|
|
|
User loginNavigationAbout KnoxViewsUpcoming events
Other KnoxViews blogsWho's onlineThere are currently 9 users and 214 guests online.
|
McCain Picks Palin!
Submitted by sugarfatpie on Fri, 2008/08/29 - 10:26am.
YEEEHAWWW!! "1. There goes McCain's best argument. |
Can't wait to see her debate Biden.
Obama noted last night that McCain has questioned Obama's judgement but gave numerous examples of McCain's bad judgement. Here's the Exhibit A example. I guess he's trying to go after disaffected Hillary voters? What a ridiculous stunt. I'm guessing they won't be buying it.
http://community.adn.com/adn/node/127769
That's good stuff, Carole, and exactly the kind of plainly critical behavior that can be used to show a lack of judgment in governing.
Two angles:
1. The obvious "Who's running the show" angle.
2. So, Palin engages in the same secretive behavior as Cheney? More of the same.
She brings nobody but the GOP base to the table (guns, abortion, etc). This is a pander to those mythical PUMAs, which will go down as one of the great political head fakes ever.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Alaska has a lot of potential corruption being investigated
Looks like at least an even dozen....
Link...
If that is true, in that environment, it would seem to be tough for an honest person to get elected to anything
Anyone know how McCain voted on allotting money to the Alaska 'Bridge to Nowhere?' and other Alaska related peculiarities?
Link...
He was against it but not enough to show up for the some votes against it.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Alaska seems like a foreign land as corrupt as Louisiana
The Alaskan oil industry is nationalized, just like in Venezuela. Maybe McCain plans to share oil company profits with all Americans and not just Alaskans!
Now Rikki you can't say that. It's a fact, not the TRVTH.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
"The Alaskan oil industry is nationalized, just like in Venezuela."
And all this time I've been thinking Alaska was a mere state.
I've been thinking Alaska was a mere state
Yes, a mere state that sends its citizens oil royalty checks every year, just like Venezuela. Do you know of a word describing that arrangement that does not contain the root "nation"? I don't, so I just used what was available.
Do you know of a word
Socialized?
Heh.
Perfect!
Liberty and justice for all.
My home
The Alaskan oil industry is nationalized, just like in Venezuela.
Link Please.
TRVTH REVEALED!
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
...all that much about Palin. Yet.
But you folks who oppose her seem to be clutching at straws.
You should have seen this coming. Now that it's happened, you better come up with better stuff than Landauer's, and with all due respect, Carole's, both of whose critiques seem pretty weak.
This race is so tight. You need to blow her out of the water. My bet is that you'll not be able to.
All five of those arguments are weak?
OK then, put forward some better ones yourself.
Don't just sit on the sidelines taking pot-shots.
Make a real contribution to the discussion.
Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin
"OK then, put forward some better ones yourself."
I don't think there are any. That's my point.
About the worst objective thing you can say about Palin is that she's the governor of a state with a population that's about the size of Knox County's.
Mike Ragsdale, ready on day one to step into the Presidency.
Liberty and justice for all.
My home
Mike Ragsdale, ready on day one
He wouldn't have sat there reading about a pet goat because he would have already finished the story!
Really, though, if as much attention had been paid to the tens of billions spent constructing and operating military prisons as has been devoted to the tens of thousands spent by Ragsdale, several current and former White House officials would be in non-military prisons right now.
Today, McCain secured the conservative vote.
Palin has a few things Barry Hussein doesn’t: over seven years of executive experience (um, see, she actually ran something successfully with her approval ratings soaring up to 90 percent! ); an entire political career crusading against the political machine that rules Alaska, which exists in her own Republican party; and more practical experience in diplomacy than Biden or Obama have ever seen.
Obama, in contrast, talked a great deal about “reform” in Chicago but never challenged the party machine, and now people are starting to ask where the $160 million he oversaw on the Annenberg Project (at the direction of his terrorist buddy, Bill Ayers) went. And neither Obama nor Biden have any executive experience.
And let’s face it — Team Obama can hardly attack Palin for a lack of foreign-policy experience. Obama has none at all.
Stick a fork in The Messiah, his terrorist buddies, and his race pimp pastor.
They’re all done.
BWAAA-HAAA-HAAAA-HAAA!!!!! (stops to take a breath) BWAAA-HAAA-HAAAA-HAAA!!!!!
...who see through this ploy to grab angry Hillary supporters.
This does NOTHING for McCain where he needs it-the middle.
And the ultra-conservatives will probably still have a problem voting for a woman.
Regardless, playing to your base with the VP slot is a clear sign of weakness.
Obama did the smart thing and played to the middle with his pick.
This move earns McSame a new moniker: McStupid
-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin
The "ploy" as you call it will work and will because those Hillary voters know full well that McCain, should he win, will only be a one-term President. Thus, in 2012, it would be Hillary versus Palin and that would be a "Hillary supporter's" dream contest election, two women going at it.
Also, McCain has shored up his conservative base, something that has been a mess since the 2006 Mid-Term Elections. Add in that his selection has someone who is fresh (unlike Biden, who is old news), an outsider that is not beholden to special interests, and she is a mother of 5-one with Down Syndrome, that will connect her to the heartstrings of the Electorate.
Playing to the base is how any candidate wins an election and the that base has been waiting for a smart move. You forget that it was the voters that put McCain in the position where he is and all of this constant diatribe, like that will win the election, means nothing. Obama should be thankful that Palin is the pick because this takes the "experience card" off the table for both major parties. It means that the candidates really will be the issue and their record the debate, not these childish comments and ads about meaningless matters.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
childish comments and ads about meaningless matters
childish comments like saying that SPLC is as bad as organizations that advocate genocide simply because they once frustrated a research project of yours?
meaningless matters like your insistence that the Second Amendment guarantees the separation of powers?
Those are definitely forgettable drivel, so let's bring on the real issues, like Republican foreign policy and financial deregulation triggering a credit collapse, bank bailouts, a plunging dollar and ballooning deficits.
Frustrating a research project that was attempting to deal with an issue that had just cost 162 people their lives in Oklahoma City is childish to you? Also, I suggest that get an education on the US Constitution, and then you can see how critical the Second Amendment is for its success. Your blinders about firearms is so bad that you are consumed hate. The problem with you and others like you is that you live with those blinders on that fill you with hate and that hate drives your entire existence, not just your concern for the election. Also, changing the subject, digressing, engaging in irrelevancies, and ad hominem attacks does not change the fact that most of this election chatter to date has been childish but that may be about to change.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Frustrating a research project that was attempting to deal with an issue that had just cost 162 people their lives in Oklahoma City is childish to you?
No, you saying SPLC is "as bad as" a group that advocates genocide is childish.
I suggest that get an education on the US Constitution
I asked you to explain how the Second Amendment guarantees the separation of powers, and you ignored me. Don't tell me I need an education while you refuse to answer my questions. How does the Second Amendment guarantee the separation of powers? An example from our history demonstrating how this works would be very helpful.
I've explained my answer three or four times already, how many times do you need it?
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
I've explained my answer three or four times already
I apologize if I've missed a post somewhere in these long threads. I can recall you restating your claim and buttressing it with some dull-witted slander against Liberals and their blinders, but apparently I missed a post or three where you actually demonstrated the Second Amendment in action upholding the separation of powers. Again, sorry for my carelessness. Perhaps you can just post a link to the answer(s) I missed.
You haven't been paying attention in the last four cycles, then.
Obama bin Biden. Edwards' haircuts. Clinton's penis. "Harold! Call me!" Max Cleland as a coward and traitor who'd sooner coddle terrorists. Zell Miller barking about "spitballs" at the RNC.
The Swift Boat Veterans thing (as petulant of a smear campaign as ever has been perpetrated) was only hitting its stride by this time four years ago.
And who can forget "AL GORE INVENTED THE INTERNET! AL GORE INVENTED THE INTERNET! AL GORE INVENTED THE INTERNET! AL GORE INVENTED THE INTERNET! AL GORE INVENTED THE INTERNET! AL GORE INVENTED THE INTERNET! AL GORE INVENTED THE INTERNET! AL GORE INVENTED THE INTERNET! Ozone Man! Love Canal! Love Story! Earth tones! St. Albans!"
McCain got bit by this machine as well back in 2000 when the Bush campaign team successfully spread the falsehood that McCain had fathered a "nigger baby." (And before you grasp your pearls and start swooning about supposed liberal incivility, it's a direct quote from McCain's book; this was a McCain campaigner describing the push polling used against McCain by other Republicans. That he would now accept this party's nomination says a lot more about him than about his party, if you ask me.)
Electioneering is all about marketing teh stoopid. And as a self-described political
hackprofessional, you should know that. Irrelevancies win and lose elections.____________________________
the distance between black & white is much further than i would like until now i never noticed that fascism has many disguises -d. boon, 1981
Winning elections is about doing one thing, getting one more vote than your opponent and that is done by how one connects with the heart of the voter. Bill Clinton did that but in both of his elections he never won more than 47% of the Electorate (something that Liberals never mention) and yet, look at him now, he is so popular because he connects with the heart of the voter.
Now as to Al Gore, he is the one who claims that he invented the Internet.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Now as to Al Gore, he is the one who claims that he invented the Internet.
With your impressive scholarly research credentials, you should be able to come up with the quote to back that up.
We don't mention it because it's not true. Clinton got 49.2% in 1996. That we mention, even if ruefully. Clinton did not govern as a liberal either except to a wingnut such as you.
The Al Gore "quote" is, was, and always will be bullshit.
Even corrected, your comment is not on point, but it is a good example of all the ridiculous crap that Republicans throw at us. You've proven Andy right about the fact that irrelevancies win and lose elections.
Liberty and justice for all.
My home
Well, Clinton never won a majority of the votes, something every Liberal MOUTH goes on about regarding the 2000 Election, go figure. Also, Clinton did govern as a Liberal when he first entered office but began to see that it would not work and compromised, which is what you do in politics and this is the real issue before us today. Why that all competing sides do not get that truth about politics is the great crux of the problem in 2008. The problem with Liberals is that you all live with your blinders on in such a way that you cannot comprehend that just because someone disagrees with you, they are a "right-wing Republican." This is why, save for the Mid-Term 2006 Elections, Dem's cannot win in this country anymore.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
I know it's my fault and all for proving you wrong, so of course you want to change the subject. There's no sense in my explaining how liberals continue to say true things about both the 1996 election and the 2000 election. You'd just find some other tangent to take to keep that chip balanced on your shoulder.
The problem you have here at KnoxViews is that you're pretending to be smart, but many of us can tell by what you write and how you write it that you're an ideologue and idiot.
Why, for instance, do you capitalize 'liberal'? It just makes you look semi-literate. Ditto the ungrammatical apostrophe in "Dem's".
Have at it, though. I have too much to do to try to educate you.
Liberty and justice for all.
My home
No, the Al Gore comment is not bs. Gore is the one to have claimed that it was his legislation that allowed for the development of the Internet as it is today. However, since the Internet actually went online September 2, 1969 (or its forerunner anyway), I am still puzzled as to how Gore did anything regarding the Internet.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Gore is the one to have claimed that it was his legislation that allowed for the development of the Internet as it is today.
That's true. And it's far from the same thing as "inventing" the Internet.
Jumping to Snopes.com we see a big red FALSE in answer to the claim "Vice-President Al Gore claimed that he "invented" the Internet." They go on to explain that it was taken out of context "when asked to describe what distinguished him from his challenger for the Democratic presidential nomination, Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey" Gore explained "that he was responsible, in an economic and legislative sense, for fostering the development the technology that we now know as the Internet." The actual Gore quote:
Snopes clarifies further:
I really like how Snopes compares Eisenhower's creation of the Interstate Highway System to Gore's creation of the Internet. "Everyone would have understood that Ike meant he was a driving force behind the legislation that created the highway system, and this was the very same concept Al Gore was expressing about himself with his Internet statement."
Doug McCaughan
Reality Me
No, they won't.
No, he didn't.
-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin
Joe Biden is nowhere close to the middle. The only reason he is closer to the middle than Obama is that everybody is closer to the middle than Obama.
over seven years of executive experience
Five of those were as Mayor of a town of less than 10,000 people. Think the Mayor of Lenior City is ready for the White House?
Look, the McCain campaign just gave away the inexperience argument. They can't say Palin (with less than two years as governor) is ready to be President and Obama isn't.
The base will love her, and maybe some disaffected Hillary voters will go for her. Or putting her on the ticket may be viewed as a transparent pander to them. It's hard to know.
Yes, the "experience card" is now off the table and everyone should be thankful for that. Now it will mean examining each ticket and comparing and contrasting for who will best fulfill their duty to the Constitution-the real reason America has this election every four years. Each candidate for President and Vice-President has major strengths and weaknesses, looking at those is what counts but in the final analysis, it is "the heart of the voter" that decides any election. Whichever ticket connects to the heart of the voter is the ticket that will get the most votes and getting the most votes of those who actually vote is all that matters in winning.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
I keep reading that the "experience card is off the table" and I just don't understand that. I'm a "swing voter" and I haven't decided who I'm voting for. I read this site as well as a few others to help me decide because, for the most part, I respect the opinions here even if I don't agree with them. I don't post often, in fact rarely, but I've been around a while. And this is the first time that I've been surprised by the reaction here. I can't speak for other swing voters but the experience card isn't off the table for me.
I expect the top of the ticket to have more experience then the second on the ticket so comparing Obama and Palin's experience isn't relevant for my vote. Compare Obama to McCain and Biden to Palin. And while I'm more impressed with Obama then McCain, he's first "act" as potential President was a failure for me. I don't know that I can vote for him with Biden on the ticket. That didn't help his experience card in my eyes and from the other people I talk to in my position I'm not the only one that feels that way.
If you want to do something different, why not spend some time selling Biden because from what I hear he's Obama's biggest issue right now.
Why don't you try turning that around and seeing how silly that sounds? McSame keeps milking the Obama has too-much-popularity(!) angle, without presenting any reason why we should keep our country hooked to the same Bush/Cheney policies for another 4/8 years. Is that all they have? The GOP had nothing but the same "inexperience" strategy to use on Clinton in '92 and how did that pan out?
There's also Palin's own Troopergate scandal already in progress. And she apparently hates polar bears, even while she supports futile oil drilling that puts the bears at further risk.
Palin has violated perhaps the best known rule of environmental politics...
Never come out against charismatic mega fauna!
-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin
In a small office, on Cook College at Rutgers, a very smart mutual friend of yours and mine, just smiled.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
...but your rejoinder is sillier.
What are you saying? That progressives have as much right to be stupid as conservatives? Well, okay. I guess.
Troopergate will probably turn out not to have legs. Some people suggest that it's all about harassment by a disgruntled former employee of the state. I don't know, but I'd bet on it being a non-factor.
Hates polar bears? Yeah. Right. Like you'll win any converts with Matt Yglesias's Limbaughesque mischaracterizations of anyone.
Keep preaching to the choir. It's no skin off my back.
If you support the principles that drove her campaign, you will work to get Obama elected.
-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin
That is, the 72 yr. old McSame.
Now that's funny! Maybe you mean diplomacy in the sense that Alaska can seem almost like another country? Still your statement is preposterous.
I am married to a man who typically votes Republican and when I forwarded him the links to Wikipedia and Palin's website, his comment was that he thought McCain had just cost himself the election. I don't know that hubby is ready to pull the lever for Obama just yet, but he said that, hand's down, he would support Biden over Palin. Now that's just the view of one 50-something republican-leaning male but, I'd say there are others who think just like him.
On the flip side, Obama's speech firmly cemented my support of him. He thoughtfully and succinctly laid out his platform and qualifications and did it while praising McCain's patriotism and service thus proving (to me) that he really does believe in a UNITED States of America. Yes, he can!
Thanks for letting us know.
-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin
P.S. You are racist, hammer. Not surprising from an Obama hater.
Another way of looking at her credentials. 5/7 of her short time in government represents weak experience compared to Mike Ragsdale.
There you go again. Is that what you said about the other infamous troopergate?
"Is that what you said about the other infamous troopergate?"
Nope. That was part of the vast rightwing conspiracy against the Clintons.
This one is just a plain ol' non-starter. I think.
There's certainly nothing ironic about it.
inquiring minds want to know.
Hey, nine, how about that Alaska strategy??? Is it brilliant on the atomic level?
Well??
Hey, nine, how about that Alaska strategy??? Is it brilliant on the atomic level?
Yes, it is brilliant. The VP debate is a great chance for Biden to come down with hoof and mouth disease.
Judging from all the posts here and on other left leaning blogs the Palin bid achieved the desired effect.
How is that polling going for the ONE?
Of course not. The devil (at least the one in "Bedazzled") wouldn't have settled for Miss Congeniality.
There's no reason to hate Palin, but I'm having a lot of fun with her.
Liberty and justice for all.
My home
Is this a Harriet Miers-like selection?
I assume Palin is more competent, but it has a similar, out-of-left-field type feel to it.
Brian A.
I'd rather be cycling.
Indeed. How many days will the media carry on with this theme next week?
Brian A.
I'd rather be cycling.
Apparently Palin wants everyone to learn about Jesus in public schools.
Praise Jesus! Go Vols!
I wonder if Palin's views on ANWR are reflective of her views on what is allowed in national parks and national forests?
From Yahoo News "Palin views on oil, polar bears may be liabilities"
Link...
Saraldine Quaylin.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Suggested Biden statement, "I know Hillary Clinton, I've worked with Hillary Clinton, and you are no Hillary Clinton."
GOP response: "You are picking on her." [kicks dirt and whines for mommy]
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Picking on a lady with Down Syndrome kid. You cannot say anything bad about her, or question anything about her!
BTW, the same goes for McCain, because he was a POW- I bet you didn't even know that!
Those hardcore anti-abortionists are usually anti-birth control as well. I hope this is researched and comes into play.
The nice folks at the DNC, the Daily Krazy, and the more extreme left leaning blogs will have a field day with Palin.
How long will it take for "Got Gilf" and "Drill Me"?
Palin will get hit harder than any politician in American history. Every time she gets hit votes will be lost for the ONE.
Face it, it's over. Once again the DNC, the Dem's, and the radical left have proven they don't get the American people. They don't understand them and they could care less.
I hereby crown you the king of Knoxviews Trolls. But you have some serious competitors. Tin Cup, Chakra Hammer, JoeBaileyOne. Get to work! Defend your title! Post more comments not worth responding to!
-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin
I hereby crown you the king of Knoxviews Trolls.
I take it you are new here?
Troll
-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin
Not new guy to me. I've known him for years. We're so close that we even shared the same house and are both writing dissertations in the same field. I do have to remind his that Rutgers is the new Clark, though.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
I find it astounding that Liberals cannot handle a competing viewpoint. When someone presents an opinion and viewpoint different from Liberal orthodox doctrine, all that you do is name-call and ad hominem attack with such immature statements as "troll." It goes as to why anyone who is not a Liberal will argue that you all cannot defend your positions and why that Liberals are so weak-kneed.
Also, it does not say much about your belief in the system that we live under here in America. You claim to nearly worship "free speech" but you seek to silence anyone who is against you with the tactic of name-calling. Instead, why don't you try defending your position in a sensible and forthright manner and actually argue your case instead of being a child about it? Your actions of no one but a sanctified Liberal is allowed to post on here is yet another great example of the inability of both sides, Left or Right, to state their positions, argue for them, and if need be compromise on what can be compromised on and get on with life. I post here because there may be a different opinion than my own and how to discuss that but most here are so immature that all you can do is engage in name-calling and childish rants. Try being an adult about it.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
"Competing" != "salient," "coherent," or "meaningful."
Again, where were you a doctoral student?
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
1. Look up the definition of a Troll.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)
Here's a start-
"An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial and irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of provoking other users into an emotional response[1] or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.[2]"
2. Go back over your posts. Count how many times you engage in name-calling. Calling someone a "Liberal" counts in your case because you think Liberals "hate America".
3. Now go back over your posts again. Count how many times you fail to address the main point of what someone is trying to say, and instead wiggle around the edges, putting words in their mouth, associating them with statements they never made,
4. Count how many times you provide no evidence to back up your assertions.
The best example of your Troll-ship was when you said I have a hatred for America. I asked you to substantiate. You couldn't.
Up to that point, I wasn't convinced of your Troll-itude, but that clinched it.
Personally I think there are worse Trolls than you, but your pretty good at it and are therefore a contender for a heavyweight Troll tittle.
-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin
No, you go back over it and list them for me. I will not apologize for writing that "Liberals hate America" because I have seen it or heard it from that camp for years. Furthermore, their hatred is why the Right has gained so much power and left the nation in the condition that it is now, so polarized.
I have written that I think Biden was a good selection for VP, just as I have written that Palin is good too. I do because each candidate brings strengths to their respective tickets, as a VP is supposed to do but here on this site anyone who does tow the orthodox line is a "troll." There's a great deal of what Biden does politically that I do not agree with but I like him anyhow. I believe that Biden, while being a politician, is probably good guy and may speak more from what he believes in his heart than is acknowledged. Also, I may not like it but I can respect him for being different from me because he is sincere about it and that commonality is what is missing in the political debate of 2008. I also like Senator Dodd, and given the role of his father as a war crimes prosecutor I suspect that he knows, deep down, how important it is to do it the American way. Again, most of his politics I do not agree with but I believe him to be sincere and honest man.
So, when I write the same about McCain, Palin, Romney, or whoever, why does that make me a "troll?" Furthermore, instead of ranting about who is a Troll, why not ask why they are for McCain in the Presidential election and then discuss it? You tell me why that you are for Obama-Biden, how about that chief?
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Can you substantiate this? Or are you just blowing hot air?
-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin
Face it, it's over.
I thought it was over when Obama named Biden. Did I misunderstand?
I thought it was over when Obama named Biden. Did I misunderstand?
It was over then. Think toast and charcoal. Just degrees of burnt.
I believe that it will not be "over" until November 4 and until then it is a race between the two major candidates and several 3rd Party ones, contrary to what the media says about it.
I wonder when all sides and the media are going to pause and truly see the historic election before America? The old saying, "anybody can be President" is being played out before us. On the one hand, a man who is half-black and half-white from a background that is not as standard as most could be the next President. Yet, why is he "black?" Think about it, he is multi-racial, not "black." Furthermore, he comes from a basically fatherless family and knows the importance of being a Father and yet is still tepid about playing that card for fear of being seen as a "conservative." Also, he has lived in Hawaii, went to school in New York, Boston, and then made Chicago his home and yet makes his identity as that of those radicals in Chicago, instead of the middle of the road that he should be with his life experience. However, the key point here being that when he started college back in the day, did he ever think that in America, he could be President?
Next up is a man who gave over 5 years of his life as a POW for this nation and her citizens. Even today, the man has physical limitations that hark from that experience, and then add in that he is a Veteran of the Navy, who from such experiences knows directly the heavy weight of sending troops into battle. Also, when he was released as a POW, did he think that all these years he could be the President? First his marriage tanks, and then he has all these wounds, physical and emotional plus he fails in his bid for the Presidency once before, and is nearly wiped out this time before he starts. Yet, here he is almost there.
The VP picks of both sides represent unique stories as well too. On the one hand is a man, who has been an "insider" for years but is also known for frank talk and yet, what is most telling about him is not his "experience" but how he overcame the death of his wife and daughter. This man has known the loneliness and coldness of heart of being a widow and has suffered that most unnatural of horrors, losing a child. Furthermore, he has a son on active duty in the US Army, much like McCain does with one on active duty in the Marines. Thus, when both men speak the real message is often drowned out by the MOUTH's on both sides and the media. The real message being is that each one speaks from the heart (regardless of the realpolitik comments) about their concerns that their sons may face in a war.
Next we see a woman, who has just been working hard all her life finds herself in a position to do more for women than has been to date. Putting aside what the media want to say about her this VP pick is a Mother of 5, one with Down's, and as such knows what most Americans really worry about, how to take care of their family. Yet, here is woman, that much like Obama, probably never thought that she would be in such a position.
Granted that there are 3rd Party candidates that will not get much attention nor votes but let's look at them for a minute too. Look at Nader, he keeps on going and contrary to what some will say, is not just media-hogging but shows that if a person has their convictions, they should act on them no matter what others think. Nader is a living testimony to believing in your cause and always being faithful to it. Now that is an American inspiration story. Add in that the Libertarian candidate has received scant attention but he is a candidate who was influential in the "Republican Revolution" of the 1990's, and yet here he is running against his former party.
There are other many first for this election, two sitting US Senators on the same ticket against another sitting US Senator. For years, being a Senator has actually been a burden and hindrance to winning the Presidency. Yet, much like it was in the 1820's to the 1840's or so, the US Senate is now reasserting its place in Presidential politics. In many ways, the US Senate should be the preeminent political body not only in the nation but the world. Is it showing that it is a force to be reckoned with? Decades have passed since the last Senator was elected, almost five in fact, as the Electorate has favored Executive experience during that time but has that created a pattern of a Presidency who does not know nor care for the legislative process? Are the voters also speaking and saying that they desire someone who can get legislation passed?
Finally, this election will be 29 years to the day of the most significant event in America's history, save for 9/11. The hostage event of the American Embassy in Iran, set into motion foreign policy decisions and actions that have never been remedied and we are still dealing with them now. In many ways, 4 November 1979 was the foundation for 9/11, and yet here we are as a nation still confronting that event. Will the Electorate cast a vote with concerns for that issue? Are they worried that the next President will have to continue to confront that legacy issue?
The best part of this year's election is that the nation may very well see a record turnout for votes. Now that is the real story of electing the President. That once again, power in this country is transferred peaceably and the Constitution is yet affirmed once more since contrary to what may be said about the election, it is always a referendum on the Constitution.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
Finally, this election will be 29 years to the day of the most significant event in America's history, save for 9/11. The hostage event of the American Embassy in Iran, set into motion foreign policy decisions and actions that have never been remedied and we are still dealing with them now.
Wow, you really think that's the second most significant event in American history? Really? I mean REALLY???
First, my apology for not writing "foreign policy" event but in many ways, it is the most important event of the current era.
The Embassy event set into a motion a precedent that shaped US foreign policy and brought about the true beginning of the Terrorist Era. Also, it was a major factor, if not the major factor (trumphing even the economy) of the 1980 Election. Then throughout the 1980's, look at how it shaped events.
The USA supported Iraq in its war with Iran, support that later lead to Hussein thinking he had a free hand with Kuwait and we all know how long we have been dealing with Iraq-in some way or another, 18 years now. It shaped the arms-for-hostages mess and how the USA would conduct actions in a covert manner that basically circumvents the US Constitution. The USA was willing to confront the USSR (and win) but could not deal with a piss-ant nation like Iran, as if the USA was frozen in time to 4 November 1979. This inability to take out, quite frankly, Iran, led their leaders to support terrorist groups the world over with THEM, and NOT al-Qaeda being the main killers of Americans prior to 9/11. In fact, Iranian-supported terrorism has killed more Americans than any event save for 9/11 and the deaths from the invasion of Iraq.
Now I happen to admire Reagan and appreciate what he did as President but let's take a look at "alternative history" here for a moment. What if Carter had successfully dealt with the Embassy event in like a very short time? Say a month or less, look at how that would have swept the nation, probably would have prohibited the USSR from invading Afghanistan, and there would have been no muhajaddin to support, no support of Iraq in its war with Iran, no first Gulf War, no decade-long mess of dealing with Hussein, no basing of American troops in the Kingdom, and thus, no 9/11, not to mention no invasion of Iraq in March, 2003. Something to think if you ask me.
The U.S. Constitution, it is what makes us free and makes us American. Let's treat it as such and with care.
First, my apology for not writing "foreign policy" event but in many ways, it is the most important event of the current era.
I stopped reading after this BS.
Liberty and justice for all.
My home
Suggested Biden statement, "I know Hillary Clinton, I've worked with Hillary Clinton, and you are no Hillary Clinton."
to Biden's ears. I hope he does.
Just heard Pat Buchanan gushing over her. Apparently she was one of his fundraisers in '96.
That should appeal to moderates. As should her opposition to abortion even in cases of rape and incest.
From the Washington Post:
So they figure they can pick just any woman and snag the would-be Hillary voters? Surely they're not that dumb.
Still, I wonder if they considered this one.
Visit us at
The Home
So they figure they can pick just any woman and snag the would-be Hillary voters? Surely they're not that dumb.
Not dumb. Desperate.
I've not heard a Republican locally who thinks this was a good choice.
The words they've used are "Ridiculous" and "It's over." Not a good sign.
Palin is less like Harriet Myers and more like Jesse Ventura. Her opponents in Alaska did themselves in and had worn out their welcome in Alaska politics. Plus, she had the Vandergriff factor, which counts for more in Alaska that it will in the lower 48.
aka Tom Delay, Mitch McConnell, other Bush apologists and neocons..at least she doesn't seem to be from that camp...I see her as still way too conservative with nothing special about her views or proposals in anything...
Her selection seems a definite reach to me.
I don't see the southern repubs voting for her and they were suspicious of McCain anyway...so I expect they will stay at home on election day.
I was thinking tonight that some, shall we say "old-timers?, might have their heads explode trying to decide whether to vote for the ticket with the woman or the ticket with the black guy.
Maybe that is what the Rapture is all about. There will be exploding heads everywhere. :)
Then there's the more common response, such as this from Kevin Drum:
I'd really love to read one of our wingnuts describe Palin's experience, especially relating to foreign policy. At least any U.S. Senator, not even one on the Foreign Relations Committee or Chairman of the subcommittee on European Affairs, is one of 100 people out of 300 million in this country who does get experience to be POTUS. That is a type of elitism, BTW, and it's also pretty damn useful for someone in the office or a heartbeat away.
Obama's main obstacle is convincing people he's up to the task. Thanks to Palin, that's all been settled now. I'm glad we're both happy about this, JB1. I shudder to think she could be president, though. She might as well have been plucked from the street at random.
BTW, don't miss Kevin Drum's list on Palin's record. This is but one doozy (where I added the emphasis):
One more before I leave for a week's vacation. This woman has a young baby, which also has special needs. How much one-on-one care can the VP of the U.S. (or even such a candidate) provide to this child? Or how much prezidentin' can a truly devoted young mother really manage?
What does this say about John McCain's family values and his judgment that he would ask her to do this, and what does it say about her own family's value and her judgment that she would say yes?
This woman has almost nothing in common with Hillary Clinton, yet this choice must have been only a desperate pander to get her supporters. Any of that bunch who follow over to McSame/Palin because she's female would be the true sexists.
Yes, it would not surprise me if she has second thoughts and drops out.
This woman has a young baby, which also has special needs. How much one-on-one care can the VP of the U.S. (or even such a candidate) provide to this child? Or how much prezidentin' can a truly devoted young mother really manage? etc.
Are you joking? Where's the sarcasm tag?
That is pretty awful. The woman already is state governor, fer cryin' out loud - leave crap like questioning her parenting skills to the 'nutters. Or to, well, the press.
(As an aside, I wonder how much we're going to hear about this woman's choice of attire.)
____________________________
the distance between black & white is much further than i would like until now i never noticed that fascism has many disguises -d. boon, 1981
He did.
Yup, I hope that's sarcasm. If not, it's sexism and you should cut it out.
Aren't you worried about how much time Obama can devote to his family?
He has young children - but then I guess its ok because his wife will drop her career take care of all that for him?
Perhaps Vlad Cheney can help with that.
You start out by shooting a lawyer.
Perhaps the Republicans plan to just have Cheney pulling different strings as a ghost VP should they manage to
stealwin the election.One thing we must admit about Cheney, he does have experience.
Visit us at
The Home
Yeah, That ghost VP is what I worry about. Most likely it would be a whole committee with Rove as moderator.
____________________________________
"Whoever corrects a mocker invites insult; whoever rebukes a wicked man incurs abuse."
FWIW (and it's only a sample of 1):
My mom is 80. She's an independent. She's voted more Dem in recent years but at heart she's a Howard Baker Republican (i.e., not a winger).
She was a strong Hillary supporter. She has come around to saying she'll vote for Obama, but she's not real happy about it.
In short, she is exactly the kind of person McCain needs to appeal to.
I got an email from her this morning. It said: What do you think about McCain's pick for VP? I think he's lost his marbles.
Farmgirl, thanks for posting, it's great to hear a fresh perspective. But I'm curious about your objection to Biden. Are you saying you'd have preferred it if Obama chose someone with less experience?
To me, the VP does 2 things, assists the president and stands by in case of death or inability to serve. I felt Biden was a good choice because he is very strong in foriegn policy experience and understanding. Plus he's competent to be president in the (I hope) unlikely event that came about. My huge concern about Palin is she is just not ready to be president. Perhaps if she were running with someone younger you could cross your fingers and hope for the best, but the possibility of McCain not serving out his term seems very high.
____________________________________
"Whoever corrects a mocker invites insult; whoever rebukes a wicked man incurs abuse."
Thanks, Goose,
I'd have preferred him pick Hillary. It seemed the most obvious choice to me considering the support she had and her experience.
Biden has tried to get elected twice and failed both times yet now he's makes a good choice to be President if he's needed? His support as a candidate was not encouraging. And I know this won't go a long way in an argument, but it's what my vote will come down to, but most of my reaction to Biden is my own gut feeling. He looked smug to me at the convention like he finally got his and that's not reassuring. I just don't get a good feeling about him. He's been a politician most of his adult life. I don't think he has a good feel of what life is like for most of us in this country. My opinion is that most politicians are in the pocket of some special interest group--I think Biden's is the credit card industry. I don't like that thought. We're dealing with a VP now who's in the pocket of a defense contractor and look what that's got us.
If you've got info on Biden that will change my mind, I'm looking and open to reading it. I'm looking for facts not rhetoric to help me make my decision. I'd prefer to hear why I should vote for Obama/Biden then why I shouldn't vote for McCain/Palin. I'm tired of having to pick the lessor of two evils and that just reinforces that feeling for me. It also insults my intellengence and my ability to make my own decision.
And while we're at it can we lay off the "McCain's not going to make it through the next 4 years". I had a grandfather that lived until he was 90 and was as sharp as anyone until 6 months before he died (when the cancer took his mind) and I had a highschool friend that didn't make it to her 18th birthday because of a drunk driver. None of us know how long we have. If you have a medical report that shows he's in poor health than I'll take that, but his age is no proof for me.
If anyone is up for an honest, respectful and rhetoric free discussion, I'm interested and am opening to learning more about this ticket.
I don't think he has a good feel of what life is like for most of us in this country. My opinion is that most politicians are in the pocket of some special interest group--I think Biden's is the credit card industry.
This is all true, but it's always true of federal candidates. It is often true of state candidates as well. Really, it's just different industries at different levels. At the county levels developers fund campaigns. At the state level, road builders are big. Federally, it's defense contractors.
Some industries, like credit cards, used to be regulated at the state level and lobbied to come under federal control so they have only one legislature to corrupt instead of 50. Industry control over government is a pervasive problem that voters have to address at all levels.
As long as it costs a billion dollars to run for President, candidates are going to be compromised by monied interests. You can find pure candidates running for City Council, even State House; higher than that they are all compromised. The clean ones have no money and get ignored by the media.
To fix this problem is going to require lots of work at every level, and your Presidential vote is your least effective vehicle for resistance. I wholeheartedly support voting third party, independent, etc in contests where the winner is certain. I will likely vote third party against Duncan and Alexander. The Democrat will not win, and Lugo and others more closely reflect my interests, so they will get my vote.
At the Presidential level, we actually have a rare opportunity to support a candidates who truly knows what it is like for us mortals. Barack Obama had a modest upbringing. What modest wealth he has earned came through hard work, dedication and teamwork with his wife. It was not long ago that his income kept just ahead of his bills like it does for the majority who own one or zero houses. We certainly don't need a President with seven houses and a beer distributorship.
Biden is one of the poorest Senators. He rides Amtrak with the people he represents. His take from the credit card industry is a concern, but he had thousands of accomplices in state and federal offices all over the nation, from both parties.
Obama/Biden is the best shot we have had at putting normal Americans in the White House in decades, and if we pass up the opportunity, it may be a long time before a better one comes along.
Is that true of Palin?
How much does one of his Amtrack rides cost?
Sounds to me like Palin was in the pocket of the bar owners when she was in Wasilla, the ANWR lobby, the "global warming is natural" lobby -AKA big oil, and her sister-in-law in Anchorage.
-Sugarfatpie (AKA Alex Pulsipher)
"X-Rays are a hoax."-Lord Kelvin