten me on what exactly you mean, CAN happen their. I have no neighbors who sit in their houses clinging to their guns and Bibles.

If you mean to say that they focus to much on moral issues rather than economic ones, I counter your contention by replying that moral issues are just as important as economic ones.

The soul of the nation is just as important, if not more important than the wallet.

And the "post-racial" Obama just stood their and shouted Amen with everyone else. I am sorry, but I think that the leader of our nation ought to think that it is the greatest thing on the planet, and should NOT support rhetoric that insults it.

Your insistence that criticism is insulting is an insult to the process that forms and shapes America. It's also woefully ignorant of history and the necessity of dissent.

Ah, yes, the classic lets blame America for everything defense. Terrorists are taught to hate us, and there is nothing that we can do to stop that cycle.

How in any way is what I said "blaming America for everything"? You seem to think only in generalizations and blanket statements. That's sad.

As a proud member of rural America, I would like you to please enlighten me on what exactly you mean, CAN happen their. I have no neighbors who sit in their houses clinging to their guns and Bibles.

Been everywhere, have you? No. Three years. North Dakota. My experience opposes yours. Sorry.

If you mean to say that they focus to much on moral issues rather than economic ones, I counter your contention by replying that moral issues are just as important as economic ones.

It isn't that they focus too much on moral issues as opposed to economic ones, rather that they focus too much on moral issues to the exclusion of just about anything else, sometimes including reason.

I counter your counter by saying that moral issues are no place for the federal government when the issue at hand has nothing to do with protecting Americans from injury, loss of life of property. For example: If you think more people are affected by gay marriage than by taxpayer-funded government bailouts of bankrupt private financial institutions, you're sadly mistaken. And yet people like you keep voting for Conservatives who put on a nice religious front but then go on to enrich their corporate cronies as repayment for paying for and/or helping them to get elected.

In particular, small business owners are usually lean Republican, yet no group has done more to hurt small businesses (in favor of corporations) than the Republicans. Just coat your message in Biblical homilies, and you'll win in rural America. It's dishonest and patently obvious, but nobody seems to want that to change. Now someone comes along who's religious and progressive, and suddenly it's called into question? Rev. Wright v Ted Haggard, Oral Roberts and Billy Graham? Tie game at worst.

The soul of the nation is just as important, if not more important than the wallet.

That's one opinion. The soul of the nation is not the government's concern. For example: A government that makes discrimination against a minority (that is only persecuted because of some religions' beliefs that their way of life is immoral) illegal is not harming the majority in any way. The majority's morals are untouched by the government's actions. They are still free to believe what they like -- they're just not allowed to kill, beat up or discriminate against the minority. Sounds like a position Christ would take.

But hey, if you're willing to let someone who knows which strings to pull go ahead and pull them, that's your right. Politics for me has become a matter of how many strings I can see. It's a shame that I'm now voting based on who's blowing the least sunshine up my ass, but that's what it's become. Quoth Lewis Black:

"If this is evolution in terms of political candidates, in twelve years, we're gonna be voting for plants."

And the "post-racial" Obama just stood their and shouted Amen with everyone else. I am sorry, but I think that the leader of our nation ought to think that it is the greatest thing on the planet, and should NOT support rhetoric that insults it.


what makes you think that obama was in the congregation that day?

Uh...right. :rolleyes:

Might it not be possible that a minority preacher (whose entire race was only fairly recently fully emancipated by law, if not yet fully by practice), speaking to his base in a position of influence just might say some things to rile them up?

That's a very bold statement, if entirely incorrect.

There were free African Americans, right here in the bigoted USA. There were free Africans, living on the continent of Africa. Seems to me, if there were people of that race who were not, in fact, enslaved, claiming their entire race was fully emancipated is a teensy bit of an overstatement.


Also, I hate to break it to you, but 9/11 was not the national tragedy we're all supposed to believe it was. It was a regional tragedy at best. A tragedy, to be sure, but a faith-based initiative on the part of Islamic Wack-a-Loons that anyone who's paid attention to US foreign policy over the last 50+ years could have predicted, as Chalmers Johnson mentions in his excellent book, Blowback.

Technically true, emotionally untrue.

Whether individuals, families, communities or states in general can claim this to be a tragedy in terms of life, property or monetary values lost, the majority of the country viewed this as a tragedy. Ergo, it is a national tragedy. Pearl Harbor was seen as a national tragedy, even though only one teensy little military base was really affected. The shuttle disaster that lost 7 people their lives was seen as a national tragedy, even though it was only 7 people. The borders of a city or state don't matter in cases like this. And the fact it was predicted doesn't change this - it was still a national tragedy.


The "bitterness" comment was given as what CAN happen in the rural US when things are bad. Having just spent three years there, I can attest to seeing exactly what Obama said in action, so you're not going to convince me that lambasting him for being observant and having the balls to call his own nation on its bullshit is not taking him out of context.

Does it happen? Sure. Does that make Obama's statement any less breathtaking in its arrogance? Not really. Despite his attempts to portray himself as a "poor black kid from the hood", Obama's been coddled and pampered his entire life, certainly in comparison to those who are truly poor.

This doesn't make McCain any better than Obama. I can't stand either of them and will be writing in my own candidate in November. However, let's try for correct information.

There are far better reasons not to vote for McCaine, I couldn't care less if he likes someone who enjoys telling the odd naughty joke.

We know that McCain supports dudes who joke about rape (one time Texas gubernatorial candidate Clayton Williams) being like the weather (”you might as well lay back and enjoy it”). We know he mocked 17-year-old Chelsea Clinton for being ugly, and said that Janet Reno was her father (ha. ha). So we know he’s a jerk with no sense of humor. But he’s also apparently fond of the occasional rape joke:

Did you hear the one about the woman who is attacked on the street by a gorilla, beaten senseless, raped repeatedly and left to die? When she finally regains consciousness and tries to speak, her doctor leans over to hear her sigh contently and to feebly ask, ‘Where is that marvelous ape?’

…yeah. That’s our potential future president. How can anyone want a president who says this crap?

I'm sorry. I normally respect you as a poster, and I despise W the sequal as much as the next person . . .

but I'm going to have to treat you like DK here. Where's you're link to proof that he actually said this? I have only your statement that he made this joke.

I was that gorilla.

I was that gorilla.

Right, that's it, no more presidency for you!

Right, that's it, no more presidency for you!

I didn't want it anyways. I'd prefer to be known as King Dong I or "The Hook".

So we got the gorilla. Now we need the woman, doctor, and possibly McCain to come testify...

And the "post-racial" Obama just stood their and shouted Amen with everyone else. I am sorry, but I think that the leader of our nation ought to think that it is the greatest thing on the planet, and should NOT support rhetoric that insults it.

George Washington and Abraham Lincoln think both you and this country suck. Now what.

I've told worse jokes.

That's a very bold statement, if entirely incorrect.

There were free African Americans, right here in the bigoted USA. There were free Africans, living on the continent of Africa. Seems to me, if there were people of that race who were not, in fact, enslaved, claiming their entire race was fully emancipated is a teensy bit of an overstatement.

Use of the word "entire" may be technically incorrect, but that's all you've got me on. "Free" as you've chosen to interpret the word may well have been the fact of the matter, but the reality was far from freedom, and you you know it. If you wish to refute me, show me something of substance. I've got centuries of documented slave trading and institutionalized marginalization. What have you got?

Technically true, emotionally untrue.

Whether individuals, families, communities or states in general can claim this to be a tragedy in terms of life, property or monetary values lost, the majority of the country viewed this as a tragedy. Ergo, it is a national tragedy. Pearl Harbor was seen as a national tragedy, even though only one teensy little military base was really affected. The shuttle disaster that lost 7 people their lives was seen as a national tragedy, even though it was only 7 people. The borders of a city or state don't matter in cases like this. And the fact it was predicted doesn't change this - it was still a national tragedy.

"Emotionally untrue"? So the hell what? Pearl Harbor was not a national tragedy, either (actions taken after the attack affected the whole nation, just like actions taken after 9/11 did), and neither was the Challenger disaster. Just because more of the nation could see or hear about an event does not make the event somehow affect the whole nation. By your logic, the Loma Prieta or Northridge earthquakes were national disasters, too. I assure you, it wasn't. Neither was the flooding of the Red River of the North in 1997, yet we all saw it on TV. Making a national disaster out of a local catastrophe is good TV, but that doesn't make it reality.

Does it happen? Sure. Does that make Obama's statement any less breathtaking in its arrogance? Not really. Despite his attempts to portray himself as a "poor black kid from the hood", Obama's been coddled and pampered his entire life, certainly in comparison to those who are truly poor.

This doesn't make McCain any better than Obama. I can't stand either of them and will be writing in my own candidate in November. However, let's try for correct information.

Tell you what: heed your own advice and I'll be glad to call your information factual. When it's "arrogant" do accurately describe something, then arrogance becomes a positive quality.

I'm sorry. I normally respect you as a poster, and I despise W the sequal as much as the next person . . .

but I'm going to have to treat you like DK here. Where's you're link to proof that he actually said this? I have only your statement that he made this joke.
its all over the news. they arent recent jokes. the chelsea clinton one is from '99. the rape one is from the 80's

its all over the news. they arent recent jokes. the chelsea clinton one is from '99. the rape one is from the 80's

Well, the rape "joke" is the subject of the thread. If this is "all over the news" then it shouldn't be difficult for you or the OP to put up a link sourcing this claim. I don't put up with this tactic from DK and I'm not putting up with it from my own side either. It has been claimed that McCain has said something horrible, that could well be damaging to his campaign. However, until someone proves to me that he actually made this "joke" I'm going to have to file it right next to "OMGWTFBBQ!!!11one! 0b4m4 iz teh Muz1um!"

If thats not a flame I don't know what is.

Last time I checked, posting a reasonable and accurate statement with which you disagreed was not the definition of flaming.

Of course, the Republican playbook says that dissent in war time is unpatriotic and legal rights help the terrorists, so dismissing something you don't agree with as flaming is on about the same level of logic and honesty.

(I would have replied as Skyland Mt, but I can't log in as that nation at the moment, so this was the only way to quickly respond to this personal attack).

To be fair, I haven't heard this on the news, but I get my news mainly from a few sources, so perhaps its been reported elsewhere. I would, however, apreciate a link as well. Proof matters, unless us Democrats are going to sink to the same level of mudslinging and outright lies as the GOP.

I honestly don't care about the joke that much. It is certainly not on my long list of things that disqualify McCain for President.

Why are we only discussing women as victims? Are they the only ones for whom rape is not funny? Don't tell me you've never laughed at any movies, late night skits, or songs (prison Bitch) which featured the more humorous side of rape. If you have then you have no right to judge.

Well, the rape "joke" is the subject of the thread. If this is "all over the news" then it shouldn't be difficult for you or the OP to put up a link sourcing this claim. I don't put up with this tactic from DK and I'm not putting up with it from my own side either. It has been claimed that McCain has said something horrible, that could well be damaging to his campaign. However, until someone proves to me that he actually made this "joke" I'm going to have to file it right next to "OMGWTFBBQ!!!11one! 0b4m4 iz teh Muz1um!"
sorry. cant be bothered. if you dont keep up, its your problem not mine.

sorry. cant be bothered. if you dont keep up, its your problem not mine.

Again, this is a much used tactic that a lot of posters get on DK and others about. When someone makes a claim it is their responsibility to provide proof and back it up, not my responsibility to seek the proof out on my own. If you can't be arsed to prove your contention then why should I bother looking it up?

Yes, prove your claim. That is one of the most lame excuses.

Again, this is a much used tactic that a lot of posters get on DK and others about. When someone makes a claim it is their responsibility to provide proof and back it up, not my responsibility to seek the proof out on my own. If you can't be arsed to prove your contention then why should I bother looking it up?
its not my thread.

We know that McCain supports dudes who joke about rape (one time Texas gubernatorial candidate Clayton Williams)
I don't know, do we want a guy who goes to a black supremacy church?

its not my thread.

You are however the one who responded to my request for proof. The correct response is not "look the proof up yourself". You seem to back the claim, you also claim that it's "all over the news". If this is so find me a link that proves he said this horrible thing, otherwise stop making false claims.

I don't know, do we want a guy who goes to a black supremacy church?

Good thing that doesn't describe either candidate then, doesn't it?

Well, the rape "joke" is the subject of the thread. If this is "all over the news" then it shouldn't be difficult for you or the OP to put up a link sourcing this claim. I don't put up with this tactic from DK and I'm not putting up with it from my own side either. It has been claimed that McCain has said something horrible, that could well be damaging to his campaign. However, until someone proves to me that he actually made this "joke" I'm going to have to file it right next to "OMGWTFBBQ!!!11one! 0b4m4 iz teh Muz1um!"

You are the one who is offended by it. If it's so easy why don't you look it up?

Apologizes for Clinton joke
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C00E6DD173CF932A15755C0A96E958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1

Many blogs have a copy of the article of the ape rape joke:
http://www.theseminal.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/mccain_joke.jpg

An associate makes a rape joke but he decides to keep the campaign money.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/15/mccain-cancels-fundraiser-over-oilmans-rape-comments/

Joke or not. Guess he forgot that bit about being "an officer and a gentleman"

I don't know, do we want a guy who goes to a black supremacy church?

Next, I suppose you'll be saying he's a Muslim?

Just admit you don't like that he's black.

Next, I suppose you'll be saying he's a Muslim?

Just admit you don't like that he's black.

But don't you know? Obama is a Closet Muslim Nazi with a Whitey-Hatin' Christian Pastor. It's true!

I know that my post will not change the views of any of you, nor do I strive to do so. The fact that we spend so much time and effort on bashing politicians is to me ridiculous. The president should be judged on credentials, on experience, on his platform. now I know this to be merely a hope and/or dream by me and others like me.We know this not to be a reality, and sadly this mudslinging extends far beyond just presidential politics.

The fact that our presidential election has come down to being determined by a few mistakes (or more) made by them when they were younger to me is dumb, and holding them to a higher standard than we do ourselves. Now, granted, I am not saying that they shouldn't be holding them to a higher standard than ourselves, because after all they are the elite who will be leading our country. However in doing so, we say that you must be the Christ himself, or as close to it as possible. Now, this is an exaggeration, but the fact is that no one is perfect, and everyone has skeletons in the closet.

Personally, I hold alot of respect for the candidate who can get up in front of the country, run on his credentials, and not tear down his opposition in the process. Politics seem to birth some of the biggest hypocrites I've seen. Not only on issues, but as well when speaking about each other. For example, this thread is bashing on McCain for that off-color joke, agreed it was off-color. But what about Blonde jokes, Black jokes, Mexican jokes, etc. All of these jokes target a group of people, and are inflammatory to that group, however the rape joke was instead a joke that hits on our taste for morality and decency. Both are off color, and both are inappropriate in public, but to we bash someone for saying one more than the other?

Now, lastly before I retire for the evening, I would like to say a few last things. People who vote along party lines for the sake of voting along party lines are incredibly irritating, and should think before voting. Blanket statements and generalizations are just that and should be taken as such, there is nothing wrong with them, there is a time and a place for them, just as anything else.

I expect to see this post torn to pieces and see everyone nit-picking what I'm saying, and if you intend to do such that is your right. This is only my opinion, and it is being voiced at 3 AM. And before any jabs at my politics come up, I am a white male from Washington State (Consistently Democratic State), I am a conservative, I have very conservative views (thus the chance for a right wing bias in my article that I didn't catch). I have not sided with McCain, nor with Obama, I will not lay a solid claim until election time rolls around. Until then i intend to let things play out, and see their cards.

I also share liberal views, which is alright and normal. People will not always agree 100% with their party platform, and often will not agree 100% with their candidate, the sad truth is that it generally boils down to, The Lesser Of Two Evils.

~Chris

But don't you know? Obama is a Closet Muslim Nazi with a Whitey-Hatin' Christian Pastor. It's true!

It's Clinton-style campaigning: use every smear you can, even if they contradict, and hope no one notices. After all, it worked so well for her.:)

You are however the one who responded to my request for proof. The correct response is not "look the proof up yourself". You seem to back the claim, you also claim that it's "all over the news". If this is so find me a link that proves he said this horrible thing, otherwise stop making false claims.
yes my response was to offer support for bitchkittens OP. if you dont consider my saying that its all over the net to be adequate proof...that to me is the same as someone saying "foxnews isnt a good source". if my word isnt enough for you, fine. go look it up yourself then and see what is true.

we arent dependant on the OP for our knowledge. we are all able to look things up for ourselves. if you find a story sketchy, look it up yourself.

not providing proof that statisfies you is not the same as lying.

You are the one who is offended by it. If it's so easy why don't you look it up?

A: I'm not the one who said it was easy.
B: Whenever one of our Conservative members post things like this with no source they get jumped on to provide the source themselves.


Apologizes for Clinton joke
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C00E6DD173CF932A15755C0A96E958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


Irrelevant, this is about the rape "joke".

Many blogs have a copy of the article of the ape rape joke:
http://www.theseminal.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/mccain_joke.jpg


Great, any reliable sources that might be considered to be valid or just blogs?

yes my response was to offer support for bitchkittens OP. if you dont consider my saying that its all over the net to be adequate proof...that to me is the same as someone saying "foxnews isnt a good source". if my word isnt enough for you, fine. go look it up yourself then and see what is true.

we arent dependant on the OP for our knowledge. we are all able to look things up for ourselves. if you find a story sketchy, look it up yourself.

not providing proof that statisfies you is not the same as lying.

I find the story sketchy precisely because of the refusal by anyone in this thread to provide proof. Link me to a reliable news organization that is reporting on this subject. If the proof exists, then provide it. The only reason I can think of that you and the OP refuse to do so is that the proof either does not exist or it's unconvincing in some manner. I don't know what you feel it benefits you or your argument to refuse to provide proof, but for me arguing you into providing proof is a simple matter of equal treatment of both sides.

I know that my post will not change the views of any of you, nor do I strive to do so. The fact that we spend so much time and effort on bashing politicians is to me ridiculous. The president should be judged on credentials, on experience, on his platform. now I know this to be merely a hope and/or dream by me and others like me.We know this not to be a reality, and sadly this mudslinging extends far beyond just presidential politics.



That is the nature of politics. Can you name an era where character attacks were not in play. Politics would be rather boring if everybody played nice.

HL Mencken offered an opinion on why good men(and women) have problems reaching national office when campaigns are conducted remotely.

From an article entitled "Bayard vs. Lionheart"

The larger the mob, the harder the test. In small areas, before small electorates, a first-rate man occasionally fights his way through, carrying even the mob with him by force of his personality. But when the field is nationwide, and the fight must be waged chiefly at second and third hand, and the force of personality cannot so readily make itself felt, then all the odds are on the man who is, intrinsically, the most devious and mediocre — the man who can most easily adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum.

The Presidency tends, year by year, to go to such men. As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.

I find the story sketchy precisely because of the refusal by anyone in this thread to provide proof. Link me to a reliable news organization that is reporting on this subject. If the proof exists, then provide it. The only reason I can think of that you and the OP refuse to do so is that the proof either does not exist or it's unconvincing in some manner. I don't know what you feel it benefits you or your argument to refuse to provide proof, but for me arguing you into providing proof is a simple matter of equal treatment of both sides.

Sorry we are not here to spoon feed you proof that is only acceptable to your opinions.

If you had bothered to click the link I offered you would have seen the copy of the newspaper article that published the story.

The fact it is a blog is irrelevant.

As Ash said, you don't like it then look it up.

Sorry we are not here to spoon feed you proof that is only acceptable to your opinions.

If you had bothered to click the link I offered you would have seen the copy of the newspaper article that published the story.

The fact it is a blog is irrelevant.

As Ash said, you don't like it then look it up.

Edit: Damn, you did say "copy of the article". I apologize and blame lack of sleep and 14 hours of chasing an Autistic 7 year old around a zoo trying to keep him from jumping into animal enclosures and such.

Now that I've read the only "proof" of this "joke" that has been given, all I see is the actual accusation. Therefore, in absence of further proof it gets filed along with "OMG! 0b4m4 iz teh Mu$1im".

McMurder also enjoys making "jokes" about bombing other countries, about Iranians dying of lung cancer, etc. Sick fascist fuck.

personally, i support obama but if mccain wants to make a joke (albeit a very unfunny one, if thats how it really was worded) than i say go for it and that it shouldnt damage his campaign in any way

as long as someone is against rape in all acuality theres no harm done in making a joke about rape; though you obviously wouldnt joke about it to a rape victim, unless said rape victim was 100% okay with it and you knew so before hand
and before anyone goes calling me sexist or whatever else, im female

That is the nature of politics. Can you name an era where character attacks were not in play. Politics would be rather boring if everybody played nice.


I'm not saying that it has ever happened, to me however I feel it would be nice if that were not the case. And Yes, that is the nature of what Politics has become, not necessarily the nature of what it must be. The mudslinging is birthed from the Politician being unsure of whether or not he will win, so in order to "insure" himself a victory he tears down the opponent as much as he can, digging up whatever he can, and making up whatever he can't. Just because that is how it has always been does not mean its how it should be. And as far as Politics being boring, some people may find the mudslinging entertaining, but that is all it is. Mudslinging is not politics, it is 2+ children who haven't grown up enough to be civilized. You say it would be boring if everyone played nice? I say it would be more enjoyable to watch.

Now that I've read the only "proof" of this "joke" that has been given, all I see is the actual accusation. Therefore, in absence of further proof it gets filed along with "OMG! 0b4m4 iz teh Mu$1im".
or you could LOOK IT UP.

or you could participate in the actual thread and give you opinion of whether or not a candidate having a slight history of ugly jokes makes him unworthy of your vote.

Wow - he actually said it as written in the OP, apologies to Bitchkitten for my doubt because I just couldn't believe he'd use those phrases, turns it from a possible joke into something different, as though he relished the raped, beaten and left for dead part.

Certainly changes my opinion, I find it a little disturbing.

Wow - he actually said it as written in the OP, apologies to Bitchkitten for my doubt because I just couldn't believe he'd use those phrases, turns it from a possible joke into something different, as though he relished the raped, beaten and left for dead part.

Certainly changes my opinion, I find it a little disturbing.

Are you referring to the link posted here? If so all I saw was two people making an unsubstantiated claim that he told this "joke".

I think this thread was inspired as just an anti McCain thread by my comments on another thread. I think I am right, that said, I could be wrong.

Its still about MCCain & Obama. Good comment by you Lunatic Goofballs.

I really am a heck of a nice guy, dude. Even if I say so myself. lol.

Um, no. It's not about Obama. Read the fucking OP. It's about McCain's appreciation of tasteless jokes, including one told by him about a woman being raped by a gorilla.

And if you're such a nice guy, you're certainly not showing it. You seem to be an extremely arrogant, mean-spirited, bitter person. In other words, a fucking dick. Not that I'm not, but if that's not the impression you'd like to make, you should change your posting style.

Are you referring to the link posted here? If so all I saw was two people making an unsubstantiated claim that he told this "joke".

Seems so, and it's dated from '86 as well, during the Congress race against Richard Kimball, the doctor who was falsely accused of murdering his wife before escaping and becoming a fugitive.

Fascinating.

...and I guess I come back to my original point, is this really what the race is about, comments made when John McCain was 13 and said that Sally smelled and she was a girl so she couldn't join the football team?