The Sarah Palin Thread (You can see Russia from this thread)

[StorminNorman]

But she believes the Earth is 6,000 years old!

That's completely false and full of the worst smelling **** ever tossed around on this planet!

We just came off of eight years of a Christofascist nutjob who believes God spoke to him. I don't want that faux logic further deteriorating the executive branch anymore.

Christ, if I believed that a magic cigarette lighter orbiting mars invented oxygen and created the Earth twenty-two years ago, then I'd be considered bat**** insane. I don't consider her beliefs to be worthy of any respect, because they have been trumped by science; if she believes in something which has been debunked OUTRIGHT by science, then what in God's name makes her smart enough to lead this country if she's forced to step in?

:huh:

Do I agree with Palin's beliefs? Of course not, but she is entitled to her own beliefs. Her believing the Earth is 6,000 years old has no impact on me, she is entitled to that right - if she wants to make a law dictating that all of America's children should be taught to believe that, I will have an issue. As it stands though, I couldn't careless.

I am much, MUCH more concerned with a politicians beliefs in the area of political ideology - an area where I find Obama's beliefs about wealth redistribution far more scary than Palin's beliefs on the planets age.

[The Senator]

I think someone who has the ability to stand up to long-time incumbents in her own party and wealthier opponents in the other party....and beat them, is clearly not a push-over. I hope Biden goes in with the attitude you guys in this thread have.

BTW, its less than 48 hours since the announcement, and this thread has developed more than 5x as many posts as the Biden thread did in 5 days. Good job McCain! Who will be the 1000th poster?

Only because the vast majority of the posters here believe this to be the most ridiculous, critique-worthy VP pick in the history of modern presidential elections :up:

[UA-Archangel]

How about McCain sends Palin back to Alaska so she can build up a resume and accomplish something worthy of the office she's been selected for before anyone is required to take her seriously? :huh:

She has accomplished something worthy.

She became a VP nominee.:yay:

[Gilpesh]

She said that she doesn't believe in censoring the discussion, that means it could be discussed in any class that the teacher allows.

That's a pretty weak stance on it. That lacks character... :whatever:

[X Knight]

how bout Obama gain more experience and achievements before he runs for PRESIDENT????

[StorminNorman]

Only because the vast majority of the posters here believe this to be the most ridiculous, critique-worthy VP pick in the history of modern presidential elections :up:

The vast majority of posters here also believe Obama would be a better President than John McCain - but of course I am sure that has little impact on their opinions on the subject. :up:

[UA-Archangel]

That's a pretty weak stance on it. That lacks character... :whatever:

It doesn't have to be an either/or situation.

I personally don't believe that global warming is driven mainly by man. A lot of evidence suggests that the sun is the major driver.

That doesn't mean, however, that I don't think the issue should not be discussed in the classroom. If a teacher allows it, it can be discussed, even if I disagree with it.

That's not a weak stance, I don't think.

[Gilpesh]

how bout Obama gain more experience before he runs for PRESIDENT????

How about Palin gains a little more national/foreign policy experience before she runs for being a McCain-falling-in-the-bathtub away from PRESIDENT????

[souvlaki]

The vast majority of posters here also believe Obama would be a better President than John McCain - but of course I am sure that has little impact on their opinions on the subject. :up:

The most outraged posters here over this choice are probably jman and Marx, and I would hardly call them Obama's biggest supporters.

[kainedamo]

Yes, if one specific website doesn't know her position on these issues.....then there's no way that McCain or his advisors who kept in touch with her over several months.......could possibly know!!!!! :wow::wow:

McCain may well know... but do you know? Does anyone besides the people in the inner circle of the GOP know just where the hell Palin stands on these issues?

It should frighten the hell out of you that a person that has no real stated opinion one way or another on MANY important issues has been picked for the VP position.

[StorminNorman]

The most outraged posters here over this choice are probably jman and Marx, and I would hardly call them Obama's biggest supporters.

And some of the most positive posters here over this choice are me and SuBe, and I would hardly call us McCain's biggest supporters.

The difference is, however, SuBe and I are far more aligned with Palin's politics than Marx and jman.

[UA-Archangel]

How about Palin gains a little more national/foreign policy experience before she runs for being a McCain-falling-in-the-bathtub away from PRESIDENT????

Are you saying that she can't learn while in office from ambassadors, the CIA, and other sources?

Keep in mind that Obama didn't know that Canada had a Prime Minister as leader and we are right next door.

[X Knight]

well.....it frightens the hell out of me that someone as inexperienced and unqualified as Obama has a very strong chance of becoming PRESIDENT of the United States. and that has nothing to do with his stances on the issues.......:o

[jaguarr]

I find that sort of opinion, as I should, incredibly offensive - but thats beside the point.

My stance is this, again - you have you insight into your family, I wouldn't dare question your actions in your family; but, simply being a parent doesn't make you an expert on the subject, nor does it give you the right to criticize Palin's action as a mother when you have no knowledge of her or her interactions with her children personally.

I don't think you are at all misogynistic, but I think your completely and utterly out of line with your criticism here.

Currently Palin has the ability to provide commitment to BOTH her family and her career. That's awesome. Women the world over do it. This move removes her ability to maintain that balance and puts her focus entirely on her career. Period. If her baby was a little older, I wouldn't question it to be quite frank. But the needs of a newborn are entirely different. What it does make me think is that she can't even put her family first. If that's the case, then what are the chances she's going to put the people of this country she wants to serve first? I'm thinking pretty low.

And if you didn't think I'm misogynistic then you wouldn't have even brought it up. But you did.

jag

[kainedamo]

I find that sort of opinion, as I should, incredibly offensive - but thats beside the point.

Norman, if I could interject here. Your original comment to Jag, if I were Jag, and you had said that to my face, you'd have a black eye right now.

Anyway, carry on.

[StorminNorman]

A BRILLIANT TRAP MAKES DEMS THE MALE CHAUVINISTS

SHE'S just a beauty queen.

She's another Dan Quayle.

And ironically, the biggest criticism of Sarah Palin, John McCain's veep choice, is she has no experience. Funny, coming from the Barack Obama camp.

Following McCain's announcement of Palin - the first female to be put on a GOP ticket for the White House, and only the second in US history - the Obama campaign skipped the niceties and blasted her as the "former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience." She's also a governor of Alaska (my home state), the first woman in that office and the youngest elected in state history. She has an 80-plus percent approval rating. She has turned the state upside down with her reformist zeal and has made enemies of the Republican establishment.

And she can talk energy policy, one of the biggest issues facing this country.

Is she a gamble? Definitely. But so is Barack Obama, who has himself dismissed experience as a prerequisite for leadership, despite his spot atop the Democratic ticket.

At this point, Palin is so unknown, there's no way to make a clear judgment about her. But listening to Obama supporters take to the airwaves to shriek with indignation about her lack of experience is just a little too rich. Where were they when Obama, two years into the Senate, announced his candidacy for president?

One Obama supporter and political operative blogged, "In picking an unknown, untested half-a-term governor from Alaska . . . John McCain is following in a long line of reckless men who have rolled the dice for a beauty queen."

Do we really have to do this again?

No sooner was Hillary Rodham Clinton out of the race, and a new woman is in the cross hairs.

On CNN, during a discussion about whether it was appropriate for Palin to accept this job when she has a baby, Dana Bash pointed out it's unlikely anyone would ask this of a male candidate.

I can't help wondering if this is a trap. The McCain camp watched and learned as Obama supporters offended Hillary supporters by their treatment of her. The McCainiacs had to know that this group is incapable of behaving, that Palin would bring out their worst instincts.

One top Republican said to me: "Just wait until she is debating Joe Biden and he starts attacking or condescending to her. Hillary voters are going to say, 'Oh yeah, I remember this.' "

The McCain camp has already made clear it stands at the ready to scoop up these voters. Yesterday, Palin proudly acknowledged her historic selection, the candidacy of Hillary Rodham Clinton and the woman who paved the way for her, Geraldine Ferraro.

Ferraro told me she's excited for another woman to be on a presidential ticket. She sees Palin as a risky choice - but also dismissed the idea that she's unqualified.

And she rejected the idea that all the so-called "Hillary voters" would be repelled by Palin's staunch anti-abortion views. These voters know the Senate will have a veto-proof Democratic majority, so that lessens the potency of that issue.

Howard Wolfson, Hillary's top strategist, said "it won't help with most Hillary voters, but it could help with some."

"Some" of 18 million people is what the McCain camp is after.

The other potential trap is luring the Obama campaign onto the "experience" field. The early conventional wisdom says McCain's pick was boneheaded because it takes the experience issue off the table. But it seems that it has done the opposite: The importance of experience is the topic of the day.

The more Democrats complain about this, the more Republicans can turn it on them and say, "If you are so concerned about the amount of experience of the vice president, what about the top of your ticket?"

Obama's argument thus far has been that experience isn't what counts; it's judgment. By attacking the Republican woman relentlessly on this issue, Democrats are undermining their own man.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/08302008/news/columnists/a_brilliant_trap_makes_dems_the_male_cha_126765.ht m?page=0

[StorminNorman]

Norman, if I could interject here. Your original comment to Jag, if I were Jag, and you had said that to my face, you'd have a black eye right now.

Anyway, carry on.

:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

[lazur]

The only problem with your analysis here is that Obama actually has experience working on foreign policy and domestic issues. Sarah Palin has no foreign policy experience at all and has experience only with Alaskan issues. Also, Alaska is a completely different state. Its politics are different from what most states experience here in the mainland. So twenty months worth of work in a state which is totally different from most of the other 48 doesn't necessarily qualify her for any of the top two jobs in the country.

I disagree. Just because Obama is in the senate, doesn't mean he has massive amounts of 'foreign policy experience.' The man has been an absentee senator for nearly two years, which leaves a year and a half at most of senatorial experience with minute fragments of that having to do with foreign policy.

Besides, you're acting as if this stuff can't be learned over time. Do you believe an experienced and intelligent executive politician isn't able to learn about foreign affairs??

Let's hope not because not only does Obama have no executive experience, his foreign policy knowledge is at about the same level as Palin...

Moreover, the issue which is most important to me is McCain's health.

Really? He has a clean bill of health. Are you seriously saying that all 72 year old human beings should automatically be assumed dead or dying??

Now it becomes fair game. McCain selected someone who has twenty-months of experience to serve less than a heartbeat away from the presidency.

I could argue that Obama, who only got his Illinois senate position because someone else who WOULD have won had to drop out because of a sex scandal, is no more qualified than Palin with his mere 20 or so months of full-time senate duties. The man's been running for president for MOST of his time in the senate, has no executive experience and virtually no foreign policy experience, and yet you seriously think he's 'more qualified' than Palin?? Serious...

What has she done which shows she can handle the war in Iraq (when she admits she doesn't pay much attention to it)?

What has Obama done? He was AGAINST the surge, which is the very reason Iraq is now considering timelines. Had the surge not happened or not worked, there would be no talk of withdrawal right now. Yet Obama sits there and acts like he has all of the answers...

What has she done which shows she can fix our national economy? Everything she has done in Alaska is not mutually exclusive to what has to be done at the national level.

What has Obama done? He talks a good game, I'll give him that. But he spits out ridiculous 'talking points' that make absolutely no sense. In his DNC speech, he said he'd cut taxes for 95% of the population. Well guess what? 100 million people currently DO NOT PAY TAXES AT ALL. If only 66% of the population is paying taxes, how in the world can he cut taxes for 95%? He talks about the economy in his speeches, but says NOTHING, ZIP, ZERO, ZILCH about how he will fix the economy, or at least how he'll try.

Yet you hold Palin accountable for something Obama hasn't done...

Not a double standard. I consider Obama to be rather inexperienced myself. However, the fact that he has foreign policy policy experience and has worked on national policy is an added bonus.

Really? What has he worked on that you keep talking about? Please do tell. The man's been in the senate working for shy of two years himself, yet you make out to sound like he has as much experience as a senator who's been in the senate for a decade...

Um, Dick Cheney just went to Georgia, did he not? Not to mention he has made numerous trips to Iraq and met with the Iraqi government.

So has McCain. So has Rice. So has Bush. Making a trip to another country doesn't require extensive knowledge of foreign affairs. It requires the ability to communicate effectively with people.

And no one in the Bush administration has met with Ahmadinejad, they would rather drop the bomb on the innocent Iranian civilians first than meet with him.

No one should. The man talks of wiping other countries off the map. It should be a multilateral effort on the part of the U.N. - not a unilateral effort on the part of the U.S.

Sorry, but serving on the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and drafting legislation on both committees, proves he has more foreign policy experience than someone who is just kinda close to Russia.

Yeah, but what has he done? All senators work on committees. However, they 'lead' nothing. I'd love to know what Obama has done that has you so convinced that somehow Palin is incapable of filling those responsibilities, or at least learning them very quickly ... just as Obama had to.

I'm not talking about liberals in general. Now you're generalizing. I'm talking about myself. Naturally I would slam Romney but not this hard. Romney at least ran a business and served as governor of an important state. As much as I despise the man, I would never argue that he is in inexperienced. Nor would I argue that the country is in danger because his inexperience would be a heartbeat away from the presidency.

Palin ran more than one business, and I don't know about you, but Alaska is an important state for natural resources. However, I'd be interested in hearing exactly what you believe 'important' means. Alaska's population is, after all, about the same as Delaware's - the state Biden represents...

My arguments against Romney would be based on policy. And while I have policy issues with Palin, she hasn't done enough policy work in her tenure to hold a debate solely on the issues. Her inexperience is what bothers me.

Right, which means you should give her the benefit of the doubt...

Well then you're an idiot if that's the case.

Heh, thanks for keeping it civil. You never fail to disappoint.

This has NOTHING to do with her gender and EVERYTHING to do with her inexperience. Her twenty months service as governor of Alaska. And McCain's audacity to select someone who has less experience than his opponent when he has spent the past three months slamming Obama's inexperience, to serve a heartbeat away from the most powerful job in the world. Don't you get that? Don't you see that NO foreign policy experience and little economic experience is a bad thing? Especially since, when Palin was mayor of Wasilla, she ran up such a huge deficit, each of the town's 6,500 people are $3,000 in debt? Especially since the McCain campaign's rationale for her having 'some' foreign policy experience is that 'she lives so close to Russia that must count for something'?

I'd love to know where you're getting your data from so I can do some digging. That may be the case, but under what circumstances? What did she inherit from the last administration?

I do find it interesting (getting back on the experience train) that you do not have a problem with Obama's lack of executive experience, citing his committee experience as trumping that, apparently.

To me, the executive experience is more valuable. Thus, to me, Obama lacks the experience Palin does in leadership. Does that mean Obama can't learn? No, but you seem to imply that Palin can't learn the relatively insignificant amount of information Obama has learned in the brief time he's been a senator...

McCain really screwed himself over here. A man who puts his country first should have known better than to select someone with less than 20 months of experience, whose only other experience beforehand was serving as mayor of a small town she screwed over financially. Romney, Pawlenty, Hutchison, Lieberman, Snowe, Lingle, Rell-- all of these people have true success stories, either in the Senate, or as governor, where they came in and balanced budgets or installed statewide programs which made things better. Palin doesn't have that. She barely has anything. She is unqualified for the job; that's it. Nothing about her gender.

When Palin was first becoming involved in politics, Obama was still 12 years removed from the scene.

If she is unqualified for the job of VP, then Obama is definitely unqualified for the job of President. The delta in experience between the two is almost nothing. In some ways one may be more experienced than the other, but neither blows the other's doors off with experience. For you to make that claim only shows your bias. Besides, all of the people you named as better candidates than Palin have more experience than Obama.

This all comes down to offering someone the benefit of the doubt and hearing what they have to say before casting judgment - something you apparently refuse to do. And based on that, I'm convinced that no matter who McCain selected, your opinion about McCain would not have changed. Which means that if you represent the typical liberal democrat, it pleases me that what he did has stirred up the emotions. After all, it's not liberal democrats he's after in this race because they will never vote for him anyway (even if they do still whine about his choice of appointees); he's after undecideds and swing voters. By most accounts, they're not as pissed off as you, so I'm not sure that the validity you find in your disdain for McCain's decision has any bearing whatsoever on the reality that people in those two categories are living in.

[X Knight]

hmmmm.....using Palin's "lack of experience" to point the reflection back at Obama's "lack of experience"...........hmmmm........

[SentinelMind]

A BRILLIANT TRAP MAKES DEMS THE MALE CHAUVINISTS

SHE'S just a beauty queen.

She's another Dan Quayle.

And ironically, the biggest criticism of Sarah Palin, John McCain's veep choice, is she has no experience. Funny, coming from the Barack Obama camp.

Following McCain's announcement of Palin - the first female to be put on a GOP ticket for the White House, and only the second in US history - the Obama campaign skipped the niceties and blasted her as the "former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience." She's also a governor of Alaska (my home state), the first woman in that office and the youngest elected in state history. She has an 80-plus percent approval rating. She has turned the state upside down with her reformist zeal and has made enemies of the Republican establishment.

And she can talk energy policy, one of the biggest issues facing this country.

Is she a gamble? Definitely. But so is Barack Obama, who has himself dismissed experience as a prerequisite for leadership, despite his spot atop the Democratic ticket.

At this point, Palin is so unknown, there's no way to make a clear judgment about her. But listening to Obama supporters take to the airwaves to shriek with indignation about her lack of experience is just a little too rich. Where were they when Obama, two years into the Senate, announced his candidacy for president?

One Obama supporter and political operative blogged, "In picking an unknown, untested half-a-term governor from Alaska . . . John McCain is following in a long line of reckless men who have rolled the dice for a beauty queen."

Do we really have to do this again?

No sooner was Hillary Rodham Clinton out of the race, and a new woman is in the cross hairs.

On CNN, during a discussion about whether it was appropriate for Palin to accept this job when she has a baby, Dana Bash pointed out it's unlikely anyone would ask this of a male candidate.

I can't help wondering if this is a trap. The McCain camp watched and learned as Obama supporters offended Hillary supporters by their treatment of her. The McCainiacs had to know that this group is incapable of behaving, that Palin would bring out their worst instincts.

One top Republican said to me: "Just wait until she is debating Joe Biden and he starts attacking or condescending to her. Hillary voters are going to say, 'Oh yeah, I remember this.' "

The McCain camp has already made clear it stands at the ready to scoop up these voters. Yesterday, Palin proudly acknowledged her historic selection, the candidacy of Hillary Rodham Clinton and the woman who paved the way for her, Geraldine Ferraro.

Ferraro told me she's excited for another woman to be on a presidential ticket. She sees Palin as a risky choice - but also dismissed the idea that she's unqualified.

And she rejected the idea that all the so-called "Hillary voters" would be repelled by Palin's staunch anti-abortion views. These voters know the Senate will have a veto-proof Democratic majority, so that lessens the potency of that issue.

Howard Wolfson, Hillary's top strategist, said "it won't help with most Hillary voters, but it could help with some."

"Some" of 18 million people is what the McCain camp is after.

The other potential trap is luring the Obama campaign onto the "experience" field. The early conventional wisdom says McCain's pick was boneheaded because it takes the experience issue off the table. But it seems that it has done the opposite: The importance of experience is the topic of the day.

The more Democrats complain about this, the more Republicans can turn it on them and say, "If you are so concerned about the amount of experience of the vice president, what about the top of your ticket?"

Obama's argument thus far has been that experience isn't what counts; it's judgment. By attacking the Republican woman relentlessly on this issue, Democrats are undermining their own man.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/08302008/news/columnists/a_brilliant_trap_makes_dems_the_male_cha_126765.ht m?page=0

Exactly. I believe this column is pretty much head on.

[souvlaki]

And some of the most positive posters here over this choice are me and SuBe, and I would hardly call us McCain's biggest supporters.

The difference is, however, SuBe and I are far more aligned with Palin's politics than Marx and jman.

I don't deny she might energize McCain's base, but given that I could have seen either jman or Marx voting for McCain 3 or 4 months ago if he played his cards right I see this as pretty much an epic fail on his part. McCain may not have had the most enthusiastic base, but those people still would have likely voted for him regardless. He'll probably lose a lot of independents which in my opinion likely would have given him a win in November.

[comicgirl]

A BRILLIANT TRAP MAKES DEMS THE MALE CHAUVINISTS

SHE'S just a beauty queen.

She's another Dan Quayle.

And ironically, the biggest criticism of Sarah Palin, John McCain's veep choice, is she has no experience. Funny, coming from the Barack Obama camp.

Following McCain's announcement of Palin - the first female to be put on a GOP ticket for the White House, and only the second in US history - the Obama campaign skipped the niceties and blasted her as the "former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience." She's also a governor of Alaska (my home state), the first woman in that office and the youngest elected in state history. She has an 80-plus percent approval rating. She has turned the state upside down with her reformist zeal and has made enemies of the Republican establishment.

And she can talk energy policy, one of the biggest issues facing this country.

Is she a gamble? Definitely. But so is Barack Obama, who has himself dismissed experience as a prerequisite for leadership, despite his spot atop the Democratic ticket.

At this point, Palin is so unknown, there's no way to make a clear judgment about her. But listening to Obama supporters take to the airwaves to shriek with indignation about her lack of experience is just a little too rich. Where were they when Obama, two years into the Senate, announced his candidacy for president?

One Obama supporter and political operative blogged, "In picking an unknown, untested half-a-term governor from Alaska . . . John McCain is following in a long line of reckless men who have rolled the dice for a beauty queen."

Do we really have to do this again?

No sooner was Hillary Rodham Clinton out of the race, and a new woman is in the cross hairs.

On CNN, during a discussion about whether it was appropriate for Palin to accept this job when she has a baby, Dana Bash pointed out it's unlikely anyone would ask this of a male candidate.

I can't help wondering if this is a trap. The McCain camp watched and learned as Obama supporters offended Hillary supporters by their treatment of her. The McCainiacs had to know that this group is incapable of behaving, that Palin would bring out their worst instincts.

One top Republican said to me: "Just wait until she is debating Joe Biden and he starts attacking or condescending to her. Hillary voters are going to say, 'Oh yeah, I remember this.' "

The McCain camp has already made clear it stands at the ready to scoop up these voters. Yesterday, Palin proudly acknowledged her historic selection, the candidacy of Hillary Rodham Clinton and the woman who paved the way for her, Geraldine Ferraro.

Ferraro told me she's excited for another woman to be on a presidential ticket. She sees Palin as a risky choice - but also dismissed the idea that she's unqualified.

And she rejected the idea that all the so-called "Hillary voters" would be repelled by Palin's staunch anti-abortion views. These voters know the Senate will have a veto-proof Democratic majority, so that lessens the potency of that issue.

Howard Wolfson, Hillary's top strategist, said "it won't help with most Hillary voters, but it could help with some."

"Some" of 18 million people is what the McCain camp is after.

The other potential trap is luring the Obama campaign onto the "experience" field. The early conventional wisdom says McCain's pick was boneheaded because it takes the experience issue off the table. But it seems that it has done the opposite: The importance of experience is the topic of the day.

The more Democrats complain about this, the more Republicans can turn it on them and say, "If you are so concerned about the amount of experience of the vice president, what about the top of your ticket?"

Obama's argument thus far has been that experience isn't what counts; it's judgment. By attacking the Republican woman relentlessly on this issue, Democrats are undermining their own man.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/08302008/news/columnists/a_brilliant_trap_makes_dems_the_male_cha_126765.ht m?page=0Ah, no.................the biggest crit????


Reckless use of power.
Favors teaching creationism in public schools.
Totally Anti-Choice and gay.....but pro-gun, etc........don't kid yourself that just BECAUSE she's a woman, that chicks will flock to her..........

Boy, John sure does love his "beauty queens", doesn't he?

[lazur]

I don't deny she might energize McCain's base, but given that I could have seen either jman or Marx voting for McCain 3 or 4 months ago if he played his cards right I see this as pretty much an epic fail on his part. McCain may not have had the most enthusiastic base, but those people still would have likely voted for him regardless. He'll probably lose a lot of independents which in my opinion likely would have given him a win in November.

Jman has already stated he would not have voted for McCain under any circumstance.

And I'm not sure that taking the temperature of this message board system, which is mostly comprised of liberals (not that that's a bad thing, but it is the truth), is the most honest way of measuring the climate of voters across the country...

[UA-Archangel]

Jman has already stated he would not have voted for McCain under any circumstance.

And I'm not sure that taking the temperature of this message board system, which is mostly comprised of liberals (not that that's a bad thing, but it is the truth), is the most honest way of measuring the climate of voters across the country...

I've found that listening to talk radio is a better indicator of the voter's mood.

I know that talk radio tends to lean right, but the average American voter leans more to the right than left.

[StorminNorman]

I don't deny she might energize McCain's base, but given that I could have seen either jman or Marx voting for McCain 3 or 4 months ago if he played his cards right I see this as pretty much an epic fail on his part. McCain may not have had the most enthusiastic base, but those people still would have likely voted for him regardless. He'll probably lose a lot of independents which in my opinion likely would have given him a win in November.

Then you haven't been paying the greatest of attention here.

Do not confuse Marx and jman for being independents - simply because they are not party puppets does not make them moderates or middle of the road. They are intelligent people who have great political passions, most of which align them to the left.

I am honestly unsure of how Palin will effect McCain's argument to the middle - however if I were forced to place a bet, I would think it would help. After all - Obama/Biden is as much, if not much more, of a moderately unfriendly ticket than McCain/Palin. The difference is the latter has a history of butting heads with their party, the latter has not.

[jaguarr]

Jman has already stated he would not have voted for McCain under any circumstance.

And I'm not sure that taking the temperature of this message board system, which is mostly comprised of liberals (not that that's a bad thing, but it is the truth), is the most honest way of measuring the climate of voters across the country...


Yeah, I'd agree with that, lazur. I frequent a couple of rather conservatively leaning boards (yes, I am the black sheep there) and a lot of people aren't happy about Palin in those places, either. The Creationist thing seems to be a big dealbreaker for a lot of them.

jag

[souvlaki]

Jman has already stated he would not have voted for McCain under any circumstance.

And I'm not sure that taking the temperature of this message board system, which is mostly comprised of liberals (not that that's a bad thing, but it is the truth), is the most honest way of measuring the climate of voters across the country...

I'm not speaking purely in terms of this messageboard. I honestly believe in general McCain blew it in regards to picking up independent voters. But I guess we'll have to see when the polls start coming out. Personally I'll be shocked if this does anything other than hurts McCain. Sure, it energizes the Republican base, but guess what, it energized the Democrats as well.

[comicgirl]

Dude, we're for the most part video game/comic book freaks, smarter than the average bear................'course we're liberal!







Can you picture Billo reading The Watchmen?????.. Pffft!...Keith Olbermann? Hell's yeah.

[StorminNorman]

Ah, no.................the biggest crit????


Reckless use of power.
Favors teaching creationism in public schools.
Totally Anti-Choice and gay.....but pro-gun, etc........don't kid yourself that just BECAUSE she's a woman, that chicks will flock to her..........

Boy, John sure does love his "beauty queens", doesn't he?
You are proving you have no idea what you are talking about.

Reckless use of power? Please - she has a history of confronting corruption and the "investigation" against her is obviously purely political and of no real threat. If it was she wouldn't have the support of most in Alaskan Government on the matter and she wouldn't of been picked as McCain's VP.

She does not favor teaching creationism in public schools - she simply does not believe that debate on the issue should not be censored.

She is not totally anti-gay - she VETOED a bill that would of prevented gay partners from receiving the same benefits straight couples have. She then signed into Alaskan a law a bill that granted same sex couples those same rights. Just because she is anti gay marriage doesn't mean she is anti gay.

Nice try though :up:

[The Senator]

I'm going to respond to a few points in lazur's post because I don't have enough time to address all of them.

1) No, not all 72 year old men should be assumed dead. However, a 72 year old man who was tortured for five years, who can barely walk, who can't lift his arms over his shoulders, who had cancer and has a history of health problems makes me more than concerned about his health. Especially when he selects someone with 20 months worth of experience to succeed him in case he dies or is incapable of finishing his term.

2) Do the digging on that data yourself. Go to an objective political site like Real Clear Politics and read the articles which have been published about her. Her tenure as mayor of Wasilla has been dissected by several renowned columnists, and not just the "liberal media" as you would like to say.

3) As for Delaware being irrelevant, you would have a point if Biden was governor of that state. However, he is a Senator, who serves as the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who has actually met with foreign leaders and drafted international policies between the United States and other countries. Moreover, he has an expansive record of working at the national level, not just for his state. Being a Senator from an irrelevant state and being a Governor of an irrelevant state are two completely different things.

And, if you want to know where I stand on irrelevant states: Delaware is the most irrelevant state in this country, Rhode Island is second, and Alaska is third. So a governor from either of those states, with twenty months worth of experience, would show me that they do not have enough experience AT ALL to be President or Vice President.

4) The fact that Obama has worked on legislation, from nuclear proliferation to child health care, at least shows me that he has a good understanding of the domestic and international issues we face. Palin does not have that, and while I consider Obama's experience to be minuscule at best, at least he has a record of working on the issues which matter at the national level. Palin has a record of working in Alaska, a state where politics are cuckoo like Coco Puffs.

5) I know what she stands for. And I disagree with everything she stands for, with the exception of combating corruption. Of course, considering she's involved in her own corruption scandal and has fundraised for Don Young, the most corrupt politician in that state, I have my doubts about where she stands on corruption.

Palin would have received the benefit of a doubt from me if she had the experience necessary to serve as VP. But she doesn't have squat. She is worse than Ferraro and Quayle in every single way, and I truly hope this country thinks about what they might be getting themselves into before they vote for the McCain-Palin bonkers express.

[The Senator]

Jman has already stated he would not have voted for McCain under any circumstance.

But I also said, for the longest time, that I might not request an absentee ballot to vote for any candidate this election.

Now I feel like I have no choice, because Palin is a serious threat to this country.

[kainedamo]

You are proving you have no idea what you are talking about.

Reckless use of power? Please - she has a history of confronting corruption and the "investigation" against her is obviously purely political and of no real threat. If it was she wouldn't have the support of most in Alaskan Government on the matter and she wouldn't of been picked as McCain's VP.

She does not favor teaching creationism in public schools - she simply does not believe that debate on the issue should not be censored.

She is not totally anti-gay - she VETOED a bill that would of prevented gay partners from receiving the same benefits straight couples have. She then signed into Alaskan a law a bill that granted same sex couples those same rights. Just because she is anti gay marriage doesn't mean she is anti gay.

Nice try though :up:


Stop hating on women.

[StorminNorman]

Stop hating on women.

You're adorable.
:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

[UA-Archangel]

Stop hating on women.

Please don't use the word woman or women or female in any of your posts.

You leave yourself wide open when you do that.

[kainedamo]

It was a joke.

[Gilpesh]

the "investigation" against her is obviously purely political and of no real threat.

Bipartisan committee looking into it?

And seriously looking into it?

Yes, purely political.

[StorminNorman]

Bipartisan committee looking into it?

And seriously looking into it?

Yes, purely political.

Palin's made as many enemies in the Alaskan Republican Party than she has Democrats.

[SuBe]

Yeah, I'd agree with that, lazur. I frequent a couple of rather conservatively leaning boards (yes, I am the black sheep there) and a lot of people aren't happy about Palin in those places, either. The Creationist thing seems to be a big dealbreaker for a lot of them.

jag
Is there a Mirror Universe SuperHeroHype Board out there??? :wow:

I bet on that one, there is Cougurr making fun of BeyondSuperBoy over his support of the UnfairTax. :(

If I see it, the world could implode.

[SuBe]

Stop hating on women.
Pure Logic.

[lazur]

Bipartisan committee looking into it?

And seriously looking into it?

Yes, purely political.

Oh I forgot, innocent until proven guilty ... unless you're a republican running for VP ...

Sorry, it had to be said.

[SuBe]

Oh I forgot, innocent until proven guilty ... unless you're a republican ...

Sorry, it had to be said.
Fixed.

[kainedamo]

Palin's made as many enemies in the Alaskan Republican Party than she has Democrats.

Do you honestly have even the slightest basis of fact to say the investigation against her is purely political?

[kainedamo]

Oh I forgot, innocent until proven guilty ... unless you're a republican running for VP ...

Sorry, it had to be said.

Awww!

Someone give these guys a hug :(

[jaguarr]

Is there a Mirror Universe SuperHeroHype Board out there??? :wow:

I bet on that one, there is Cougurr making fun of BeyondSuperBoy over his support of the UnfairTax. :(

If I see it, the world could implode.

LMAO! :funny:

jag

[UA-Archangel]

Do you honestly have even the slightest basis of fact to say the investigation against her is purely political?

Why don't we wait until the investigation has been completed and see what the results are.

[Gilpesh]

Palin's made as many enemies in the Alaskan Republican Party than she has Democrats.

So that means a suspicious firing is based on something else? Even when it's very conveniently placed... right after she has a problem with the guy?

Let's just say everyone is waiting for their findings.

Oh I forgot, innocent until proven guilty ... unless you're a republican running for VP ...

Sorry, it had to be said.

:whatever:

[SuBe]

Do you honestly have even the slightest basis of fact to say the investigation against her is purely political?
Seeing as how she was fighting corruption in Alaskan Government, and Wasn't partisan about it, common sense would say it's true.

Remember that scene in Batman: Year One, when Flass and his gang of cops would beat up Gordon for being a "snitch", yeah, same thing.

[kainedamo]

Why don't we wait until the investigation has been completed and see what the results are.

I'm not saying she's guilty...

But Norman seems to have the inside scoop, Norman flat out said "the investigation against her is purely political".

Why nominate someone for VP that is currently under investigation for abusing her power?

[kainedamo]

Seeing as how she was fighting corruption in Alaskan Government, and Wasn't partisan about it, common sense would say it's true.

Remember that scene in Batman: Year One, when Flass and his gang of cops would beat up Gordon for being a "snitch", yeah, same thing.

That is niether common sense or proof.

[UA-Archangel]

I'm not saying she's guilty...

But Norman seems to have the inside scoop, Norman flat out said "the investigation against her is purely political".

Why nominate someone for VP that is currently under investigation for abusing her power?

Because time may be of the essence. It's not as though McCain can wait a few months until the investigation wraps up.

He's probably reasonably assured of the quality of the accusations to have gone ahead with the nomination, otherwise he's quite screwed.

[SuBe]

That is niether common sense or proof.
So, you don't remember that scene? It was pretty good.

[jaguarr]

Why don't we wait until the investigation has been completed and see what the results are.

I think it's a concern because the investigation won't be completed until after the elections.

jag

[UA-Archangel]

So that means a suspicious firing is based on something else? Even when it's very conveniently placed... right after she has a problem with the guy?

Let's just say everyone is waiting for their findings.



:whatever:

Unlike Europe, in many smaller centres in America, the mayor is also the butcher, the baker, and the candlestick maker.

She may have been the only one with authority to fire him.

[Gilpesh]

I think it's a concern because the investigation won't be completed until after the elections.

jag

That's hilariously great timing.

So it looks less like McCain believes she didn't do it... and more than no one will know until after it matters.

[souvlaki]

So much for Palin bringing in women:

Surprise? First Two National Polls Find Palin Gains LESS Support from Women

By E&P STaft

Published: August 30, 2008 1:35 PM ET

NEW YORK The first national polls on John McCain's pick of Sarah Palin yesterday came out today from Rasmussen and Gallup -- and contrary to what the GOP probably hoped, she scored less well with women than men.

Here's a finding from Gallup: Among Democratic women -- including those who may be disappointed that Hillary Clinton did not win the Democratic nomination -- 9% say Palin makes them more likely to support McCain, 15% less likely.

From Rasmussen: Some 38% of men said they were more likely to vote for McCain now, but only 32% of women. By a narrow 41% to 35% margin, men said she was not ready to be president -- but women soundly rejected her, 48% to 25%.

Only 9% of Obama supporters said they might be more likely to vote for McCain.

Overall, voters expressed a favorable impression of her by a 53/26 margin, but there was a severe gender gap on this: Men embraced her at 58% to 23%, while for women it was 48/30.

And by a 29/44 margin, men and women together, they do not believe that she is ready to be President.

As for voters not affiliated with either major party, 37% are more likely to vote for McCain and 28% less likely to do so.

Gallup is now out with its own initial poll. It also shows women with a slightly less favorable view of Palin. An excerpt from USA Today:

There is wide uncertainty about whether she's qualified to be president. In the poll, taken Friday, 39% say she is ready to serve as president if needed, 33% say she isn't and 29% have no opinion.

That's the lowest vote of confidence in a running mate since the elder George Bush chose then-Indiana senator Dan Quayle to join his ticket in 1988. In comparison, Delaware Sen. Joe Biden was seen as qualified by 57%-18% after Democrat Barack Obama chose him as a running mate last week.....

Among all those surveyed, 35% call Obama's speech at Invesco Field at Mile High Stadium Thursday night excellent, 23% good, 15% "just OK," 3% poor and 4% "terrible." Sixteen percent say they didn't see it and 14% have no opinion. That's higher than the ratings for acceptance speeches by President Bush and Democrat John Kerry in 2004, by Bush and Democrat Al Gore in 2000 and by Republican Bob Dole in 1996.

Asked about the Democratic convention's impact, 43% say it makes them more likely to vote for Obama, 29% less likely. Nineteen percent say it won't make a difference.

[UA-Archangel]

I think it's a concern because the investigation won't be completed until after the elections.

jag

I don't think it's a serious enough of an issue to warrant concern.

I'd be more concerned if she'd been caught with her hands on the money stash.

[SuBe]

I think it's a concern because the investigation won't be completed until after the elections.

jag
Then, you should be happy, if they are elected, and then found guilty, No Republican will ever be elected again, and there will be sunshine and rainbows every day. And, Jaggy can walk around know just how right he is, and how everyone should have listened to him...











(except in the Mirror Universe Hype):hehe:

[Gilpesh]

Unlike Europe, in many smaller centres in America, the mayor is also the butcher, the baker, and the candlestick maker.

She may have been the only one with authority to fire him.

Yeah but for what? Not firing her sister's ex-husband?

Anyone have that guy's record?

[jaguarr]

I don't think it's a serious enough of an issue to warrant concern.

I do.


I'd be more concerned if she'd been caught with her hands on the money stash.

Still time for that, too. :hehe:

jag

[UA-Archangel]

Yeah but for what? Not firing her sister's ex-husband?

Anyone have that guy's record?

If it was a bad firing, she likely wouldn't have the 80% or better support of her constituents.

I remember that there were other things to that firing, but can't recall them.

[jaguarr]

Then, you should be happy, if they are elected, and then found guilty, No Republican will ever be elected again, and there will be sunshine and rainbows every day. And, Jaggy can walk around know just how right he is, and how everyone should have listened to him...











(except in the Mirror Universe Hype):hehe:

Uhhh...I'd rather not let corrupt politicians into Washington in the first place. :up:

jag

[SuBe]

Uhhh...I'd rather not let corrupt politicians into Washington in the first place. :up:

jag
But if...

[Gilpesh]

But if...

Is a bad if to ask when it won't be answered until after November.

[UA-Archangel]

Uhhh...I'd rather not let corrupt politicians into Washington in the first place. :up:

jag

I'd like that too, but Biden keeps slipping through the secret tunnels.

[jaguarr]

I'd like that too, but Biden keeps slipping through the secret tunnels.

Well maybe if McCain hadn't dug them, people wouldn't use them.

jag

[DorkyFresh]

Obama - "we might not be able to agree on pro-life or pro-choice, but i think we can agree that we should reduce the amount of unwanted pregnancies."

Palin - "not me. i'm totally pro-life and anti-prophylactics....MORE BABIES FOR EVERYONE!"

[Marx]

But I also said, for the longest time, that I might not request an absentee ballot to vote for any candidate this election.

Now I feel like I have no choice, because Palin is a serious threat to this country.

In response to the Souv/Norm/Lazur conversation about Jman and myself...

I consider myself to be a moderate Democrat. I am socially liberal and fiscally conservative. I have voted for Republicans and Democrats. I, like Jman, have seriously considered not voting in this presidential election cycle. (Which would be the first time that I would not cast my vote.) I have been a rather harsh critic of both Barack Obama and John McCain. That being said, I applauded the Republican nomination of McCain because I thought that it was a much needed step in the right direction for the Republican party. A break from the stranglehold of the Religious Right.

Since that nomination, John McCain has turned toward the harder right. (Potentially alienating the independent support that voted for him and largely gave him the nomination.) Now, he has chosen a christian conservative with even less experience than Barack Obama. (Despite his condemnation of Barack Obama's lack of experience. Despite his argument that experience should be a determining factor in the Vice Presidential selection process.) A choice that has absolutely no foreign policy experience in a time where we are at war and the world is far more dangerous than it has ever been.

Barack Obama did exactly what I had hoped he would do. In his first act as a potential president, he got the decision absolutely right. (Something that John McCain has miserably failed at.) Obama picked a Vice Presidential candidate that has experience. A choice that is a six term senator and Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. A choice that is more than capable to step into the role of president without hesitation or reservation. A choice that is respected and known throughout this country and the world. I have a tremendous amount of respect for Joe Biden.

In the Democratic convention, I was hoping to see the real Barack Obama. And I believe that I did. His speech was something that I had been waiting on for quite some time. His speech was exactly what I had hoped it would be. He got real. He dropped the facade and soaring rhetoric. He dropped the preacher-esque tone in his voice. He spoke like a normal person. He detailed what he means when he says change. He detailed where he stands on the issues and how he would resolve different crisis. And, for the first time in a long time, I was moved by a political candidate. Do I think that he is the best the Democratic party has to offer? Absolutely not. Do I agree with him on every issue? Absolutely not, but I have come to respect him. And I will now vote for him in this presidential election...because the option on the Republican side is far too damaging for a country that is already damaged.

[souvlaki]

In response to the Souv/Norm/Lazur conversation about Jman and myself...

I consider myself to be a moderate Democrat. I am socially liberal and fiscally conservative. I have voted for Republicans and Democrats. I, like Jman, have seriously considered not voting in this presidential election cycle. (Which would be the first time that I would not cast my vote.) I have been a rather harsh critic of both Barack Obama and John McCain. That being said, I applauded the Republican nomination of McCain because I thought that it was a much needed step in the right direction for the Republican party. A break from the stranglehold of the Religious Right.

Since that nomination, John McCain has turned toward the harder right. (Potentially alienating the independent support that voted for him and largely gave him the nomination.) Now, he has chosen a christian conservative with even less experience than Barack Obama. (Despite his condemnation of Barack Obama's lack of experience. Despite his argument that experience should be a determining factor in the Vice Presidential selection process.) A choice that has absolutely no foreign policy experience in a time where we are at war and the world is far more dangerous than it has ever been.

Barack Obama did exactly what I had hoped he would do. In his first act as a potential president, he got the decision absolutely right. (Something that John McCain has miserably failed at.) Obama picked a Vice Presidential candidate that has experience. A choice that is a six term senator and Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. A choice that is more than capable to step into the role of president without hesitation or reservation. A choice that is respected and known throughout this country and the world. I have a tremendous amount of respect for Joe Biden.

In the Democratic convention, I was hoping to see the real Barack Obama. And I believe that I did. His speech was something that I had been waiting on for quite some time. His speech was exactly what I had hoped it would be. He got real. He dropped the facade and soaring rhetoric. He dropped the preacher-esque tone in his voice. He spoke like a normal person. He detailed what he means when he says change. He detailed where he stands on the issues and how he would resolve different crisis. And, for the first time in a long time, I was moved by a political candidate. Do I think that he is the best the Democratic party has to offer? Absolutely not. Do I agree with him on every issue? Absolutely not, but I have come to respect him. And I will now vote for him in this presidential election...because the option on the Republican side is far too damaging for a country that is already damaged.

Yeah, thinking back on it I probably was jumping to conclusions to assume had he played his cards right you guys would have voted for him. But I could have, at the very least, seen you guys not voting. Something tells me Palin's selection has pretty much made that not an option for either of you.

[DorkyFresh]

*slow clapping to Marx's post*

[souvlaki]

Oh, and well said btw, Marx.

[Hobodeluxe]

the thing that troubles me is her judgment. here's a 44 yr old woman. who when she was 7.5 months pregnant (already a risky pregnancy just from her age) who she knew had a Down Syndrome baby (risky++ for delivery complications and special needs) goes into premature labor when her water breaks and decides that instead of getting checked out in Texas where she was attending a conference chose to (without doctor's permission) board a 9 hour 2 legged flight to Alaska and drive from Anchorage to her hometown (another hour+)to have her baby in a hospital with NO NICU.

Now I ask you. Reckless or not?

Also after she had been warned not to pursue the firing of that officer/bro in law through the channels she was using she did it anyway. then fired the supervisor who wouldn't fire him. then denied it. then when caught backtracked on it.

this is a female Dubyah who is probably, slightly more right wing.

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb33/hobodeluxe/motivator6180576.jpg

[Superman]

I just found out that Palin supported Pat Buchanan over George W. Bush in 2000.

Wow, She really is way over there on the Right.:wow:

[Gilpesh]

Well Superman found out why that first day Buchanan was on replay of "She's got five kids, the last one of them with down syndrome."

[Lightning Strykez!]

This VP decision is backfiring big-time and it's barely been 24 hours yet.

NONE of my Republican friends are pleased with this--in fact, most are bashing the mess out of her. Not that they are going to vote for Obama now (they don't like him either) but they are readiliy admitting that at least he made a better selection of VP.

It's just...meh.

[Superman]

Well Superman found out why that first day Buchanan was on replay of "She's got five kids, the last one of them with down syndrome.":huh:

[hammy]

I had to leave right in the middle of our discussion yesterday. Grrr. :cmad:


Did you even LISTEN to her acceptance speech? A Republican does not praise Hillary Clinton or Geraldine Ferraro without pandering to the left.It's called, class. Someone women have it. She was simply acknowledging that they were trailblazers for women. She can't possibly believe that the same people who supported Hillary will simply 'transfer' their votes over to her because they all have breasts in common.
The same reasons that conservatives wouldn't support Hillary are reasons liberals wouldn't support Palin. At least I give people some credit for following ideology over gender.


Well, Biden helps where Obama lacks... Palin has... um... guts? Yeah she can be a Washington outsider... in Alaska... in her early years.

Wouldn't you suppose that he might think Palin does the same for his ticket? She is much more conservative than he is, and as I said in another post, if any pandering was done, it was more likely to the conservatives than the Clintonites. Conservatives were wetting themselves over this choice. I doubt any liberals were. :dry:



As it should. McCain only picked Palin because of her gender and appearance.

Women should be outraged that McCain only selected Palin to appeal to them, not to help lead this country.


These comments disgust and infuriate me. :cmad: You don't know why he chose her and to assume her gender and her appearance will have millions flocking to vote for their ticket is idiotic. You must really think people (particularly women) are morons. :whatever:


I got an infraction for that post. Apparently it's perfectly okay for jmanspice to assert with confidence that McCain only picked Palin because of her gender and appearance. For me to question that assertion was obviously inappropriate for someone of my station and worthy of an infraction.

Thank God Matt has opened my eyes and I now know my place, as a woman. I now know that I should go to jmanspice to seek permission and guidance on when I, as a woman, should and should not be, outraged. What a relief! I no longer have to think for myself. *Phew*


*shuffles backward out of thread, bowing with respect*

:dry:

[kainedamo]

EDIT: Keepin' this in PM.

[Marx]

I had to leave right in the middle of our discussion yesterday. Grrr. :cmad:


It's called, class. Someone women have it. She was simply acknowledging that they were trailblazers for women. She can't possibly believe that the same people who supported Hillary will simply 'transfer' their votes over to her because they all have breasts in common.
The same reasons that conservatives wouldn't support Hillary are reasons liberals wouldn't support Palin. At least I give people some credit for following ideology over gender.


With all due respect Casey, I see it differently. I see it as nothing more than an attempt to court voters sympathic to Hillary Clinton.





I got an infraction for that post. Apparently it's perfectly okay for jmanspice to assert with confidence that McCain only picked Palin because of her gender and appearance. For me to question that assertion was obviously inappropriate for someone of my station and worthy of an infraction.

Thank God Matt has opened my eyes and I now know my place, as a woman. I now know that I should go to jmanspice to seek permission and guidance on when I, as a woman, should and should not be, outraged. What a relief! I no longer have to think for myself. *Phew*


*shuffles backward out of thread, bowing with respect*

:dry:

I think Matt's accidentally put chewing gum on his infraction button.

Seriously Matt, what the hell? Casey didn't even insult jmanspice. She got angry and emotional, but no more so than anyone else here.

Don't you both think it would be better suited to discuss this privately? If you have a problem with a certain poster or moderator, PM them.

[Lightning Strykez!]

^ I agree that would be the best approach but uh....

She got an infraction for that?

:dry:

[The Senator]

I think Matt's accidentally put chewing gum on his infraction button.

Seriously Matt, what the hell? Casey didn't even insult jmanspice. She got angry and emotional, but no more so than anyone else here.

She accused me of being sexist when that wasn't even the case, and saying that women would flock to McCain because he selected a woman.

Not what I said.

At all.

And to accuse me of being sexist is quite ****ing disgusting, to tell you the truth. Casey should know her place as a poster in this forum and not go around making ridiculous insinuations. Especially since I worked for a congresswoman and campaigned for Clinton this year, because I'm such a big fat sexist.

[hammy]

With all due respect Casey, I see it differently. I see it as nothing more than an attempt to court voters sympathic to Hillary Clinton.


Then I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't believe for one minute that a Hillary supporter will be swayed to vote the McCain ticket, simply because of Palin. If they do, then I would say they are the ones being suckered .. by that I mean, to give up their ideology and vote for gender, instead of the issues that are important to them. That very idea bewilders me. Maybe McCain was stupid enough to think it would work. I just find that hard to believe. But maybe he did.


She accused me of being sexist when that wasn't even the case, and saying that women would flock to McCain because he selected a woman.

Not what I said.

At all.

And to accuse me of being sexist is quite ****ing disgusting, to tell you the truth. Casey should know her place as a poster in this forum and not go around making ridiculous insinuations. Especially since I worked for a congresswoman and campaigned for Clinton this year, because I'm such a big fat sexist.

I don't specifically recall calling you sexist, though I very well may have. But I wouldn't say that working for a congresswoman precludes sexist tendencies.

Also, thanks for pointing out, "my place." *bows head*

*Once again shuffles out of thread* reverently

[Hobodeluxe]

— Palin didn’t back McCain in the primary. She stayed neutral in Alaska’s January primary — perhaps on account of McCain’s opposition to drilling in ANWR. “A lot of us are sitting back and waiting to see if there will be new players in there," she said in 2007. "That’s probably why that box that says ‘none of the above’ is so popular right now."

— Mayoral performance. Palin, who portrays herself as a fiscal conservative, racked up nearly $20 million in long-term debt as mayor of the tiny town of Wasilla — that amounts to $3,000 per resident. She argues that the debt was needed to fund improvements.

— Stevens and Young, redux. Palin has distanced herself from the state’s two most popular politicians, but both appeared at Palin fundraisers during her 2006 gubernatorial bid.

— The environment. As governor, Palin vetoed wind power and clean coal projects, including a 50-megawatt wind farm on Fire Island and a clean coal facility in Healy that had been mired in a dispute between local and state governments.

— And, maybe, censorship. According to the Frontiersman newspaper, Wasilla’s library director, Mary Ellen Emmons, said that Palin asked her outright if she "could live with censorship of library books.” Palin later dismissed the conversation as a “rhetorical” exercise.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12987.html

[Marx]

— Palin didn’t back McCain in the primary. She stayed neutral in Alaska’s January primary — perhaps on account of McCain’s opposition to drilling in ANWR. “A lot of us are sitting back and waiting to see if there will be new players in there," she said in 2007. "That’s probably why that box that says ‘none of the above’ is so popular right now."

— Mayoral performance. Palin, who portrays herself as a fiscal conservative, racked up nearly $20 million in long-term debt as mayor of the tiny town of Wasilla — that amounts to $3,000 per resident. She argues that the debt was needed to fund improvements.

— Stevens and Young, redux. Palin has distanced herself from the state’s two most popular politicians, but both appeared at Palin fundraisers during her 2006 gubernatorial bid.

— The environment. As governor, Palin vetoed wind power and clean coal projects, including a 50-megawatt wind farm on Fire Island and a clean coal facility in Healy that had been mired in a dispute between local and state governments.

— And, maybe, censorship. According to the Frontiersman newspaper, Wasilla’s library director, Mary Ellen Emmons, said that Palin asked her outright if she "could live with censorship of library books.” Palin later dismissed the conversation as a “rhetorical” exercise.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12987.html

That's going to be a problem.

[The Senator]

I don't specifically recall calling you sexist, though I very well may have. But I wouldn't say that working for a congresswoman precludes sexist tendencies.

Also, thanks for pointing out, "my place." *bows head*

*Once again shuffles out of thread* reverently

Look-- you missed the point of my post. And I thought I summed that up quite nicely in one of my replies, but instead of agreeing to disagree with what I wrote, you completely took it out of context and insinuated that I was sexist (and I believe, you did say it directly).

The point I was making, and the point I have made repeatedly in this thread, is that Palin's selection seems to be done to pander to Clinton supporters. And this is the point which comes off of that, which you missed every time:

Women are NOT going to vote for Palin only because she's a woman. Apparently, the national polls show that McCain receives LESS support from women by making Palin his running mate. So it is obvious that the point I made is true, that women are not going to vote for McCain-Palin because a woman is his running mate.

Did McCain select Palin because she's a woman? I truly, wholeheartedly believe that was a huge factor in his decision. She is a young, self-made woman with conservative credentials. She was practically a dream candidate, actually (except for the inexperience and her status as the governor of one of the least relevant states in the country). She is the anti-Hillary. And as someone who knows political strategy, you want to hit your opponent where he hurts. Right now, or at least a week ago, Obama was hurting because many female Hillary supporters refused to support him because he didn't pick Clinton as his running mate. If McCain could convince women to vote for him with a female running mate, he would be golden.

So yes, I believe Palin was selected because of her gender. But I also believe her status as an independent woman with a nice, touchy-feeley story was a factor as well. And her beliefs? Probably a part of it, too. But her experience? It's hard to select a running mate based on experience when she doesn't have any...

[Hobodeluxe]

That's going to be a problem.

I was more concerned with her question about censoring library books

[Marx]

I was more concerned with her question about censoring library books

I find several things about her to be quite disturbing.

[Marx]

PALIN BOOED FOR MENTIONING HILLARY CLINTON
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/30/palin-booed-for-mentioning-hillary-clinton/





(Still invoking Clinton... :whatever:)

[The Senator]

That's going to be a problem.

Oh, it's not a problem.

As the most wasteful society on the planet, we would rather have politicians in office who support drilling for the resources which will be gone from our hands in the next sixty years. We support big, hulking SUVs because we like the extra room and the satisfying crunch of running over a Mini on the road.

Even though we whine and whine about gas prices being so expensive...

Then, a politician who supports prolonged drilling for oil and has voted against expanding the production of alternative energies selects someone who is actually tied to the oil industry directly as his running mate... a presidential ticket which very well could win in November...

And I know the argument: But if we don't drill for oil, or if we explore alternative energies, we'll be damaging the economy! Of course, doesn't it strike people that our economy will become even worse if we don't do anything to combat our reliance on fossil fuels? Do people not realize that all the pollution we dump into our environment damages our agriculture, pollutes our drinking water, and harms the health of hundreds of thousands of people each year?

Why can't the oil industries actually start to produce alternative energies? Why are they a one-trick pony? If Apple can go into the phone business, if cable companies can deliver the internet and phone service, then why the hell can't the oil executives expand their reach and start producing hydrogen, natural gas, and electric batteries on a regular basis? There is demand in this country for alternatives. There is a demand to get away from high gas prices.

I'm sick and tired of conservatives saying "but if we drill for oil we will help the economy!"

No. You. WON'T.

It will take five years at least before any oil drilled in America reaches the gas pumps. And in five years, who knows where gas prices will be. Who knows what our standing with foreign oil dealers will be. Why not explore and implement alternatives NOW instead of distracting this country for another five-ten years?

It's good to see that if McCain-Palin results in sixteen years of Republican rule, our country's energy problems will continue to fall apart.

[kainedamo]

PALIN BOOED FOR MENTIONING HILLARY CLINTON
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/30/palin-booed-for-mentioning-hillary-clinton/
(Still invoking Clinton... :whatever:)

:facepalm:

I don't wanna jump the gun. But my impressions about all of this?

I really think this decision by McCain is ALREADY backfiring. It's backfiring in the worst, worst way. It's a little early to say that, but seriously... everywhere I look about this woman, its bad news. And now she's being booed!

[hammy]

Look-- you missed the point of my post. And I thought I summed that up quite nicely in one of my replies, but instead of agreeing to disagree with what I wrote, you completely took it out of context and insinuated that I was sexist (and I believe, you did say it directly).

The point I was making, and the point I have made repeatedly in this thread, is that Palin's selection seems to be done to pander to Clinton supporters. And this is the point which comes off of that, which you missed every time:

omen are NOT going to vote for Palin only because she's a woman. Apparently, the national polls show that McCain receives LESS support from women by making Palin his running mate. So it is obvious that the point I made is true, that women are not going to vote for McCain-Palin because a woman is his running mate.

Apparently you missed the point of my posts, as well. Because we actually .... *eek* agree. There is no way a died in the wool Hillary supporter will vote for Palin. Just as there is no way a died in the wool conservative would vote for Hillary.







Did McCain select Palin because she's a woman? I truly, wholeheartedly believe that was a huge factor in his decision.


You said it a whole lot more assertively yesterday. You came across as though you were in some sort of inner circle and knew exactly what McCain's thinking was. And I got an infraction for challenging you on that assertion. :whatever:

By the way, jman, did you complain to Matt about me and that post or did he do that all on his own? Just wondering.



She is a young, self-made woman with conservative credentials. She was practically a dream candidate, actually (except for the inexperience and her status as the governor of one of the least relevant states in the country). She is the anti-Hillary. And as someone who knows political strategy, you want to hit your opponent where he hurts. Right now, or at least a week ago, Obama was hurting because many female Hillary supporters refused to support him because he didn't pick Clinton as his running mate. If McCain could convince women to vote for him with a female running mate, he would be golden.

So yes, I believe Palin was selected because of her gender. But I also believe her status as an independent woman with a nice, touchy-feeley story was a factor as well. And her beliefs? Probably a part of it, too. But her experience? It's hard to select a running mate based on experience when she doesn't have any...

I am really tired of hearing you say how irrelevant Alaska is. That elitist attitude about you is what I find so stomach turning. YOU know McCain's inner thoughts, YOU know Alaska is irrelevant, YOU know when I as a woman should be outraged, YOU know when I should keep my place ...

Geez, come to think of it, I don't know how I've gotten along all these years without you. :eek:

Despite my distaste for your communication style and what I believe is a condescending attitude, I don't have any ill feelings toward you. People are going to disagree on these things. What I find amusing is that you apparently think I'm some sort of big Sarah Palin supporter when all I was attempting to do was suggest that Hillary supporters (and particularly females) had more sense than to jump on a presidential bandwagon because of someones gender. However, if it's true that many have claimed they won't vote for Obama because Hillary wasn't chosen as his V.P. running mate, then maybe they don't have a whole lot of sense. :dry:

[Hobodeluxe]

And to think she wanted to be a sportscaster for ESPN

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c187/TStatic/palingoogoo.jpg

[DBella]

Maybe it's because there are women out there who believe that a human being in the womb is just that--a human being--and doesn't deserve to have its life snuffed out.



Heck, I know plenty who feel that way . . .

Personally, I believe that too but I am not going to impose my belief on others, I'd rather them have a choice. We don't know what's best for an individual but the individual herself/himself. Imo, that's a personal choice for the individual to make, not the government.



That's all belief based.



Why women would vote for someone who isn't interested in giving equal pay, is another question.

I'm all for equal pay. And equal benefits... eg. maternity/paternity leave. Raising a child is the responsibility of both parents.



I agree whole heartedly and want to repost for Posterity.



I love that arguement, just 2 days ago, how many times would you have heard that Obama didn't need experience in the White House, now yesterday, over and over you hear, "She's not experienced enough for the 2nd in Command". This is amazing, the mentality of those on the left. Always the apologist, always making excuses, always defending your parties decisions without reason.



Palin doesn't bring a whole lot of experience, but she has executive experience. She brings a fire that will ignite the Republican Party. She is like a Good Teddy Rossevelt. Not the Fascit kind, but the Skakin' up Washington king. I fully support Sarah the Berrecuda for VP.

I'd like to give Palin credit for all of her achievements. I just find it funny though how the Republicans liked to point out Obama's lack of experience over and over and yet, a 'fresh-faced' politician was picked as their VP candidate.

I'm extremely concerned over the sheer incompetence by McCain choosing Palin as his VP pick.



They haven't worked together. He had only met her once. Once! Yeah, he has staffers that vet the choices, I'm sure. The point is, he picked someone he has no real personal experience with. It speaks volumes about McCain's agenda in picking her.



The experience argument is perfectly valid and not hypocritical from the democratic side. Why is it valid? McCain had plenty of choices. Plenty! Any other viable choice would have had much more experience. Palin has no experience on foreign policy, and has been cited as having no real opinion on the Iraq war. Why didn't McCain pick someone with more experience, someone that he actually has some personal experience of working with?



From the republican side, it's hypocritical beyond belief. How can you complain about Obama's experience, and yet be supportive of the Palin pick?



The Palin choice is an attempt to grab disinfranchised Hillary supporters. But Palin thinks the Earth is 6000 years old, favours creationism education, is anti-abortion, and she has no problems with drilling for oil in Alaskan wildlife reserves.



The way I see it is this. Obama, instead of going for the obvious and attention grabbing choice of Hillary, instead chose someone that would actually work with his Presidency, someone that brings quite a lot to the table and would work with Obama.



McCain's choice is a tactical vote grabbing choice. Firstly, announcing it the day after Obama's nomination was an attempt to take attention away from Obama. Secondly, choosing a woman in the GOP's mindset further divides the female voting base of the democrats.



To pick a VP purely for vote grabbing purposes is incompetent, because you're putting this person just one step away from the white house if McCain is elected.



I have one very, very simple question. What does Palin add? What does Palin add that the other choices for McCain didn't have?

From my standpoint, I don't really see how important it is for McCain to have met her more than once before selecting her. When you hire someone for a job, it's the resume that speaks volumes about the person and her ability and capability. If the first interview creates a good impression to back up the resume, the person is usually hired. This seems to be the case. She passed her job interview at first meeting.

[kainedamo]

Here is the clip of Palin supposedly being booed.

http://blogsforjohnmccain.com/gov-sarah-palin-speaks-rally-washington-pennsylvania-video-83008

Kinda seems like maybe they're booing the mention of Hillary rather than booing Palin.

[DorkyFresh]

From my standpoint, I don't really see how important it is for McCain to have met her more than once before selecting her. When you hire someone for a job, it's the resume that speaks volumes about the person and her ability and capability. If the first interview creates a good impression to back up the resume, the person is usually hired. This seems to be the case. She passed her job interview at first meeting.
thing is, though, that this isn't just any job. this is a job that could possibly wind up with her becoming THE president of the USA. it's not like she was interviewing for a job as an attorney or a judge. she was interviewed for the 2nd highest seat in the nation. i'd like to think that a presidential candidate had known their VP pick more personally than just meeting them primarily for an interview.

[DBella]

thing is, though, that this isn't just any job. this is a job that could possibly wind up with her becoming THE president of the USA. it's not like she was interviewing for a job as an attorney or a judge. she was interviewed for the 2nd highest seat in the nation. i'd like to think that a presidential candidate had known their VP pick more personally than just meeting them primarily for an interview.
Yes, I realize that but I am sure there are people who supports McCain who thinks that way. I find the support from the Republicans for his choice to be quite amusing because these are the same people who stresses on experience. I guess being a mayor and governor (for what... less than two years?), is enough experience to lead the nation and be the Commander in Chief if something were to happen to McCain. *quite scared*

[Marx]

Yes, I realize that but I am sure there are people who supports McCain who thinks that way. I find the support from the Republicans for his choice to be quite amusing because these are the same people who stresses on experience. I guess being a mayor and governor (for what... less than two years?), is enough experience to lead the nation and be the Commander in Chief if something were to happen to McCain. *quite scared*

Isn't it though? I mean these same people condemn Obama for his lack of experience, but praise Palin for her lack of experience. :whatever:http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon13.gif

[Gilpesh]

Isn't it though? I mean these same people condemn Obama for his lack of experience, but praise Palin for her lack of experience. :whatever:http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon13.gif

But will call you out if you say anything about her not having much experience.

[DBella]

Isn't it though? I mean these same people condemn Obama for his lack of experience, but praise Palin for her lack of experience. :whatever:http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon13.gif
I was actually waiting for them to say, "John McCain? Have you gone insane?! Didn't you agree with us that experience matters?! WTH?" But, no. Nothing like that was uttered at all. Not surprising though. American politics, it seems to me, is all about PARTY FIRST.

[DorkyFresh]

Yes, I realize that but I am sure there are people who supports McCain who thinks that way. I find the support from the Republicans for his choice to be quite amusing because these are the same people who stresses on experience. I guess being a mayor and governor (for what... less than two years?), is enough experience to lead the nation and be the Commander in Chief if something were to happen to McCain. *quite scared*

it IS quite hypocritical. they raised such a fuss over Obama being inexperienced, then they pick a VP that's inexperienced as well. it's almost as if the Reps turned into gold fish (3 second memory).

[DBella]

it IS quite hypocritical. they raised such a fuss over Obama being inexperienced, then they pick a VP that's inexperienced as well. it's almost as if the Reps turned into gold fish (3 second memory).
I already see a response to this:
"But she's been mayor and is a governor of Alaska. She HAS executive experience and that's more experience than Obama, dammit!"

[Marx]

But will call you out if you say anything about her not having much experience.

I was actually waiting for them to say, "John McCain? Have you gone insane?! Didn't you agree with us that experience matters?! WTH?" But, no. Nothing like that was uttered at all. Not surprising though. American politics, it seems to me, is all about PARTY FIRST.

it IS quite hypocritical. they raised such a fuss over Obama being inexperienced, then they pick a VP that's inexperienced as well. it's almost as if the Reps turned into gold fish (3 second memory).

It's sickening. I thought the same as Bella - that maybe they would say 'WTH...have you lost your mind!?!?!?' But they came out in support because it's still all about party! :whatever:

[JackMercy]

Here is the clip of Palin supposedly being booed.

http://blogsforjohnmccain.com/gov-sarah-palin-speaks-rally-washington-pennsylvania-video-83008

Kinda seems like maybe they're booing the mention of Hillary rather than booing Palin.

Either way, that part of the speech ain't gonna last very long, I'm predicting...

Thanks for the video. I love how McCain raises and clasps his hands, ready to clap when she mentions Clinton, except when he hears the boos, he freezes in that awkward smile, and plays it off like he's just rubbing them together...twitchy eyeblinks follow...

Smooth, John...

This whole thing is great pre-Fall Premiere entertainment, a glorious trainwreck that only McCain could have concocted...

It's likely to get even better (or worse), if Hurricane Gustav -- which may go to Cat. 5 -- hits New Orleans (at least they're getting all the people out!), as their convention will be completely upstaged, postponed, or at the very least, significantly re-formatted...

Some say that the party will try to turn this into a "benefit" show... Desperate much?

:ikyn

[Marx]

Either way, that part of the speech ain't gonna last very long, I'm predicting...

Thanks for the video. I love how McCain raises and clasps his hands, ready to clap when she mentions Clinton, except when he hears the boos, he freezes in that awkward smile, and plays it off like he's just rubbing them together...twitchy eyeblinks follow...

Smooth, John...

This whole thing is great pre-Fall Premiere entertainment, a glorious trainwreck that only McCain could have concocted...

It's likely to get even better (or worse), if Hurricane Gustav -- which may go to Cat. 5 -- hits New Orleans (at least they're getting all the people out!), as their convention will be completely upstaged, postponed, or at the very least, significantly re-formatted...

Some say that the party will try to turn this into a "benefit" show... Desperate much?

:ikyn

The much-remembered reaction of the Bush Administration to Hurricane Katrina will shoot holes through any RNC-turned 'benefit show' for Gustav.

[Comicfilmer]

I love how McCain raises and clasps his hands, ready to clap when she mentions Clinton, except when he hears the boos, he freezes in that awkward smile, and plays it off like he's just rubbing them together...twitchy eyeblinks follow...

Smooth, John...

Good catch. He's such a dork... lol

[Gilpesh]

That clip just makes me agree with Mr. Galifianakis' Booing plan. It's too vague and people should be more specific.

[Heretic]

If there are mass casualties or tons of destruction from the hurricane the Rrepublicans SHOULD turn the first day into a benfit! Its the right freaking thing to do to try to help the less fortunate when you have a captive media. Of course, liberals are p[ositive that Republicans are uncaring monsters that couldnt care about hurting people so they would only be doing it for political points. If Democrats did the exact same thing it would be an expression of how much they truly care for the little guy.

[Comicfilmer]

I would agree with you were it not for the heartfelt care the current Republican administration showed these people three years ago. They are caring when it is politically opportune to be so. When it isn't, well..."those folks are looting."

[danoyse]

Here's a new one I just heard about: I had dinner with my sister tonight, and her best friend's husband is in Iraq. Apparently in one of her speeches/interviews (not sure which), Palin mentioned exactly when and where her son is being deployed. And according to my sister's friend, that's a big mistake, because she's basically put him and his fellow troops at risk by announce where he'll be and when.

Her friend is part of one of the online army wives groups and they're livid about it right now.

[DBella]

Here's a new one I just heard about: I had dinner with my sister tonight, and her best friend's husband is in Iraq. Apparently in one of her speeches/interviews (not sure which), Palin mentioned exactly when and where her son is being deployed. And according to my sister's friend, that's a big mistake, because she's basically put him and his fellow troops at risk by announce where he'll be and when.

Her friend is part of one of the online army wives groups and they're livid about it right now.
"Loose lips sink ships".

[EdRyder]

Here's a new one I just heard about: I had dinner with my sister tonight, and her best friend's husband is in Iraq. Apparently in one of her speeches/interviews (not sure which), Palin mentioned exactly when and where her son is being deployed. And according to my sister's friend, that's a big mistake, because she's basically put him and his fellow troops at risk by announce where he'll be and when.

Her friend is part of one of the online army wives groups and they're livid about it right now.

People wanted to hang Geraldo for that if you remember!

[danoyse]

People wanted to hang Geraldo for that if you remember!

He got kicked out of Iraq for that.

[DACrowe]

I'll tell you what, boss. You find me an unborn child that knowingly committed murder, and I'll support the state if it wants to apply capital punishment to it. Outside of those circumstances, it's just the killing of an innocent human being at an incovenient location and stage of development.

See, I'm pro-choice when it comes to the death penalty--I think states should have the option to execute individuals who commit murder. That would make anyone who opposes the death penalty anti-choice. :o

Meh. I don't understand how you can have your cake and eat it too. I personally am opposed to abortion if it was my child, nor would I pull the lever in an execution, but I am up for choice. Life is life. What lets you, I or any government (which can be corrupt, fallible, wrong, etc.) decide who lives or dies.

As I said it is hypocrisy to say you are pro-life and also for the death penalty. You're fine with state-sanctioned murder of the undesirables. As long as it is out of the wound, who cares right? After all as the mother said in The Dark Knight, "They had their chance." :o

[Matt]

No matter where you stand on the issue...comparing the death penalty and abortion is stupid as hell.

[Comicfilmer]

I agree with that. Apples and oranges.

[Marx]

No matter where you stand on the issue...comparing the death penalty and abortion is stupid as hell.

Matt! There you are! Where the heck have you been??? Have you been in stealth mode? :ninja:

[Matt]

Did I miss something important? :csad:

[redfirebird2008]

No matter where you stand on the issue...comparing the death penalty and abortion is stupid as hell.

No, it's not. I'm pro-life all the way around. The people who use the term "pro-life" and try to apply it to one issue instead of all issues are hypocrites.

[DACrowe]

She said that she doesn't believe in censoring the discussion, that means it could be discussed in any class that the teacher allows.

She said they should both be taught. I'd agree if evolution is taught in science classes, particularly biology and anthropology, while creationism is taught in Religious Studies and theology classes, not that there is stuff that "controversial" in high schools.

But to be taught in the same class? What class is that? If it is science related, then no. Evolution is a scientifically proven theory (which is different from a hypothesis, not that most understand this), while creationism is based on scripture and personal faith-based beliefs with little or no scientific grounding.

They are not the same thing.

[StrainedEyes]

No, it's not. I'm pro-life all the way around. The people who use the term "pro-life" and try to apply it to one issue instead of all issues are hypocrites.

The Death Penalty and Abortion are two completely different topics.

[DACrowe]

No matter where you stand on the issue...comparing the death penalty and abortion is stupid as hell.

If you're pro-life, what gives you the right to pick and choose what lives your "supporting?"

Point is to be selective means you are not pro-life and it is always fun to point out hypocrisy. You sure love finding Obama's contradictions for example. :oldrazz:

[DorkyFresh]

imo...comparing the death penalty to abortion is a valid comparison because it's a discussion on the value of life. they both involve drawing a line between what is moral/immoral when it comes to life and death. saying that they're not comparable is a way of dismissing the argument without addressing it

[UA-Archangel]

No matter where you stand on the issue...comparing the death penalty and abortion is stupid as hell.

You're right. At least with the death penalty, some of them have actually done something to deserve death.:word:

[Marx]

Did I miss something important? :csad:

Just the most ridiculous VP pick in history! :oldrazz:

[SuBe]

No matter where you stand on the issue...comparing the death penalty and abortion is stupid as hell.
I agree. There is no way anyone from both sides can debate this issue with a civil outcome, so, go ahead and try, but it is better not to. IMO.

[redfirebird2008]

The Death Penalty and Abortion are two completely different topics.

Then people should not use a general term like "pro-life" to refer to a very specific issue. Just my 2 cents anyway, even though I realize the phrase's connection to that specific issue has been ingrained in the culture.

This to me is what it really means to be pro-life:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistent_Life_Ethic

[DACrowe]

You're right. At least with the death penalty, some of them have actually done something to deserve death.:word:

says who?

[UA-Archangel]

says who?

Says the judge and jury.

[SuBe]

There is an Abortion Thread, if y'all want to discuss this.

Back on Track. I support Palin for Vice president on the basis that she is hotter than biden in a Hetrosexual point of view. And her merits, and such.

[DACrowe]

Says the judge and jury.

Oh. Hey guess what? 7 judges said the same thing about abortion as well...:dry:

[StrainedEyes]

Then people should not use a general term like "pro-life" to refer to a very specific issue. Just my 2 cents anyway, even though I realize the phrase's connection to that specific issue has been ingrained in the culture.

This to me is what it really means to be pro-life:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistent_Life_Ethic

Pro-Life is too ambiguous. I think generally it just refers to abortion issues, I've never thought about the term for anything else. .

[SuBe]

Back on Track, I support Palin over Biden over her Executive Experience.

[danoyse]

This might make some awkward conversation at the next family get-together:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/republican_race/2008/08/30/2008-08-30_hometown_backs_sarah_palin_but_motherinl-2.html

Hometown backs Sarah Palin, but mother-in-law backs Obama?
BY NANCY DILLON
DAILY NEWS WEST COAST BUREAU CHIEF

WASILLA, ALASKA - Sarah Palin's hometown rallied around her as mayor - now Republicans wonder if the rest of America will warm up to the surprise pick from cold country.

Though her mother-in-law has doubts.

Faye Palin admitted she enjoys hearing Barack Obama speak, and still hasn't decided which way she'll vote.

"We don't agree on everything. But I respect her passion," she said. "Being pro-life is who Sarah is."

Faye Palin said the governor never considered ending her recent pregnancy when genetic testing showed her son Trig, born in April, would have Down syndrome.

"There was no question," she said. "She was going to have that baby."

With a population of just 6,715, Wasilla is a fast-growing railroad town that got its start as a mail and supply hub linking the coastal towns of Seward and Knik to Alaska's interior mining camps along the Iditarod dog sled trail.

Scores of reporters descended Saturday on the A-frame wood hunting lodge where Sarah Palin's parents live amid hundreds of sets of trophy antlers and a taxidermy collection that includes a giant moose head and a full-grown mountain lion.

Faye Palin said the entire family was shocked by the news on Friday.

"I'm not sure what she brings to the ticket other than she's a woman and a conservative. Well, she's a better speaker than McCain," Faye Palin said with a laugh. "People will say she hasn't been on the national scene long enough. But I believe she's a quick study."

There's more to the article at the link above...including a college photo I'm sure Palin is thrilled to see made public.

[redfirebird2008]

Pro-Life is too ambiguous. I think generally it just refers to abortion issues, I've never thought about the term for anything else. .

I just wish the two would call their own positions what they really are: pro-abortion and anti-abortion. I fall into the latter category and have no qualms about using that phrase. I'm not afraid to say "I'm anti-abortion" instead of softening it and saying, "I'm pro-life."

[redfirebird2008]

Back on Track, I support Palin over Biden over her Executive Experience.

George W. Bush had "executive" experience. Look how that turned out. Dick Cheney had "executive" experience. Look how that turned out. The two combined for one of the worst Presidencies ever.

Palin's "executive experience" is pretty damn weak when you look at the state she's from. I just read something that said she left her town with $20 million in debt when she resigned as mayor. Statewide, Alaska has had good times financially in recent years due to high oil prices. So I commend her for not screwing up a naturally good thing for the people of Alaska while she's been governor. That (oil prices) is the reason that the housing market here in Midland, Texas is booming whereas it's crashing in the average American city. It's really a hard thing to screw something up when you're in the position that West Texas and Alaska are in.

[Gilpesh]

Back on Track, I support Palin over Biden over her Executive Experience.

I don't support Palin because of her 'executive experience'... cause it put her hometown deep in debt.

[SuBe]

George W. Bush had "executive" experience. Look how that turned out. Dick Cheney had "executive" experience. Look how that turned out. The two combined for one of the worst Presidencies ever.

Palin's "executive experience" is pretty damn weak when you look at the state she's from. I just read something that said she left her town with $20 million in debt when she resigned as mayor. Statewide, Alaska has had good times financially in recent years due to high oil prices. So I commend her for not screwing up a naturally good thing for the people of Alaska while she's been governor. That (oil prices) is the reason that the housing market here in Midland, Texas is booming whereas it's crashing in the average American city. It's really a hard thing to screw something up when you're in the position that West Texas and Alaska are in.

I don't support Palin because of her 'executive experience'... cause it put her hometown deep in debt.
As long as we can discuss Palin, instead of Abortion, please by all means, keep going.

[DACrowe]

Back on Track, I support Palin over Biden over her Executive Experience.

I could see you preferring her positions as a social conservative as opposed to a liberal...but over experience? Her "executive experience" only really lasts 20 months and she has done nothing of note in that time frame. I'm aware she was a mayor of a small town but that does not equate being president of the United States.

Compare this to Joe Biden who has run for president twice, spent decades in the senate and has traveled the world over. He has a strong clear vision of foreign policy and domestic issues and has been considered a respected and level headed voice in the senate who is one of the few who uses "straight talk," especially since McCain has abandoned that philosophy.

Experience and knowledge-wise, Biden blows Palin away. You preferring her ideological views? Okay. Her "experience?" Really?

[luke1234]

George W. Bush had "executive" experience. Look how that turned out. Dick Cheney had "executive" experience. Look how that turned out. The two combined for one of the worst Presidencies ever.

Palin's "executive experience" is pretty damn weak when you look at the state she's from. I just read something that said she left her town with $20 million in debt when she resigned as mayor. Statewide, Alaska has had good times financially in recent years due to high oil prices. So I commend her for not screwing up a naturally good thing for the people of Alaska while she's been governor. That (oil prices) is the reason that the housing market here in Midland, Texas is booming whereas it's crashing in the average American city. It's really a hard thing to screw something up when you're in the position that West Texas and Alaska are in.

I totally agree. This is such a publicity stunt. I cant believe McCain and the Republicans have gone so low. I think its foolish of John McCain to choose her due to his health issues, a political figure that no one knows about, that no one trust, that has no experience in world issues , is one heartbeat from the presidency. I cant believe people are buying into this. Romney is such a better V.P choice. I was undecided but after the DNC and this piece of **** move, Obamas got my vote

[Marx]

I am dumbfounded by anyone who honestly believes that twenty months experience as a governor, whose only other plotpoint on the resume consists of city councilwoman and mayor, is sufficient experience to run this country.

[SuBe]

I could see you preferring her positions as a social conservative as opposed to a liberal...but over experience? Her "executive experience" only really lasts 20 months and she has done nothing of note in that time frame. I'm aware she was a mayor of a small town but that does not equate being president of the United States.

Compare this to Joe Biden who has run for president twice, spent decades in the senate and has traveled the world over. He has a strong clear vision of foreign policy and domestic issues and has been considered a respected and level headed voice in the senate who is one of the few who uses "straight talk," especially since McCain has abandoned that philosophy.

Experience and knowledge-wise, Biden blows Palin away. You preferring her ideological views? Okay. Her "experience?" Really?
I support her Experiences of Clearing Corruption from the Partisan Planks of Alaskan Government. I support her Bull-Moose attitute in cutting spending, even at her own salary. I support her fight against partisanship. I support her for more than the fact she has 20 months of working behind a peticular desk, but for the things she did while behind that desk.

[luke1234]

I am dumbfounded by anyone who honestly believes that twenty months experience as a governor, whose only other plotpoint on the resume consists of city councilwoman and mayor, is sufficient experience to run this country.

B I N G O

[jaguarr]

Back on Track, I support Palin over Biden over her Executive Experience.

Really? Seriously? Okay. :huh:

jag

[Gilpesh]

Is anyone hearing this craziness that Palin isn't the mother of her fifth kid?

That's a little too far too soon. Oh and ah, too crazy.

[SuBe]

I am dumbfounded by anyone who honestly believes that twenty months experience as a governor, whose only other plotpoint on the resume consists of city councilwoman and mayor, is sufficient experience to run this country.
Wasn't Guliani mayor and he was at one time a serious contendor for the GOP spot.

[SuBe]

Really? Seriously? Okay. :huh:

jag
Just trying to get off the Abortion Express, and back to Palin Town, Hun.

[redfirebird2008]

I totally agree. This is such a publicity stunt. I cant believe McCain and the Republicans have gone so low. I think its foolish of John McCain to choose her due to his health issues, a political figure that no one knows about, that no one trust, that has no experience in world issues , is one heartbeat from the presidency. I cant believe people are buying into this. Romney is such a better V.P choice. I was undecided but after the DNC and this piece of **** move, Obamas got my vote

Yeah, this is the same woman who has said in the past that she has "no interest" in foreign affairs. She also doesn't even understand what the VP job is about, according to one of her interviews where she asked the interviewer to explain it to her. Obama and Biden both have plenty of knowledge on foreign policy. In fact, given McCain's constant Sunni/Shi'ite gaffe, I would say Obama knows more about foreign policy than John McCain. Experience in government doesn't necessarily mean you have more knowledge than someone else on a topic. I've had one class in college on the history of the Middle East and judging from the fact he keeps saying that Iran is helping Al Quaeda, it makes me wonder if the man even knows as much about the Middle East as anyone who took that class. Obama explained it pretty well when he said invading Iraq was one of the stupidest things we could do if our ultimate goal was dealing with Iran, given the fact that Iran and Iraq have been enemies for a long time and Iran was chomping at the bit to fill the power void created by our invasion of Iraq.

[luke1234]

Wasn't Guliani mayor and he was at one time a serious contendor for the GOP spot.

Did he win? no...should tell you something

[bunk]

Wasn't Guliani mayor and he was at one time a serious contendor for the GOP spot.


He seemed to feel NYC is large enough to endow him with more experience points than any other mayor. He was also a 9/11 hero.

[DorkyFresh]

addressing the inexperience issue between Obama and Palin...


...both are inexperienced compared to many politicians, but the main difference between Obama and Palin is that Obama has a solid and positive vision of America and is able to heartfully explain how he intends on bringing his change to DC and America while Palin neither has a solid vision nor is able to explain her non-existent vision for America. that's the main difference between the 2 'inexperienced' candidates. also, it's pretty clear that Obama has a powerful ability to unify most of the audience he's speaking to while it remains unclear whether Palin has that kind of skill.

[jaguarr]

Wasn't Guliani mayor and he was at one time a serious contendor for the GOP spot.

You're going to compare being the Mayor of NYC to being the Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska? :dry: And Giuliani wasn't qualified for the Presidency, either. "Noun. Verb. 9/11." was pretty much his platform.

Just trying to get off the Abortion Express, and back to Palin Town, Hun.

I applaud that but now wonder if you slipped off your meds. :hehe:

jag

[luke1234]

Yeah, this is the same woman who has said in the past that she has "no interest" in foreign affairs. She also doesn't even understand what the VP job is about, according to one of her interviews where she asked the interviewer to explain it to her. Obama and Biden both have plenty of knowledge on foreign policy. In fact, given McCain's constant Sunni/Shi'ite gaffe, I would say Obama knows more about foreign policy than John McCain. Experience in government doesn't necessarily mean you have more knowledge than someone else on a topic. I've had one class in college on the history of the Middle East and judging from the fact he keeps saying that Iran is helping Al Quaeda, it makes me wonder if the man even knows as much about the Middle East as anyone who took that class. Obama explained it pretty well when he said invading Iraq was one of the stupidest things we could do if our ultimate goal was dealing with Iran, given the fact that Iran and Iraq have been enemies for a long time and Iran was chomping at the bit to fill the power void created by our invasion of Iraq.


exactly, Obamas also put it well when he said sure McCains got experience, experience of being wrong 90% of the time

[DACrowe]

George W. Bush had "executive" experience. Look how that turned out. Dick Cheney had "executive" experience. Look how that turned out. The two combined for one of the worst Presidencies ever.

Very true. May I name a few presidents without previous executive experience before taking office?

-Abraham Lincoln was elected president (barely) after serving only as a state legislator from Illinois who got elected to a SINGLE (that is 2 years) term as a US Congressman where he defied the very at-the-time popular Polk for taking the US to war on a false charge. That sounds very familiar...And Lincoln went on to be the greatest president in US history.

-Harry Truman only served 1 and 2/3 of a term in the US senate before becoming a very ill and dying vice president for FDR. He has gone down as probably the best president of the 20th century after the Roosevelts.

-John F. Kennedy's only experience in national politics was also a brief stint in the senate.

Just saying.

[redfirebird2008]

Is anyone hearing this craziness that Palin isn't the mother of her fifth kid?

That's a little too far too soon. Oh and ah, too crazy.

I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt on it even though a lot of the "evidence" that's piling up seems pretty suspicious. Could all be a bunch of BS, but a lot of it is actual photos of her at 6-7 months pregnant (looks normal), a video of her hiking during a snow blizzard at 8 months pregnant (looks normal), a family photo where the girl has a bit of a gut forming, and then Palin's acceptance speech with McCain. The daughter is in the background holding and taking care of the child in a rather "motherly" manner. Also, Palin's water broke in Texas yet she gave a 30 minute political speech, then flew across the country back to Alaska to deliver the child? That seems strange because she said they knew all along that the child would be a special needs child. Seems like a risky decision to not just have the child in Texas.

[Marx]

Wasn't Guliani mayor and he was at one time a serious contendor for the GOP spot.

He wasn't qualified either.

I don't like Guiliani...but it you really want to go there.

Let's compare Wasilla, Alaska to New York City, New York.

Shall we?

[SuBe]

addressing the inexperience issue between Obama and Palin...


...both are inexperienced compared to many politicians, but the main difference between Obama and Palin is that Obama has a solid and PROGRESSIVE vision of America and is able to heartfully explain how he intends on bringing his change to DC and America while Palin neither has a solid vision nor is able to explain her non-existent vision for America. that's the main difference between the 2 'inexperienced' candidates. also, it's pretty clear that Obama has a powerful ability to unify most of the audience he's speaking to while it remains unclear whether Palin has that kind of skill.
Fixed, and The Other main difference is, SHE'S not Running for President. He Is.

[danoyse]

Is anyone hearing this craziness that Palin isn't the mother of her fifth kid?

That's a little too far too soon. Oh and ah, too crazy.

Yeah, I heard that one last night. The rumor is that her daughter was out of school for several months when Palin was pregnant--apparently due to mono. Palin was also back at work only 3 days after the baby was born, which seems strange.

But it's rumor, and that one seems a little too wild to be true.

[jaguarr]

I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt on it even though a lot of the "evidence" that's piling up seems pretty suspicious. Could all be a bunch of BS, but a lot of it is actual photos of her at 6-7 months pregnant (looks normal), a video of her hiking during a snow blizzard at 8 months pregnant (looks normal), a family photo where the girl has a bit of a gut forming, and then Palin's acceptance speech with McCain. The daughter is in the background holding and taking care of the child in a rather "motherly" manner. Also, Palin's water broke in Texas yet she gave a 30 minute political speech, then flew across the country back to Alaska to deliver the child? That seems strange because she said they knew all along that the child would be a special needs child. Seems like a risky decision to not just have the child in Texas.

She really did that? That's...crazy. :huh:

jag

[SuBe]

I applaud that but now wonder if you slipped off your meds. :hehe:

jag
I'm on No Meds Jaggy, that's a hundred percent pure rock hard SuBe.




I don't know what that really means.

[Gilpesh]

I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt on it even though a lot of the "evidence" that's piling up seems pretty suspicious.

Yeah, it sounds like utter crap... and it's a bad sign when the utter crap starts so soon.

[X Knight]

Very true. May I name a few presidents without previous executive experience before taking office?

-Abraham Lincoln was elected president (barely) after serving only as a state legislator from Illinois who got elected to a SINGLE (that is 2 years) term as a US Congressman where he defied the very at-the-time popular Polk for taking the US to war on a false charge. That sounds very familiar...And Lincoln went on to be the greatest president in US history.

-Harry Truman only served 1 and 2/3 of a term in the US senate before becoming a very ill and dying vice president for FDR. He has gone down as probably the best president of the 20th century after the Roosevelts.

-John F. Kennedy's only experience in national politics was also a brief stint in the senate.

Just saying.

and so....if that "standard" is to be extended to Obama....then that same standard should be extended to Palin......

again....both Obama and Palin have thin resumes ( albeit different kinds of experience, imo ).

so....if those examples you listed prove that candidates with "little experience" can go on to become great presidents....then that means both Obama and Palin have the same chance to do the same in their respective positions......

[redfirebird2008]

She really did that? That's...crazy. :huh:

jag

Yes. Kind of gives you an insight into her "judgment" if you ask me, even if the rumors are FALSE about the child not being hers.

[DACrowe]

I support her Experiences of Clearing Corruption from the Partisan Planks of Alaskan Government. I support her Bull-Moose attitute in cutting spending, even at her own salary. I support her fight against partisanship. I support her for more than the fact she has 20 months of working behind a peticular desk, but for the things she did while behind that desk.

I'll give you she is a bit bi-partisan (but her politics are very polarizing on the national level which would make it harder) and does not like corruption. But the only successful strides she has had at combating corruption was before she was governor. She really hasn't done much in office. Well she did support Sen. Stevens' bridge-to-nowhere when he first unveiled it, before it came out he was going to be investigated for corruption...Yeah.

In any case I'm still unclear how that makes her more experienced than Biden who has also crossed party lines more than once and also has a no-non-sense policy as one of the few Democrats who had the balls back in 2002/03 to tell Bush "No," when it came to Iraq.

Really.

[danoyse]

He wasn't qualified either.

I don't like Guiliani...but it you really want to go there.

Let's compare Wasilla, Alaska to New York City, New York.

Shall we?

I've worked in NYC for 12 years now. I was born in the Bronx (grew up in NJ, though). I have never lived more than 30 minutes from NYC my entire life.

NYC is not comparable to Wasilla. Not even close.

[redfirebird2008]

and so....if that "standard" is to be extended to Obama....then that same standard should be extended to Palin......

again....both Obama and Palin have thin resumes ( albeit different kinds of experience, imo ).

so....if those examples you listed prove that candidates with "little experience" can go on to become great presidents....then that means both Obama and Palin have the same chance to do the same in their respective positions......

Except for this one difference: Palin has admitted she has no interest in foreign affairs. No one, I mean NO ONE, can be POTUS without having an interest in foreign affairs. It is literally impossible. She's also admitted that she doesn't even know what the VP does. Obama, even if you disagree with his stance on the issues, has a ton of knowledge on foreign affairs...more than John McCain.

[jaguarr]

I'm on No Meds Jaggy, that's a hundred percent pure rock hard SuBe.




I don't know what that really means.

:eek:

jag

[Marx]

I've worked in NYC for 12 years now. I was born in the Bronx (grew up in NJ, though). I have never lived more than 30 minutes from NYC my entire life.

NYC is not comparable to Wasilla. Not even close.

My point exactly Danoyse.

[jaguarr]

Yes. Kind of gives you an insight into her "judgment" if you ask me, even if the rumors are FALSE about the child not being hers.

That's a big "YIKES!", regardless of any rumors.

jag

[DorkyFresh]

Fixed, and The Other main difference is, SHE'S not Running for President. He Is.

isn't progress a positive thing? also, she might not be running for president...but you should pick your VP candidate with the mindset that they will have to be president, even if you plan on serving 2 full terms. can anyone here honestly say that they can imagine Palin as the President of the United States of America??

[SuBe]

I'll give you she is a bit bi-partisan (but her politics are very polarizing on the national level which would make it harder) and does not like corruption. But the only successful strides she has had at combating corruption was before she was governor. She really hasn't done much in office. Well she did support Sen. Stevens' bridge-to-nowhere when he first unveiled it, before it came out he was going to be investigated for corruption...Yeah.

In any case I'm still unclear how that makes her more experienced than Biden who has also crossed party lines more than once and also has a no-non-sense policy as one of the few Democrats who had the balls back in 2002/03 to tell Bush "No," when it came to Iraq.

Really.
He didn't tell Bush No, he voted for Iraq.

That is, unless the new history book is out, and I haven't read it yet.

This race has become more McCain vs Biden, and Palin vs Obama. Sorry, but it is true.

[DACrowe]

and so....if that "standard" is to be extended to Obama....then that same standard should be extended to Palin......

again....both Obama and Palin have thin resumes ( albeit different kinds of experience, imo ).

so....if those examples you listed prove that candidates with "little experience" can go on to become great presidents....then that means both Obama and Palin have the same chance to do the same in their respective positions......

I was just using those to point out great presidents who had no "executive experience," like some are using to say Palin is a better choice than Obama or Biden (****, I've seen some on Fox News go so far as McCain as well).

You do have a point, experience does not mean everything. That is why I think defending Palin from a political/ideological front makes more sense to me. However, I need to point out most use the experience angle (including myself at times), because McCain and Republicans around the country (including the entirety of Fox News) bash Obama as unready or unfit to lead due to his youth and lack of experience. He has barely been in the senate and they run those stupid 3 a.m. ads. Then McCain unveils a candidate who no one has ever heard of and has less experience (i.e. none) in national politics than Obama. I think it is the hypocrisy of that which is ammunition for Obama supporters, really.

[luke1234]

isn't progress a positive thing? also, she might not be running for president...but you should pick your VP candidate with the mindset that they will have to be president, even if you plan on serving 2 full terms. can anyone here honestly say that they can imagine Palin as the President of the United States of America??

ask yourself that, and then ask yourself can Biden be president, with his foreign ideals and tough talk politics, and his knowledge of world affairs. This is a man who had the potential to be president and now will help guide Barrack Obama to make good intellegent world affair decisions

[danoyse]

My point exactly Danoyse.

Glad to help.

I have to point out another thing that worries me about her regarding that. I was in NYC on 9/11. There hasn't been a day since where I've gone to work without this little worry in the back of my mind that something will happen again. I don't even go across the street for a soda at lunchtime without my cell phone in my pocket, just in case. And that's not paranoia, that's just an automatic thing now.

Does she really get that? She says she's not interested in foreign affairs. Well, she should be.

[SuBe]

isn't progress a positive thing? also, she might not be running for president...but you should pick your VP candidate with the mindset that they will have to be president, even if you plan on serving 2 full terms. can anyone here honestly say that they can imagine Palin as the President of the United States of America??
Progress yes, the word, in action for attain a postive goal is a good thing. PROGESSIVISM is not a good thing. It's not what this country is founded, and is Divisive at it's core and leads to Facism or National Socialism at it's Appendages. Yes, Progessivism CAN be sold as Compassion, but is it no replacement for Liberty.

[Marx]

ask yourself that, and then ask yourself can Biden be president, with his foreign ideals and tough talk politics, and his knowledge of world affairs. This is a man who had the potential to be president and now will help guide Barrack Obama to make good intellegent world affair decisions

A Palin presidency scares me more than a Bush presidency ever could.

[luke1234]

He didn't tell Bush No, he voted for Iraq.

That is, unless the new history book is out, and I haven't read it yet.

This race has become more McCain vs Biden, and Palin vs Obama. Sorry, but it is true.

No it hasnt, thats what the republicans are trying to pull but you have to be very narrowminded to look at it that way. When the debates go on, whos gonna be up there? what two people are gonna be watched by the whole world? its McCain vs. OBama period

[redfirebird2008]

PROGESSIVISM is not a good thing. It's not what this country is founded, and is Divisive at it's core and leads to Facism or National Socialism at it's Appendages. Yes, Progessivism CAN be sold as Compassion, but is it no replacement for Liberty.

Conservatism leads to those two things as well.

[SuBe]

A Palin presidency scares me more than a Bush presidency ever could.
Then you should relish the next 4 months.:yay:

[luke1234]

A Palin presidency scares me more than a Bush presidency ever could.

hahah i dont even want to think about that. She'd just be puppeteer for the overall party.

[SuBe]

No it hasnt, thats what the republicans are trying to pull but you have to be very narrowminded to look at it that way. When the debates go on, whos gonna be up there? what two people are gonna be watched by the whole world? its McCain vs. OBama period
Yes, that is who will be debating eachother, but who are we talking about now, and who are we comparing. NOT McCain/Obama. We are talking about Obama and Palin.

[SuBe]

Conservatism leads to those two things as well.
When, give me a REALLY good example and the history between point A and B.

[Marx]

Yes, that is who will be debating eachother, but who are we talking about now, and who are we comparing. NOT McCain/Obama. We are talking about Obama and Palin.

Those distinctions have been drawn because of the constant attack by McCain and company on Obama's experience.

[luke1234]

Yes, that is who will be debating eachother, but who are we talking about now, and who are we comparing. NOT McCain/Obama. We are talking about Obama and Palin.

No we are talking about the overall ticket, and how Palin being a heartbeat away from the presidency is a lot more dangerous then Biden being a heartbeat away from the presidency

[SuBe]

Those distinctions have been drawn because of the constant attack by McCain and company on Obama's experience.
I will not state that ANYONE on this Forum is talking about Obama vs Palin because of some wrinkly white haired dude. We are talking about these two out of an organic discussion that has grown through debate. We are discussing Obama vs Palin, many others out there will do the same.

[SuBe]

No we are talking about the overall ticket, and how Palin being a heartbeat away from the presidency is a lot more dangerous then Biden being a heartbeat away from the presidency
Around and Around we go. We are also talking about the Guy in the Presidents chair and his experience and what he has done, not just the 2nd in command (Or the Talking Point: a Heartbeat away).



I'm hearing that all over the place. Heartbeat away, is that some ploy to make people think that McCain's Heart isn't good?

[DorkyFresh]

Progress yes, the word, in action for attain a postive goal is a good thing. PROGESSIVISM is not a good thing. It's not what this country is founded, and is Divisive at it's core and leads to Facism or National Socialism at it's Appendages. Yes, Progessivism CAN be sold as Compassion, but is it no replacement for Liberty.

well this country isn't being founded. the foundation has actually been butchered by the Bush admin. as for progressivism leading to fascism or socialism....as redfirebird said, conservatism can lead to those as well. it depends on the situation.

[DACrowe]

Conservatism leads to those two things as well.

Very true. Fascism is itself an extension of conservative ideology and control. Security over freedom, no? While socialism can come from progressives, it hasn't in this country.

Actually both are politically sound theories to follow, that is liberal/progressive vs. conservative. However the greatest achievements in our country's history has come from progressive ideology. Such as rebelling against the British Empire, demanding taxation with representation, revolution and independence. Also the forming of free states in the west and the eventual abolition (despite the terrible means to get to that point) of slavery, the regulation of railroad monopolies and trust busting. Minimum wage and workers rights, giving women the right to vote, the New Deal and social security, globalization over isolation and the civil rights movement and the overturning of Dredd v. Scott as well as Jim Crow/segregation in general...

all progressive movements. All opposed every generation by conservative ideologues. Evolution "was bad" and should not be taught in schools. Women shouldn't vote. Men have the right to own other men. States should have the right to secede from the Union. Immigrants from Ireland and eastern Europe are unwelcome as they are stealing American jobs.

All platforms of conservatives in the past that are echoed today. All dated and offensive now.

[luke1234]

Around and Around we go. We are also talking about the Guy in the Presidents chair and his experience and what he has done, not just the 2nd in command (Or the Talking Point: a Heartbeat away).



I'm hearing that all over the place. Heartbeat away, is that some ploy to make people think that McCain's Heart isn't good?

In case you havent heard, McCain has had cancer 4 times, heart issues, hell he wouldnt even release his full medical records to the public.

[SuBe]

well this country isn't being founded. the foundation has actually been butchered by the Bush admin. as for progressivism leading to fascism or socialism....as redfirebird said, conservatism can lead to those as well. it depends on the situation.
Maybe you don't read all my posts, I don't support the Bush Adminstration, nor are they running again. And, maybe you didn't see my Sig. I'm a Libertarian, and the Bush Administration hasn't done anything for Liberty. So, that point is Moot.

And, give me an example from Point A to B when Conservatism has lead to Facism or Socialism. Because by DEFINITION, it is IMPOSSIBLE for Conservatism to lead to Facsim or Socialism. Now, you do know the Definition of Conservative, do you, Dork?

[JLBats]

Around and Around we go. We are also talking about the Guy in the Presidents chair and his experience and what he has done, not just the 2nd in command (Or the Talking Point: a Heartbeat away).



I'm hearing that all over the place. Heartbeat away, is that some ploy to make people think that McCain's Heart isn't good?

...:dry:

Dan Quayle.
It's a Dan Quayle reference.
It's not a ploy.

lol

[JLBats]

potatoe?

[DACrowe]

Maybe you don't read all my posts, I don't support the Bush Adminstration, nor are they running again. And, maybe you didn't see my Sig. I'm a Libertarian, and the Bush Administration hasn't done anything for Liberty. So, that point is Moot.

And, give me an example from Point A to B when Conservatism has lead to Facism or Socialism. Because by DEFINITION, it is IMPOSSIBLE for Conservatism to lead to Facsim or Socialism. Now, you do know the Definition of Conservative, do you, Dork?

While I do not think conservatism can directly lead to socialism it is very easy for it to lead to fascism. Giving up rights to protect power for the better of the nation? Is that not what Julius Caesar and then Octavian did in Rome? Or Hitler in Germany? I certainly wouldn't call Hitler progressive in his ideology, but returning to the "way things were" by getting rid of those who are different.

It is also illustrated a time and again in fiction like 1984, 451, Brave New World, V For Vendetta, etc. While the word fascist is relatively new, the concept that breeds it has been around forever and was what Benjamin Franklin warned against when he said "Those who give up a little freedom for a little security deserve neither and shall lose both."

[DorkyFresh]

Maybe you don't read all my posts
maybe? actually, that's a fact. sorry that i can't give you that kind of attention. i didn't think you'd needed it.

I don't support the Bush Adminstration, nor are they running again. And, maybe you didn't see my Sig. I'm a Libertarian, and the Bush Administration hasn't done anything for Liberty. So, that point is Moot.
hmm....when did i ever accuse you of supporting Bush's admin, or of being a conservative? sorry if you took my comment as accusations. it was more an observation than an accusation.

And, give me an example from Point A to B when Conservatism has lead to Facism or Socialism. Because by DEFINITION, it is IMPOSSIBLE for Conservatism to lead to Facsim or Socialism.
i don't think you read the part of my post where i said that conservatism CAN (not DOES) lead to fascism/socialism but either way, i think DaCrowe covered it better than i CAN.

Now, you do know the Definition of Conservative, do you, Dork?
aww...why you trying to make this a personal thing?

[DACrowe]

Funny little op-ed piece Maureen Dowd did about this in the Times this morning.

From New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/opinion/31dowd.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin



Vice in Go-Go Boots?

By Maureen Dowd:

The guilty pleasure I miss most when I’m out slogging on the campaign trail is the chance to sprawl on the chaise and watch a vacuously spunky and generically sassy chick flick.

So imagine my delight, my absolute astonishment, when the hokey chick flick came out on the trail, a Cinderella story so preposterous it’s hard to believe it’s not premiering on Lifetime. Instead of going home and watching “Miss Congeniality” with Sandra Bullock, I get to stay here and watch “Miss Congeniality” with Sarah Palin.

Sheer heaven.

It’s easy to see where this movie is going. It begins, of course, with a cute, cool unknown from Alaska who has never even been on “Meet the Press” triumphing over a cute, cool unknowable from Hawaii who has been on “Meet the Press” a lot.

Americans, suspicious that the Obamas have benefited from affirmative action without being properly grateful, and skeptical that Michelle really likes “The Brady Bunch” and “The Dick Van Dyke Show,” reject the 47-year-old black contender as too uppity and untested.

Instead, they embrace 72-year-old John McCain and 44-year-old Sarah Palin, whose average age is 58, a mere two years older than the average age of the Obama-Biden ticket. Enthusiastic Republicans don’t see the choice of Palin as affirmative action, despite her thin résumé and gaping absence of foreign policy knowledge, because they expect Republicans to put an underqualified “babe,” as Rush Limbaugh calls her, on the ticket. They have a tradition of nominating fun, bantamweight cheerleaders from the West, like the previous Miss Congeniality types Dan Quayle and W., and then letting them learn on the job. So they crash into the globe a few times while they’re learning to drive, what’s the big deal?

Obama may have been president of The Harvard Law Review, but Palin graduated from the University of Idaho with a minor in poli-sci and worked briefly as a TV sports reporter. And she was tougher on the basketball court than the ethereal Obama, earning the nickname “Sarah Barracuda.”

The legacy of Geraldine Ferraro was supposed to be that no one would ever go on a blind date with history again. But that crazy maverick and gambler McCain does it, and conservatives and evangelicals rally around him in admiration of his refreshingly cynical choice of Sarah, an evangelical Protestant and anti-abortion crusader who became a hero when she decided to have her baby, who has Down syndrome, and when she urged schools to debate creationism as well as that stuffy old evolution thing.

Palinistas, as they are called, love Sarah’s spunky, relentlessly quirky “Northern Exposure” story from being a Miss Alaska runner-up, and winning Miss Congeniality, to being mayor and hockey mom in Wasilla, a rural Alaskan town of 6,715, to being governor for two years to being the first woman ever to run on a national Republican ticket. (Why do men only pick women as running mates when they need a Hail Mary pass? It’s a little insulting.)

Sarah is a zealot, but she’s a fun zealot. She has a beehive and sexy shoes, and the day she’s named she goes shopping with McCain in Ohio for a cheerleader outfit for her daughter.

As she once told Vogue, she’s learned the hard way to deal with press comments about her looks. “I wish they’d stick with the issues instead of discussing my black go-go boots,” she said. “A reporter once asked me about it during the campaign, and I assured him I was trying to be as frumpy as I could by wearing my hair on top of my head and these schoolmarm glasses.”

This chick flick, naturally, features a wild stroke of fate, when the two-year governor of an oversized igloo becomes commander in chief after the president-elect chokes on a pretzel on day one.

The movie ends with the former beauty queen shaking out her pinned-up hair, taking off her glasses, slipping on ruby red peep-toe platform heels that reveal a pink French-style pedicure, and facing down Vladimir Putin in an island in the Bering Strait. Putting away her breast pump, she points her rifle and informs him frostily that she has some expertise in Russia because it’s close to Alaska. “Back off, Commie dude,” she says. “I’m a much better shot than Cheney.”

Then she takes off in her seaplane and lands on the White House lawn, near the new ice fishing hole and hockey rink. The “First Dude,” as she calls the hunky Eskimo in the East Wing, waits on his snowmobile with the kids — Track (named after high school track meets), Bristol (after Bristol Bay where they did commercial fishing), Willow (after a community in Alaska), Piper (just a cool name) and Trig (Norse for “strength.”)

“The P.T.A. is great preparation for dealing with the K.G.B.,” President Palin murmurs to Todd, as they kiss in the final scene while she changes Trig’s diaper. “Now that Georgia’s safe, how ’bout I cook you up some caribou hot dogs and moose stew for dinner, babe?”

[The Senator]

I am really tired of hearing you say how irrelevant Alaska is. That elitist attitude about you is what I find so stomach turning. YOU know McCain's inner thoughts, YOU know Alaska is irrelevant, YOU know when I as a woman should be outraged, YOU know when I should keep my place ...

I don't know anything. I can only analyze his decision the best way possible.

As for Alaska being one of the most irrelevant states in the country... meh. That's subject to opinion, to everyone's opinion. But, when you consider that its politics are totally different from the politics in the mainland United States, that its taxes are different, that its breed of politicians are different... it becomes apparent, to me, that two year's experience as governor of Alaska isn't nearly enough experience to become Vice President of the United States.

Elitist? Maybe it is. I consider my intellect to be fairly high, I consider my knowledge of the political system to be top notch, and I consider my standing in the political world to make my opinion a little more valid in some cases than others. But my opinion is not the only opinion, and at least I can back up my opinion on Alaska and Sarah Palin with factual evidence.

And, as for your place... your place, as a poster on these boards, is to know when it is right to open your mouth (fingers? :huh:) and make daring insinuations, such as I am sexist. Instead of being so bold as to make the accusation itself, I would suggest asking a series of questions and analyzing the answers you receive, then calling the poster on it if it is prevalent. Gender and race baiting are two things which shouldn't come up here, ever, unless it is quite obvious.


Geez, come to think of it, I don't know how I've gotten along all these years without you. :eek:

I know, right? Like, you're just the butter on my bread...


Despite my distaste for your communication style and what I believe is a condescending attitude, I don't have any ill feelings toward you. People are going to disagree on these things. What I find amusing is that you apparently think I'm some sort of big Sarah Palin supporter when all I was attempting to do was suggest that Hillary supporters (and particularly females) had more sense than to jump on a presidential bandwagon because of someones gender. However, if it's true that many have claimed they won't vote for Obama because Hillary wasn't chosen as his V.P. running mate, then maybe they don't have a whole lot of sense. :dry:

I don't consider you a Palin supporter :huh:

My defense against you was solely based on your assertion that I had a sexist attitude, and nothing further. If I thought you were a Palin supporter I would have called you on it, but I rarely do here because such assumptions can be embarrassing for both people involved.

Last time I made such an accusation was when I accused Marx of being a Republican way back in February... you can obviously see why my foot has been in my mouth ever since...

[SuBe]

Very true. Fascism is itself an extension of conservative ideology and control. Security over freedom, no? While socialism can come from progressives, it hasn't in this country.

Actually both are politically sound theories to follow, that is liberal/progressive vs. conservative. However the greatest achievements in our country's history has come from progressive ideology. Such as rebelling against the British Empire, demanding taxation with representation, revolution and independence. Also the forming of free states in the west and the eventual abolition (despite the terrible means to get to that point) of slavery, the regulation of railroad monopolies and trust busting. Minimum wage and workers rights, giving women the right to vote, the New Deal and social security, globalization over isolation and the civil rights movement and the overturning of Dredd v. Scott as well as Jim Crow/segregation in general...


Sorry but you are Wrong, Progressivism didn't begin until the 1880s, out of Germany. What you are talking about, from the 1750 and 60's is CLASSICAL LIBERALISM, the basis for Conservative Thought today. This lead to the writings of Adam Smith and eventually the US Constition. CONSERVATIVISM is maintaining of that Status Quo, Revolution (Change) is a "Pre"by-product of Progressivism and Facism, in that you must enact CHANGE in Status quo to acheive your ideals. And if you want to talk about Minimum Wage, that is ANTI-Captialist. For a Government to enact policies that is against Laissez-faire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laissez-faire) Capitalism. And the opposite of Laissez-Faire Markets is Socialism, which Laissez Faire Capitalism is the foudation for CLASSICAL LIBERALISM.

Now, Facism is a difficult word to define. One could point to the Il Duce, or even his hated brethren Hitler or even Stalin. All are Facist. But to know that they each dispised eachother, and eachother's political regimes, one must look deeper, what is the similarities to each? Political Revolution, Change for the Worker Class and Change from Self Identity to Identity of the State and Hated of other Classes, usually the Rich and powerful or scapegoats like the Jews.

Progressisim, or what was at the time called GERMANISM or Wilsonism, lead to Italian Facism, and eventually an offshoot of National Socialism and Commusism. Even Mussolini was a Fan of Woodrow Wilson, writing him letters of endorsement, promising to retire to Vermont after his term of Dictatorship was over.

And, if you want to talk about Jim Crow Laws, that was enacted by DEMOCRATS, yes, the party of Obama, go back about 60 years from that, which party stood for FREEDOM for the Black man? Yes, the party of Lincoln, the Republicans. You want to talk about isolations? That is Wilsonism, Yes, Progresive Woodrow Wilson Spouted Isolationism along side the New Deal, which the Country has never recovered. That is the reason we didn't fight earlier during WWI, because of Wilson.

all progressive movements. All opposed every generation by conservative ideologues. Evolution "was bad" and should not be taught in schools. Women shouldn't vote. Men have the right to own other men. States should have the right to secede from the Union. Immigrants from Ireland and eastern Europe are unwelcome as they are stealing American jobs.


Again, by definition, the creation of "Conservative ideolouges" makes no sense, as Conservativism is the retainment of the status quo and CHANGE is Progressism, hence the name "Progress" another word for Moving Forward. And again, it was Repubilicanism that repaired the Union and freed the slaves, he was a Conservative, in that he wanted to RETAIN THE STATUS QUO of the UNION.
All platforms of conservatives in the past that are echoed today. All dated and offensive now.
And you are plain wrong, but don't worry, I'm sure it was because you were taught wrong by the Liberal Government School system. Brainwashing isn't brainwashing if you didn't know anything before, right?

[jaguarr]

:funny: Maureen Dowd had a lot of fun and maybe a glass of wine or two writing that piece. :D

jag

[JLBats]

lol. I still like that paranoid "Is this trying to convince people McCain's ticker is ****ed?!" comment.

[The Senator]

My boyfriend informs me that now the RNC is going through many speeches and removing anything which points out Obama's lack of experience from the rhetoric. I wish I had an article, so this is just here say at the moment... but if it is true, then that means the McCain campaign is at least aware that Palin's inexperience will be an issue in the campaign...

[SuBe]

While I do not think conservatism can directly lead to socialism it is very easy for it to lead to fascism. Giving up rights to protect power for the better of the nation? Is that not what Julius Caesar and then Octavian did in Rome? Or Hitler in Germany? I certainly wouldn't call Hitler progressive in his ideology, but returning to the "way things were" by getting rid of those who are different.

It is also illustrated a time and again in fiction like 1984, 451, Brave New World, V For Vendetta, etc. While the word fascist is relatively new, the concept that breeds it has been around forever and was what Benjamin Franklin warned against when he said "Those who give up a little freedom for a little security deserve neither and shall lose both."
Sorry, the word Facist is far from "new". It was created in the 1910's by the Il Duce himself. It's Latin for Bundle or Bundle of Stick, or Union of Sticks. Hitler was a progressive, he used what he learned from Italian Facism (the Party and Ideology) and converted it to fight his agenda. The Nazis were very into Holistics and Natural medicine. They were wanting the State to National Healthcare and the Auto Industry. They pushed for the Fist Smoking Ban in History, and blamed the Rich for their Problems. And, because much of the "rich" was Jewish, it was only natural for this to grow until it gave reason for the Government to reduce the "problem". First they confiscated the wealth, in the name of Fairness and Equality, than made them work to "earn" their Freedom. "Work will earn you Freedom" was one of their Motos for Work Camps.

Now, we can ask ourselves, which party is asking for change from the Status Quo, which party is fighting for "Fairness" in wealth, which party is fighting for healthcare and which party wants to Nationalise Private industy?

[redfirebird2008]

SupermanBeyond,

The parties have flip-flopped on certain issues. The "solid South" used to be Democratic and is now Republican and it had everything to do with the fact that the Democratic Party is the one that decided to tear down Jim Crow laws. A good example of the flip flop between the parties is William Jennings Bryan, DEMOCRAT. Anti-evolution, pro-creation fundamentalist Christian who prosecuted the Scopes monkey trial. Now, which party has people pushing the idea of Creationism while denying evolution and which one pushes evolution while denying Creationism? The answer is pretty simple for both of those.

[jaguarr]

My boyfriend informs me that now the RNC is going through many speeches and removing anything which points out Obama's lack of experience from the rhetoric. I wish I had an article, so this is just here say at the moment... but if it is true, then that means the McCain campaign is at least aware that Palin's inexperience will be an issue in the campaign...

Interesting. I wonder if they maybe realized they created a bit of a quagmire for themselves a bit too late after pulling the trigger. That's been their main attack on Obama from Day One. Could their VP choice have left them toothless on that one and now they know it?

jag

[SuBe]

SupermanBeyond,

The parties have flip-flopped on certain issues. The "solid South" used to be Democratic and is now Republican and it had everything to do with the fact that the Democratic Party is the one that decided to tear down Jim Crow laws. A good example of the flip flop between the parties is William Jennings Bryan, DEMOCRAT. Anti-evolution, pro-creation fundamentalist Christian who prosecuted the Scopes monkey trial. Now, which party has people pushing the idea of Creationism while denying evolution and which one pushes evolution while denying Creationism? The answer is pretty simple for both of those.
This example just proves my point, Progressivism vs Conservatism. At the Time the Democrats were progressive on the issues, and today the Republicans are Conservative, meaning, keeping the status quo, keeping it where it was.


oh, by the way, I denounced my Conservative Ideologue about 2 weeks ago. I'm now a Hot Blooded Libertarian. Once I understood the difference between Neo-Libertarian and Conservative, and how the Republicans are not going to do anything to be Regressive to the Laissez-Faire Mentality, and be Regressive on Constitutional interpertations, I renounce my Conservative Ideologue, and proclaim myself a fierce Neo-Libertarian. I will however support McCain/Palin only because they will not grow our imperial Federal Government as quickly as the Democrats.

[DACrowe]

Sorry but you are Wrong, Progressivism didn't begin until the 1880s, out of Germany. What you are talking about, from the 1750 and 60's is CLASSICAL LIBERALISM, the basis for Conservative Thought today. This lead to the writings of Adam Smith and eventually the US Constition. CONSERVATIVISM is maintaining of that Status Quo, Revolution (Change) is a "Pre"by-product of Progressivism and Facism, in that you must enact CHANGE in Status quo to acheive your ideals. And if you want to talk about Minimum Wage, that is ANTI-Captialist. For a Government to enact policies that is against Laissez-faire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laissez-faire) Capitalism. And the opposite of Laissez-Faire Markets is Socialism, which Laissez Faire Capitalism is the foudation for CLASSICAL LIBERALISM.

Now, Facism is a difficult word to define. One could point to the Il Duce, or even his hated brethren Hitler or even Stalin. All are Facist. But to know that they each dispised eachother, and eachother's political regimes, one must look deeper, what is the similarities to each? Political Revolution, Change for the Worker Class and Change from Self Identity to Identity of the State and Hated of other Classes, usually the Rich and powerful or scapegoats like the Jews.

Progressisim, or what was at the time called GERMANISM or Wilsonism, lead to Italian Facism, and eventually an offshoot of National Socialism and Commusism. Even Mussolini was a Fan of Woodrow Wilson, writing him letters of endorsement, promising to retire to Vermont after his term of Dictatorship was over.

And, if you want to talk about Jim Crow Laws, that was enacted by DEMOCRATS, yes, the party of Obama, go back about 60 years from that, which party stood for FREEDOM for the Black man? Yes, the party of Lincoln, the Republicans. You want to talk about isolations? That is Wilsonism, Yes, Progresive Woodrow Wilson Spouted Isolationism along side the New Deal, which the Country has never recovered. That is the reason we didn't fight earlier during WWI, because of Wilson.


Again, by definition, the creation of "Conservative ideolouges" makes no sense, as Conservativism is the retainment of the status quo and CHANGE is Progressism, hence the name "Progress" another word for Moving Forward. And again, it was Repubilicanism that repaired the Union and freed the slaves, he was a Conservative, in that he wanted to RETAIN THE STATUS QUO of the UNION.
And you are plain wrong, but don't worry, I'm sure it was because you were taught wrong by the Liberal Government School system. Brainwashing isn't brainwashing if you didn't know anything before, right?


:whatever: I took those Poli Sci classes as well and am aware of the details. I was speaking in a broad sense of liberal ideology vs. conservative ideology. I used progressive as interchangeable for liberal and I know about classical liberalism and Adam Smith (albeit I do think John Locke had more to do in influencing American individualism).

Fascism is a modern concept, but the idea of tyranny stems from the definition of the Greeks when the likes of Plato argued that democracy was one step away from this terrible ideal. The term dictator in itself comes from Roman times when Caesar was to be named First Dictator, hence my comparison of the birth of the Empire to fascism.

I realize these are all modern terms, but as we use the word "nation" to refer to Greek city states or regions of the world, when the idea of nations is completely from enlightenment and after the middle ages speaks of our ability to see the similarities in history and notice the trends of ideology, even if the details change.

Hitler came from a conservative ideology and Stalin came from a liberal/progressive ideology (arguably) but they both led to fascism. That was my point. It can happen.

As for American history, don't try to go down that road with "the party of Obama supported segregation" crap. I am well too aware that the parties were very different. Republicans were actually the PROGRESSIVE (oh looked I used it an incorrect context again! :eek: ) party when they formed and Lincoln being their first president was the excuse SC wanted to secede to protect their slave rights. Southern Democrats were from the south and divided their votes with multiple candidates in 1860. This led to after the war the south being deep Democratic and maintaining a conservative idea.

It was the likes of socially liberal policies of Teddy Roosevelt, his reactions to Taft and much more FDR and the New Deal that switched the philosophies of the party. The tipping was when the party of Kennedy came out for civil rights in the 1960s, allowing the Republicans to defend Jim Crow in the south and steal the region. When LBJ signed the first of civil rights legislation he said "We lost the south for a generation" and it became red overnight.

And I can go much deeper into it, but I hope I proved at the very least I have basic American history knowledge. :whatever:

At any rate I merely pointed out it was liberal ideology or rather that of "change" that has progressed our nation forward. Conservative in itself means conserving or maintaining the status quo. Like those who didn't want immigrants in the mid 19th century forming the Nativists. Or those who wanted to maintain white power and blacks as endentured help with no future after Reconstruction. Yes the Democrats were the conservative ones and the Republicans were liberal. I'm speaking in generalities here when I say all the great strides in American history were made by those "radical" progressives, even if the term was not invented until the 1880s.

Now you can patronize me some more by pulling out Political Theory 100 some more.

[DACrowe]

Sorry, the word Facist is far from "new". It was created in the 1910's by the Il Duce himself. It's Latin for Bundle or Bundle of Stick, or Union of Sticks. Hitler was a progressive, he used what he learned from Italian Facism (the Party and Ideology) and converted it to fight his agenda. The Nazis were very into Holistics and Natural medicine. They were wanting the State to National Healthcare and the Auto Industry. They pushed for the Fist Smoking Ban in History, and blamed the Rich for their Problems. And, because much of the "rich" was Jewish, it was only natural for this to grow until it gave reason for the Government to reduce the "problem". First they confiscated the wealth, in the name of Fairness and Equality, than made them work to "earn" their Freedom. "Work will earn you Freedom" was one of their Motos for Work Camps.

Now, we can ask ourselves, which party is asking for change from the Status Quo, which party is fighting for "Fairness" in wealth, which party is fighting for healthcare and which party wants to Nationalise Private industy?

When I said "new" I was referring to the 20th century. I was applying it in theory to Caesar. The concept is new, but I'd argue the practice of tyranny and dictatorship, which fascism is just the 20th century extension of, is anything but.

[souvlaki]

and so....if that "standard" is to be extended to Obama....then that same standard should be extended to Palin......

again....both Obama and Palin have thin resumes ( albeit different kinds of experience, imo ).

so....if those examples you listed prove that candidates with "little experience" can go on to become great presidents....then that means both Obama and Palin have the same chance to do the same in their respective positions......

Okay, you are forgetting one small difference here. See, in this country we have these things called elections, and primaries. Regardless of your opinion on Obama's experience he spent a year proving to the American people that he had what it takes, despite his resume, to be President of the United States. He proved to at least the majority of Democrats that he was the most qualified, and most capable to lead out of the Democratic candidates that ran for President in this election, and we, the people voted for him. Palin on the other hand was selected by one person. She was very obviously not vetted to the extent that Obama vetted his VP choices (McCain met her once). And the candidate in question had spent the last six months grilling his opponent for his thin resume, and then turned around and selected a person with an even thinner resume. That alone speaks volumes about his hypocrisy. You had no say in her selection. Only John McCain. What makes the selection even worse is that it's obvious to anyone with half a brain she was selected not because she was the most qualified, but because she was perceived to help McCain win certain demographics. And this is the person that may possibly have to step in as President one day. So far the best thing I've heard from you guys is that she will get on the job training, and if something happens to McCain a couple years down the line then she'll have plenty of experience by that point. But let me ask you this, what if something happens to McCain a week after he is elected? Then what? You don't choose a VP hoping that that day will never come. You select a VP that is capable of stepping into that role at any given time. All this choice proves to me is a lack of judgment on McCain's part. If Palin manages to prove herself capable of running this country in the next 60 days than perhaps my opinion of her will change. But I'm not counting on it, especially given that she has virtually no experience with foreign affairs to the point of not even knowing what is happening in a war we are in the middle of, no knowledge of what the position of VP even entails, and her biggest asset as a VP, her executive experience, is as a two year (and that's rounding it up) Governor of a state with a population the size of a large city (a state completely isolated from the rest of the US no less), two terms as the mayor of a town with a little bit over 5000 people in it, and serving on the local PTA. To top it off she has radical views on social, religious, and environmental issues that are completely out of touch with the majority of the American public. And this is the person that may become our President if John McCain croaks on his first day in office.

[Superman4ever]

Has this been posted?

Sarah Palin is 'NOT DA MAMMA!' (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/30/121350/137) She's the Mamma's Mamma! :woot:

Sarah Palin Is NOT The Mother [Photos+Video]
by ArcXIX
Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:12:31 PM PDT

Yesterday, with the news of Sarah Louise Heath Palin inexplicably being chosen as a Vice-Presidential nominee, the attentive American public was also introduced to her character. Unfortunately for all of us, it was filled with multiple instances of backtracking and outright lies. While Alaskans had been giving her an 80% approval rating, recently 87% of Alaskans polled on the subject of TrooperGate believed she was lying.

Now, I've known liars in my life. Their single core problem is not with themselves, but those around them. If they're never called out on their twisting of truths and fabrications, they simply continue to make larger lies.

Well, Sarah, I'm calling you a liar. And not even a good one. Trig Paxson Van Palin is not your son. He is your grandson. The sooner you come forward with this revelation to the public, the better.

* ArcXIX's diary :: ::
*

The story begins on March 6th, when Sarah decided to come forward and announce to the world that she was pregnant, a monumental occasion for an acting Governor. Republican Governor Jane Maria Swift of Massachusetts was the first sitting Governor in United States history to give birth in office just seven years before, and now here we were once again. Yet, no one could believe the news:

JUNEAU -- Gov. Sarah Palin shocked and awed just about everybody around the Capitol on Wednesday when she announced she's expecting her fifth child.

...

Palin said she's already about seven months along, with the baby due to arrive in mid-May.

That the pregnancy is so advanced astonished all who heard the news. The governor, a runner who's always been trim, simply doesn't look pregnant.

Even close members of her staff said they only learned this week their boss was expecting.

"I thought it was becoming obvious," Palin said. "You know, clothes getting snugger and snugger."

But people just couldn't believe the news.

"Really? No!" said Bethel state Rep. Mary Nelson, who is close to giving birth herself.

"It's wonderful. She's very well-disguised," said Senate President Lyda Green, a mother of three who has sometimes sparred with Palin politically. "When I was five months pregnant, there was absolutely no question that I was with child."

...

Palin said she's not aiming to take any time off from her job as governor, assuming all goes well with the pregnancy.

...

With Palin riding extraordinarily high popularity ratings, pundits have mentioned her as a potential vice presidential candidate. But she said Wednesday night she's "not pursuing or perpetuating it," adding, "I have no desire to leave my job at all as governor."

...

She's known as a fashion plate, but said she hasn't been dressing differently to cover her barely perceptible bulge.

Funny quote on her having no desire for the Vice-Presidency aside, the article is direly clear. No one knew she was pregnant, not even her own staff. Quite a feat. Why the secrecy? Sarah has never given an answer, and upon further reading, no one has bothered to ask.

Seven months into a pregnancy, and no one noticed.

Even Harry Houdini would be impressed.

And how could anyone tell? Sarah's waistline never changed. Her wardrobe still remained tight and professional. In a video posted in February (nearing five months of pregnancy at the time), Sarah is seen trim, and walking around all of Juneau, Alaska.

Here's a picture of Palin, 3 days after the announcement that she was 7 months preggers!

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/9515/3073504041standaloneprovb5.jpg

SNAP!

Now here's a pic of her daughter, published on March 9th (3 days after the announcement.

http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/1113/6873504039standaloneprokr3.jpg

Shee-iittt!

[souvlaki]

Has this been posted?

Sarah Palin is 'NOT DA MAMMA!' (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/30/121350/137) She's the Mamma's Mamma! :woot:



Here's a picture of Palin, 3 days after the announcement that she was 7 months preggers!

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/9515/3073504041standaloneprovb5.jpg

SNAP!

Now here's a pic of her daughter, published on March 9th (3 days after the announcement.

http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/1113/6873504039standaloneprokr3.jpg

Shee-iittt!

Personally, I think this is likely tabloid garbage. There are a few questions that article poses though that give it some credibility, like the 8 hour plane ride while she was supposedly in labor followed by a 3 hour drive to a hospital once she arrived there. Also, the whole part about her daughter being pulled from school for five months due to an extreme case of mono. Overall though, there isn't a whole hell of a lot of compelling evidence outside those things, and a couple pictures of Palin not showing 6 months into her pregnancy. If, for some off the wall reason any of this turns out to be true though, that would be such a devastating scandal that Palin would likely never recover from. But it's likely not. Wouldn't be shocked to see the National Enquirer pick up on this before the end of the week though.

[Raiden]

6 things Palin pick says about McCain


The selection of a running mate is among the most consequential and the most defining decisions a presidential nominee can make. John McCain’s pick of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin says a lot about his decision-making — and some of it is downright breathtaking.
ADVERTISEMENT

We knew McCain is a politician who relishes improvisation and likes to go with his gut. But it is remarkable that someone who has repeatedly emphasized experience in this campaign named an inexperienced governor he barely knew to be his No. 2. Whatever you think of the pick, here are six things it tells us about McCain:

1. He’s desperate. Let’s stop pretending this race is as close as national polling suggests. The truth is McCain is essentially tied or trailing in every swing state that matters — and too close for comfort in several states, such as Indiana and Montana, that the GOP usually wins pretty easily in presidential races. On top of that, voters seem very inclined to elect Democrats in general this election — and very sick of the Bush years.

McCain could easily lose in an electoral landslide. That is the private view of Democrats and Republicans alike.

McCain’s pick shows he is not pretending. Politicians, even “mavericks” like McCain, play it safe when they think they are winning — or see an easy path to winning. They roll the dice only when they know that the risks of conventionality are greater than the risks of boldness.

The Republican brand is a mess. McCain is reasonably concluding that it won’t work to replicate George W. Bush and Karl Rove’s electoral formula, based around national security and a big advantage among Y chromosomes, from 2004.

“She’s a fresh new face in a party that’s dying for one — the antidote to boring white men,” a campaign official said.

Palin, the logic goes, will prompt voters to give McCain a second look — especially women who have watched Democrats reject Hillary Rodham Clinton for Barack Obama.

The risks of a backlash from choosing someone so unknown and so untested are obvious. In one swift stroke, McCain demolished what had been one of his main arguments against Obama.

“I think we’re going to have to examine our tag line, ‘dangerously inexperienced,’” a top McCain official said wryly.

2. He’s willing to gamble — bigtime. Let’s face it: This is not the pick of a self-confident candidate. It is the political equivalent of a trick play or, as some Democrats called it, a Hail Mary pass in football. McCain talks incessantly about experience, and then goes and selects a woman he hardly knows, who hardly knows foreign policy and who can hardly be seen as instantly ready for the presidency.

He is smart enough to know it could work, at least politically. Many Republicans see this pick as a brilliant stroke, because it will be difficult for Democrats to run hard against a woman in the wake of the Hillary Clinton drama. Will this push those disgruntled Hillary voters McCain’s way? Perhaps. But this is hardly aimed at them: It is directed at the huge bloc of independent women who could decide this election — especially those who do not see abortion as a make-or-break issue.

McCain has a history of taking dares. Palin represents his biggest one yet.

3. He’s worried about the political implications of his age. Like a driver overcorrecting out of a swerve, he chooses someone who is two years younger than the youthful Obama and 28 years younger than he is. (He turned 72 on Friday.) The father-daughter comparison was inevitable when they appeared next to each other.

4. He’s not worried about the actuarial implications of his age. He thinks he’s in fine fettle and Palin wouldn’t be performing the main constitutional duty of a vice president, which is standing by in case a president dies or becomes incapacitated. If he were really concerned about an inexperienced person sitting in the Oval Office, we would be writing about vice presidential nominee Mitt Romney or Tom Ridge or Condoleezza Rice.

There is no plausible way McCain could say that he picked Palin, who was only elected governor in 2006 and whose most extended public service was as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska (population 8,471), because she was ready to be president on Day One.

Nor can McCain argue that he was looking for someone he could trust as a close adviser. Most people know the staff at the local Starbucks better than McCain knows Palin. They met for the first time last February at a National Governors Association meeting in Washington. Then, they spoke again — by phone — on Sunday while she was at the Alaska state fair and he was at home in Arizona.

McCain has made a mockery out of his campaign's longtime contention that Barack Obama is too dangerously inexperienced to be commander in chief. Now, the Democratic ticket boasts 40 years of national experience (four years for Obama and 36 years for Joe Biden of Delaware), while the Republican ticket has 26 (McCain’s four years in the House and 22 in the Senate).

The McCain campaign has made a calculation that most voters don’t really care about the national experience or credentials of a vice president, and that Palin’s ebullient personality and reputation as a reformer who took on cesspool politics in Alaska matters more.

5. He’s worried about his conservative base. If he had room to maneuver, there were lots of people McCain could have selected who would have represented a break from Washington politics as usual. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman comes to mind (and it certainly came to McCain’s throughout the process). He had no such room. GOP stalwarts were furious over trial balloons about the possibility of choosing a supporter of abortion rights, including the possibility that he would reach out to his friend.

Palin is an ardent opponent of abortion who was previously scheduled to keynote the Republican National Coalition for Life's "Life of the Party" event in the Twin Cities this week.

“She’s really a perfect selection,” said Darla St. Martin, the co-director of the National Right to Life Committee. It is no secret McCain wanted to shake things up in this race — and he realized he was limited to a shake-up conservatives could stomach.

6. At the end of the day, McCain is still McCain. People may find him a refreshing maverick or an erratic egotist. In either event, he marches to his own beat.

On the upside, his team did manage to play to the media’s love of drama, fanning speculation about his possible choices and maximizing coverage of the decision.

On the potential downside, the drama was evidently entirely genuine. The fact that McCain only spoke with Palin about the vice presidency for the first time on Sunday, and that he was seriously considering Lieberman until days ago, suggests just how hectic and improvisational his process was.

In the end, this selection gives him a chance to reclaim the mantle of a different kind of politician intent on changing Washington. He once had a legitimate claim to this: After all, he took on his own party over campaign finance reform and immigration. He jeopardized this claim in recent months by embracing ideas he once opposed (Bush tax cuts) and ideas that appeared politically motivated (gas tax holiday).

Spontaneity, with a touch of impulsiveness, is one of the traits that attract some of McCain’s admirers. Whether it’s a good calling card for a potential president will depend on the reaction in coming days to what, for the moment, looks like the most daring vice presidential selection in generations.

I found this Yahoo! article very interesting re: McCain's pick of Palin. Seems like he picks her not well in advance, but rather out of implusiveness in the recent days. And the fact that he hardly knew her makes the decision kind of suspicious.

[kane9321]

Is anyone hearing this craziness that Palin isn't the mother of her fifth kid?

That's a little too far too soon. Oh and ah, too crazy.

I just heard this on a talk show..5 mins ago:wow:

[Superman]

George W. Bush had "executive" experience. Look how that turned out. Dick Cheney had "executive" experience. Look how that turned out. The two combined for one of the worst Presidencies ever......This has always been my feeling on the whole experience argument, Experience don't mean jack without good judgment. Bush is proof of that.

[Superman]

Personally, I think this is likely tabloid garbage. There are a few questions that article poses though that give it some credibility, like the 8 hour plane ride while she was supposedly in labor followed by a 3 hour drive to a hospital once she arrived there. Also, the whole part about her daughter being pulled from school for five months due to an extreme case of mono. Overall though, there isn't a whole hell of a lot of compelling evidence outside those things, and a couple pictures of Palin not showing 6 months into her pregnancy. If, for some off the wall reason any of this turns out to be true though, that would be such a devastating scandal that Palin would likely never recover from. But it's likely not. Wouldn't be shocked to see the National Enquirer pick up on this before the end of the week though.I would laugh my ass off if this was true.

Sadly the Dems couldn't get that lucky... But it would be funny though.:hehe:

[kainedamo]

There doesn't seem to be any conclusive proof that Sarah Palin isn't the mother of Trig. But there definately seems to be something fishy.

I mean, most airlines have restrictions against pregnant women flying, especially if they are late in pregnancy. Palin not only ignored this, she got on an eight hour flight while in labor. AND, the flight attendants didn't notice that she was pregnant or in any discomfort.

EnBjwZ93n6Q

85IZ9ieVSEY

[Hobodeluxe]

There doesn't seem to be any conclusive proof that Sarah Palin isn't the mother of Trig. But there definately seems to be something fishy.

I mean, most airlines have restrictions against pregnant women flying, especially if they are late in pregnancy. Palin not only ignored this, she got on an eight hour flight while in labor. AND, the flight attendants didn't notice that she was pregnant or in any discomfort.

EnBjwZ93n6Q

her pregnancy was risky because of her age anyway. doubly risky being a Down's kid. and then she goes into premature labor (that's triple risky) when her water breaks.

Did she want to have a still born? She never got approval from her doctor for the flight. She didn't get checked out in Texas. She risked all that to make it to her small hometown hospital (not the capital where she was living as gov)that doesn't have an NICU.

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb33/hobodeluxe/wasilla.jpg

Downtown Wasilla.

Something is awfully suspicious.
She's either covering something up or likes to take unnecessary risks(borne out by her abuses of power both as mayor and gov and the debt she left Wasilla holding when she ended her term)

I want to see Elizabeth on "The View" defend this. Should be hilarious.

[Superman]

There doesn't seem to be any conclusive proof that Sarah Palin isn't the mother of Trig. But there definately seems to be something fishy.

I mean, most airlines have restrictions against pregnant women flying, especially if they are late in pregnancy. Palin not only ignored this, she got on an eight hour flight while in labor. AND, the flight attendants didn't notice that she was pregnant or in any discomfort.

EnBjwZ93n6Q

85IZ9ieVSEY

IF, and that's a big IF, If all of that is true it does make you think.

I doubt very much that she faked a pregnancy though. It sounds good for a movie on the "Lifetime" Ch but the real world just doen't work that way...


But again, It would be funny.:hehe:

[kainedamo]

http://www.zimbio.com/pilot?ZURL=%2FBristol%2BPalin%2Farticles%2F34%2FBr istol%2BPalin%2BTrig%2BMom%2Bwatch%2Bvideo%2Bdecid e&URL=http%3A%2F%2Froschellenelson.blogspot.com%2F20 08%2F08%2Ffollow-up-to-bristol-palin-pregnancy.html

[SuBe]

:whatever: I took those Poli Sci classes as well and am aware of the details. I was speaking in a broad sense of liberal ideology vs. conservative ideology. I used progressive as interchangeable for liberal and I know about classical liberalism and Adam Smith (albeit I do think John Locke had more to do in influencing American individualism).

..

Hitler came from a conservative ideology and Stalin came from a liberal/progressive ideology (arguably) but they both led to fascism. That was my point. It can happen.

..

Now you can patronize me some more by pulling out Political Theory 100 some more.

Ok, I'm only going to add a little more here. You learned all that in your Political Science class right? Which school? Just how Liberal is that School? Do you really think that Liberal American Acedemia is going to tell you that Hitler followed a path of ideology that stems from Liberalism? Buddy, you are in college, to learn how to ask questions, not repeat the historical talking points.

How was Hitler anywhere remotely Conservative or a Classical Liberal? How did he believe in Free Market? Was it when he took over Industry in Germany? Or was it when he Changed the Status Quo of Post WWI Germany? Was it when he enacted NEW laws detailing rights in Germany? He took over Germany by Revolution, Intellectual Revolution. And that is in part, defination of a Progressive Statist Facist. But because he happened to be slightly to the right of Italian Facism, he is taught to be a Conservative. But, how was he a Conservative?

He was slightly to the right of the Far Left, but not a Centrist, or anywhere near the right.

Which party between Democrat and Republican want bigger government, which party had members call for Nationalizing the Oil Companies, and healthcare? Which Party uses class warfare to attain its goals? Which party is clamoring the differences between Men and Women, Rich and Poor, Workers and Managment, and races? Sorry, but when I hear liberals spout off about the Rich being lazy, or confiscation of their wealth for no reason other than "Fairness", or Nationalizing ANYTHING that is private, I hear echos of Facism, Communism, and Marxism. When I hear a Politician's wife say "[Canidate] is going to require you to work, he is going to ask you to serve" I don't find that very appealing. I feel that isn't promoting Classical Liberalism, just the complete opposite of it. When I hear plans to "Lift the burden on the poor and middle-class", I hear "Proletariat vs the Bourgeosise", and I think, hmm... Who in history was for the "Workers"?
Who today is compounding the dangerous echos of the past?


Progressivism is a dangerous, dangerous thing. Because, to who's benifit is the "Progress"? By who's terms is this progress met? Who's definition of "Progress"? Yes. It is noble to want to be compassionate for the poor, the sick, and the hungry, but don't give the Government the tools to steal the wealth, control your health, and obtain nurishment, Intellectually or otherwise. They will control you. Give them the power, and they will make you "work for your freedom".

I won't comment any more on this, unless there is a dedicated thread for it.

[Heretic]

I would agree with you were it not for the heartfelt care the current Republican administration showed these people three years ago. They are caring when it is politically opportune to be so. When it isn't, well..."those folks are looting."


Oh, how incorrect you are. I have lived in several hurricane prone areas, and EVERYWHERE I lived had a very strict, and very clearly stated policy about hurricanes. If there was a mandatory evactuation, YOU MUST LEAVE, because we cannot send rescue workers into danger to save you. That policy is followed by every single ambulance service in the entire country, no medical help is allowed to enter until it is absolutely safe for them to enter. When I have decided to stay in town during hurricanes, I knew that the feds would not, could not help me for days if trouble happened. But what about the people who couldnt afford to leave??? Thats why New Orleans had a policy for getting those people out of town...a policy that the democratic mayor did not bother to follow...so blame him, not the feds for the lack of response.

[SuperT]

Whooooooooooa @ the whole baby thing. I'm taking it with a grain of salt, but if that whole thing is true - my god! O_O

It also doesn't help her case when she took all of her photos off her official site, it just makes her look more suspicious. I know skinny women still are pretty skinny when they are pregnant but seven months into it and she still looks the same as she did before she was pregnant? I think photos of her pregnant with her older children need to be seen before stuff like that takes center stage.

[SuBe]

Palin says she felt safe flying to Alaska to have baby
By Rebecca George

Originally published Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 12:07 a.m.
Updated Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 2:25 p.m.



Anchorage Daily News
Gov. Sarah Palin’s decision to make the eight-hour flight from Dallas to Anchorage has some people wondering about the possible safety hazards of flying while in the late stages of pregnancy.

The governor, eight months into her pregnancy, noticed amniotic fluid Thursday morning prior to giving a keynote luncheon address at the Republican Governor’s Energy Conference in Texas. After wrapping up the speech, Palin and her husband consulted with her physician about possibly flying home on an earlier flight. After being granted permission from her doctor, she and her husband proceeded with the trek home.

At that point, Palin was only having minor contractions and was not showing signs of active labor, Sharon Leighow, the governor’s spokeswoman, said on Monday.

After the baby was born, Palin told her staff members that her experiences from four previous pregnancies made her comfortable with the signs of active labor. She felt that neither she nor her baby were in any danger, and so she flew home as scheduled.

Most airlines have specific policies concerning air travel during pregnancy, especially during the final months. For women traveling in the final month of pregnancy, a “permission-to-travel” letter is required by her primary physician. However, most restrictions rely on an honor policy that leaves the decision to notify the airline in the hands of the passenger.

The governor did not feel the need to inform the airline of her condition, Leighow said.

Alaska Airlines is one of the few airlines that does not have a policy regarding flight during pregnancy.

“We leave the decision to fly up to our customers and their medical advisers,” according to Alaska Airlines representative Caroline Boren.

Palin told her staff that she would not have boarded the plane had she thought she or her baby were in danger.

Had Palin needed medical assistance during the flight, ground agents and flight attendants for the airline are highly trained to look for signs of distress or other concerns with a passenger’s condition, Boren said.

“Governor Palin was extremely pleasant to flight attendants and her stage of pregnancy was not apparent by observation as she didn’t show any signs of distress,” Boren said.

Flight crew members are not specifically trained to assist in labor during a flight. But had Palin gone into active labor while en route to Anchorage, the crew would have been prepared to offer medical assistance through a system known as Med Link, a medical advisory service that allows crew members to radio for medical help during the flight.

The flight would not have needed to land, barring any emergency with the delivery.

No medical assistance was necessary for Palin during the flight.

Palin’s flight landed at 10:30 p.m. Thursday. She and her husband drove to the Mat-Su Valley Regional Medical Center, and she checked in with her doctor an hour later.

Trig Paxson Van Palin was born seven hours later.

The governor confirmed Monday that early testing showed that Trig was born with Down syndrome. The syndrome is a chromosomal disorder caused by the presence of all or part of an extra 21st chromosome.

Trig is the governor’s fifth child. She told her staff members that Trig was the easiest delivery of all her children.

[danoyse]

Personally, I think this is likely tabloid garbage. There are a few questions that article poses though that give it some credibility, like the 8 hour plane ride while she was supposedly in labor followed by a 3 hour drive to a hospital once she arrived there. Also, the whole part about her daughter being pulled from school for five months due to an extreme case of mono. Overall though, there isn't a whole hell of a lot of compelling evidence outside those things, and a couple pictures of Palin not showing 6 months into her pregnancy. If, for some off the wall reason any of this turns out to be true though, that would be such a devastating scandal that Palin would likely never recover from. But it's likely not. Wouldn't be shocked to see the National Enquirer pick up on this before the end of the week though.

Those photos look like they could have been easily photoshopped, too.

There's definitely something fishy--she was hiking in a blizzard at 8 months? She also went back to work 3 days after the baby was born, and the daughter was missing from school during those last months. I know that you can have plenty of time after your water breaks before delivery, but getting on a plane? Why not just get yourself to a hospital?

It's definitely suspicious, but it still seems a little too wild to be true.

[Comicfilmer]

The whole "baby issue" is pretty interesting. Not sure if the whole story true, but that sure is a weird set of coincidences if even part of the story is true.

[jaguarr]

Personally, I think this is likely tabloid garbage. There are a few questions that article poses though that give it some credibility, like the 8 hour plane ride while she was supposedly in labor followed by a 3 hour drive to a hospital once she arrived there. Also, the whole part about her daughter being pulled from school for five months due to an extreme case of mono. Overall though, there isn't a whole hell of a lot of compelling evidence outside those things, and a couple pictures of Palin not showing 6 months into her pregnancy. If, for some off the wall reason any of this turns out to be true though, that would be such a devastating scandal that Palin would likely never recover from. But it's likely not. Wouldn't be shocked to see the National Enquirer pick up on this before the end of the week though.

If the baby is hers, then her 8 hour plane ride and three hour car ride AFTER her water broke makes me question her judgment as a mother all the more. Especially since they knew this was a special needs baby and it was premature. If it's not hers, then she'll be double-damned. What I DO know is this: when you are from a small town there are NO secrets. None. If this story has any legs, it will come out of the woodwork and probably fairly quickly.

jag

[Matt]

Sounds too much like something out of a soap opera to be true. Plus, unless McCain had the worst vetting staff ever...there is no way this would've gotten by them and no way they wouldn't have checked into it.

[SuperT]

A kid taken out of school for five months and her parents tell them it's because of mono?!? No freak'in way!

The most I've ever seen someone with mono gone is about a month, and that was someone I work with. There is definitely something going on there.

[kainedamo]

“Governor Palin was extremely pleasant to flight attendants and her stage of pregnancy was not apparent by observation as she didn’t show any signs of distress,” Boren said.

Man, that is suspicious as hell. Eight months pregnant, in LABOUR, and it wasn't apparent to the flight attendants that she was pregnant or in distress?

[Comicfilmer]

Anyone think the mainstream media will pick this one up today?

[SuBe]

I have to admit, it does sound suspicious, but why would they contrive the whole story, of her going into labor in Texas, and the labor pains on the plane? If it is fake, then why not tell the media that she started laboring after the plane landed?

[SuBe]

Anyone think the mainstream media will pick this one up today?
I think its over shadowed by Gustav.

[bunk]

I'm assuming there are no other photos of her daughter in the last couple months? It seems unlikely Palin would allow her daughter to be photographed like that if she really were pregnant.

[Matt]

Hmm...

http://www.postchronicle.com/images/articles/bristol-palin.jpg

And here is a url to a bigger version. Look at her stomach. It is REALLY looking like she is.

http://gov.state.ak.us/photos/PalinFamily_Outside_v01.jpg

This one is from August 07, I suppose it can be seen as the "before" picture.

http://govserv.state.ak.us/photos/pict0210.jpg

Not the best angle, but that little gut is not there, and it seems like her boobs got a bit bigger.

Call me crazy, but this might have some merit. Sure, there is a chance she just put on some weight...but in all the right places? This is very interesting. It can't be proven, in the least, unless the doctor breaks confidentiality and wants to lose his or her license...but it is still going to make the blogosphere very interesting for awhile.

[Marx]

Last time I made such an accusation was when I accused Marx of being a Republican way back in February... you can obviously see why my foot has been in my mouth ever since...

:oldrazz::cwink:

[Marx]

I want to see Elizabeth on "The View" defend this. Should be hilarious.

Yeah, that should be interesting. Considering how she always blasts Obama for his 'lack of experience'. :hehe:

[Matt]

Man, that is suspicious as hell. Eight months pregnant, in LABOUR, and it wasn't apparent to the flight attendants that she was pregnant or in distress?

Well, she had done it 4 times before. Its not entirely impossible that she is very good at enduring the pain. Plus in early stages, its not that bad.

Anyone think the mainstream media will pick this one up today?

No. There's no way to prove it and CNN is not going to run a story with no proof. No one wants to be this year's Dan Rather.

[Gilpesh]

Well, she had done it 4 times before. Its not entirely impossible that she is very good at enduring the pain. Plus in early stages, its not that bad.

Yeah. But still.... god I hate tabloids that scrape together a little more 'evidence' than usual.

No. There's no way to prove it and CNN is not going to run a story with no proof. No one wants to be this year's Dan Rather.

Yup. That just means she gets a free pass.

[danoyse]

I started hearing that rumor on Friday night. It's apparently a well-known rumor in Alaska government circles, according to the comments I was reading.

It is weird--the baby was premature and she got on a plane? With a disabled baby? And she went back to work 3 days later. I don't know anyone who's been physically able to get back to work just 3 days after giving birth.

[SuperT]

Like a stated before - the pieces just suspiciously fit together.

The girl is taken out of school for five months which is conveniently when every thing starts showing up big time? And the excuse is mono?!

As for someone asking if the media will pick this up - no, there isn't enough solid proof unfortunately. It'll be huge on the blogosphere, guaranteed!

[Heretic]

A 16 year olds breasts grew slightly??? Must be pregnant since teenagers never experience any bodily changes!!!!!

A teenage girl has a bit of a gut...it MUST be pregnancy!!!

Have you guys been to the mall lately?? Girls of all shapes are now wearing the same sizes of clothes...I know several teenage girls who wear clothes that are a few sizes too small for them every day simply because all the hot girls are wearing those clothes. These girls show much bigger stomachs than this girl is in these photos ans they arent pregnat.

I still think the story is true though.

[danoyse]

No. There's no way to prove it and CNN is not going to run a story with no proof. No one wants to be this year's Dan Rather.

No, and even if it does break I'm sure McCain's camp will spin it into her making such a great sacrifice for her daughter or something. They'll just find a way make it positive thing and a non-issue.

[Gilpesh]

Actually I see it now. Fox News will run with the story and then Steve Doocy will make a joke about how if anyone could know if Palin was the mother... shouldn't Palin know that?

And they'll all laugh and maybe someone will say it shows the hidden sexism of everyone that they would make up a story like that to try and cut down the one possible woman who would be VP.

[danoyse]

Oh boy...the other forum I read (which is mostly conservative) is talking about this too now. It's possible this might not be going away anytime soon.

[kainedamo]

Well, she had done it 4 times before. Its not entirely impossible that she is very good at enduring the pain. Plus in early stages, its not that bad.



No. There's no way to prove it and CNN is not going to run a story with no proof. No one wants to be this year's Dan Rather.

Correct me if I'm wrong, Matt...

Weren't you criticizing the "liberal" media for not reporting the John Edwards affair story a couple of months ago?

[Marx]

Oh boy...the other forum I read (which is mostly conservative) is talking about this too now. It's possible this might not be going away anytime soon.

So what's the story on the baby being reported? That the 16 year old daughter is really the mother, but Palin is passing it off as her own?

[Gilpesh]

Kaine, I think that's a different story... there's evidence and people are talking about the affair.

[Matt]

Oh boy...the other forum I read (which is mostly conservative) is talking about this too now. It's possible this might not be going away anytime soon.

Again, it will be a joke in the blogosphere and on internet message boards for a few months. But I really doubt it'll go anywhere unless the doctor comes out and confesses. Otherwise its all just heresay.

[Matt]

Correct me if I'm wrong, Matt...

Weren't you criticizing the "liberal" media for not reporting the John Edwards affair story a couple of months ago?


Umm...no, I wasn't. :huh: In fact, I defended the media for not running a story when there was no real proof to support it.

[jaguarr]

What I will say is this: If that kid turns out to NOT be hers it will absolutely explain to me why she doesn't seem to be very interested in bonding with her newborn baby. Back to work three days after the delivery and now is ready to embark on a months long VP campaign that will take her away from her newborn baby? HIGHLY, HIGHLY unusual for a new mother, to be honest. If the baby really isn't hers after all, then I'd understand her perspective completely. No need to bond with a child that isn't yours.

jag

[Matt]

A 16 year olds breasts grew slightly??? Must be pregnant since teenagers never experience any bodily changes!!!!!

A teenage girl has a bit of a gut...it MUST be pregnancy!!!

Have you guys been to the mall lately?? Girls of all shapes are now wearing the same sizes of clothes...I know several teenage girls who wear clothes that are a few sizes too small for them every day simply because all the hot girls are wearing those clothes. These girls show much bigger stomachs than this girl is in these photos ans they arent pregnat.

I still think the story is true though.

Come on though, you can't deny the place and shape of the "weight gain," is very very convenient.

No, and even if it does break I'm sure McCain's camp will spin it into her making such a great sacrifice for her daughter or something. They'll just find a way make it positive thing and a non-issue.

Well...maybe thats true? Why do you have to assume the worst? Maybe she did just want to protect her daughter from the humiliation of being a teenage mother in a small, Alaska town. Is that so wrong? She had the resources to do it...I can't really say I fault her. I'd do it for my daughter if I could.

[kainedamo]

Umm...no, I wasn't. :huh: In fact, I defended the media for not running a story when there was no real proof to support it.

Ah, ok.

[Matt]

What I will say is this: If that kid turns out to NOT be hers it will absolutely explain to me why she doesn't seem to be very interested in bonding with her newborn baby. Back to work three days after the delivery and now is ready to embark on a months long VP campaign that will take her away from her newborn baby? HIGHLY, HIGHLY unusual for a new mother, to be honest. If the baby really isn't hers after all, then I'd understand her perspective completely. No need to bond with a child that isn't yours.

jag

In all fairness, her standard of work may have changed. A couple meetings and going over some paper work. I doubt she had the most strenous job on earth after the child was born but did have some things that she needed to do as the state's chief executive. If it is hers, we have no idea what kind of hours she was putting in, what the work consisted of, or even if the baby was with her.

[Heretic]

Fathers go to work the day after their child is born and never take any time off. Dont they need to bond with their children???

No...it is the mothers that need to bond with them because they are women, and that sort of thing is more important to them. Women shouldnt be concerned with things like careers, and if they have a career and then become pregnant, they should quit their jobs...even if that job is governor of a state.

What I typed above sounds ridiculous to both republicans and feminists...seems the democrats believe it though.