REPUBLICANS: VP Candidate Palin [Archive] - Page 3

heelsguy

09-04-2008, 09:49 AM

Here is something that really pisses me off:

Say what you will about countries where religious fundamentals run the government, but at least they are up front about it. We live in a country where there is something called Separation of Church and State, and it seems like we are moving ever-closer to a society where that exists in name only.

For eight years we have had God-loving G.W. in the White House, and I have heard more than enough references to "God". Now we have a VP candidate that thinks the war in Iraq is a "task from God" and that in order to get a pipeline in Alaska we have to rely on "God's Will".

Please.

This sort of thing pisses me off way more than Palin's daughter being pregnant.

what? name any president who has NOT mentioned God occassionally in public? In fact. just about every president since television/radio has signed off national addresses with "God Bless". so what exactly is your problem with a President believing in God? They can say the phrase, but aren't supposed to actually believe in God?

"So help me God" is even in the Oath of Office, for Christ's sake.

Mr. Brown

09-04-2008, 09:52 AM

*fixed

she's abstinence only.

Oggie

09-04-2008, 09:56 AM

Not many people can pull off the hat-to-the-side-like-a-retard look. Redsox39 is definitely not one of them.
But he's keepin' it real!

VoxAngelikus

09-04-2008, 09:57 AM

what? name any president who has NOT mentioned God occassionally in public? In fact. just about every president since television/radio has signed off national addresses with "God Bless". so what exactly is your problem with a President believing in God? They can say the phrase, but aren't supposed to actually believe in God?

"So help me God" is even in the Oath of Office, for Christ's sake.

My problem is not with a President believing in God. It's with a President, or potential President, allowing that belief to directly effect the decisions he or she is making while in office. By this I mean that Presidential decisions should be based on what is truly best for the country, and not based on what will or will not offend Catholic/religious supporters.

It seems that since Clinton and Bush have been President, religion has gotten mixed with politics far more than we should have allowed. If the President has a faith he believes in, that is fine. Don't mix that faith in the politics of a country that is made up of multiple faiths.

Oggie

09-04-2008, 09:59 AM

My will be done.

redsox39

09-04-2008, 09:59 AM

Not many people can pull off the hat-to-the-side-like-a-retard look. Redsox39 is definitely not one of them.

Thank you Kind sirs! When all else fails, my Avatar will bail you out of saying anything funny and/or clever. I used this to keep the playing field fair.

redsox39

09-04-2008, 10:01 AM

But he's keepin' it real!

BTW, when you start rocking the one Lens shades at night, make sure you give me credit!

PS- depth perception is overrated...

nuclearjew

09-04-2008, 10:09 AM

Thank you Kind sirs! When all else fails, my Avatar will bail you out of saying anything funny and/or clever. I used this to keep the playing field fair.
I'm pretty sure I can't top "Fox News is the only Fair and Balanced outlet, the rest lean left".

Kilgore

09-04-2008, 10:25 AM

I thought Sarah did the best speech so far out of all the Conventions, but that doesn't mean that she isn't going to get her ass handed to her by Biden in the VP debate.

heelsguy

09-04-2008, 10:30 AM

My problem is not with a President believing in God. It's with a President, or potential President, allowing that belief to directly effect the decisions he or she is making while in office. By this I mean that Presidential decisions should be based on what is truly best for the country, and not based on what will or will not offend Catholic/religious supporters.

It seems that since Clinton and Bush have been President, religion has gotten mixed with politics far more than we should have allowed. If the President has a faith he believes in, that is fine. Don't mix that faith in the politics of a country that is made up of multiple faiths.

i see your point, but you may be over-simplifying the presidents' decision-making process. faith is probably just one of many ingredients used to make a decision. it is a compass that keeps the president on the "right track" more than a magic 8-ball.

redsox39

09-04-2008, 10:36 AM

I'm pretty sure I can't top "Fox News is the only Fair and Balanced outlet, the rest lean left".

I would normally be with you here, I mean that is the line we have been fed for years, but based upon "negitive headlines", it is. I had a class during the Bush/Kerry election at UNL where the teacher assigned us times to watch/read certain media outlets. We had groups assigned, usually during the nightly news (I really wish I had TiVO at this point).

We would have to tally if the story was a "Negitive Republican story" (bad for Kerry, or a "Negative Democrat story" (Bad for Bush - it was election time).

Fox News was the closest one after 1 week to a 50/50 split, surprisingly, Newsweek maginzine was the next closest (but it was based on just one issue of course).

Wallstreet Journal was more to the right.

but the least shocking was the CNN, MSNBC, ABC had about a 70-30 split, by far the worst ones we could find...I wanted to find our stuff before posting, but couldn't hold off anymore. I am trying to contact my professor to see if he is still doing this, and if the results are pretty much the same.

In any case, I think I am basing my belief off of just more than just perception and having it drilled in my head.

Granted, you could flip this and say "there are more bad things to say about GW at the time" or "maybe that week had a certain storyline everyone was following", because it isn't really a scientific study here, and our time period was small.

Jrod - Keeping it wankster
http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd96/jyce50/gangster.jpg

redsox39

09-04-2008, 10:38 AM

I thought Sarah did the best speech so far out of all the Conventions, but that doesn't mean that she isn't going to get her ass handed to her by Biden in the VP debate.

You are right, but no matter if she drools on her mini skirt and sounds like her youngest, or knocks him out of the park, this is the first time I really gave a shit about VP's...

The Batman

09-04-2008, 10:42 AM

I thought Sarah did the best speech so far out of all the Conventions, but that doesn't mean that she isn't going to get her ass handed to her by Biden in the VP debate.

Why do you think its a better speech than the one Obama made?

Mr. Brown

09-04-2008, 10:48 AM

I'm guessing he means for the Republicans

The Batman

09-04-2008, 10:53 AM

I'm guessing he means for the Republicans

I hope so, because saying "best speech so far out of all the Conventions" doesn't make me think so.

Mr. Brown

09-04-2008, 10:56 AM

But what I really did like about Palin's speech is how she went after everyone. I mean everyone. So now when the media and the dems attack her no one cry their beating up on a woman. It's like a topic thread somewhere else on the forum; If a woman attacks you your allowed to defend/fight back. I don't want it to get nasty, but now it's a fair field. No having to worry about image when talking about her.

Kilgore

09-04-2008, 10:56 AM

Why do you think its a better speech than the one Obama made?
Obama's was great, eventhough I don't agree with her, she delivered extremely well. She made herself very convincing and made herself out to one that you want to believe. She took all the right jabs at all the right times.

But that is shadow boxing, let see how she does when someone is swinging back at her.

By buddy whom was watching with me, and is on the fence about who to vote for said, "The old guy should be her VP, she would have a better chance of winning."

Kilgore

09-04-2008, 10:58 AM

I loved how of all the states, Alaska casted 5 votes for Ron Paul.

kid_vidrio

09-04-2008, 10:58 AM

Mr. Brown

09-04-2008, 11:04 AM

Obama's was great, eventhough I don't agree with her, she delivered extremely well. She made herself very convincing and made herself out to one that you want to believe. She took all the right jabs at all the right times.

But that is shadow boxing, let see how she does when someone is swinging back at her.

By buddy whom was watching with me, and is on the fence about who to vote for said, "The old guy should be her VP, she would have a better chance of winning."

Really she delivered well? Compared to whom? I could actually tell when a different speech writer's took over in the speech. She didn't flow as well as she could have.

Believe in what? what was her message that's she's not one of the same good ole boys who's holding the party she's attending?

She took jabs at all the right times? She was like rookie swinging away and when she happened to connect it seemed to be big.

Kilgore

09-04-2008, 11:06 AM

redsox39

09-04-2008, 11:09 AM

Mr. Brown

09-04-2008, 11:10 AM

can't hate on nothing and that's what we came away with.

Mr. Brown

09-04-2008, 11:12 AM

I guess we saw to completely different speeches. Look I'm a Dem but I will give credit when credit is do, and I thought she gave a fantastic speech.
I'd give credit but I just didn't get anything but she's a young female mavreck like her grandfather, I mean running mate

vasili denisov

09-04-2008, 11:16 AM

Really she delivered well? Compared to whom? I could actually tell when a different speech writer's took over in the speech. She didn't flow as well as she could have.

Believe in what? what was her message that's she's not one of the same good ole boys who's holding the party she's attending?

She took jabs at all the right times? She was like rookie swinging away and when she happened to connect it seemed to be big.
I watched Pat Buchanan's speech from fifteen years ago as a comparison, because that's also full of bile and attacks on the elite. It's a nasty, passionate, very successful piece of rhetoric. There's a point where he talks about being on the campaign and seeing those without work, and he manages to establish a sustained hush for more than a minute.

This, on the other hand, put me at odds with a lot of liberal pundits, who thought it was spectacular. I thought the clips alone of her making this plain putdown followed by this very, very amped up laughter made me feel like I was watching the Rodney Dangerfield part of "Natural Born Killers".

VoxAngelikus

09-04-2008, 11:21 AM

Her speech was like a lot of GMF posts:

Use insults, attacks and putdowns. You're guaranteed to distract from the fact that you've got nothing to say.

Obama may do just as much lip service, but at least he sounds good when he does it.

Palin just sounds like she's trying to score popularity points by being a cunt.

Da Raider

09-04-2008, 11:55 AM

halfabubbleoff

09-04-2008, 12:02 PM

I have to say, that I agree with most of Vox's points.

I do have to differ on the last point. I don't see Palin trying to score popularity points. I see it as a two fold attempt to declare her loyalty to the party platform, and to solidify her position as McCain's "attack dog" in the election. She threw a lot of red meat out during that speech, but only repeated what the crowd was wanting to hear and what the far right has been saying in blogs and radio for a while.

They wanted to paint her as the "tough, executive female" and show that McCain wasn't "afraid to put a woman on the ticket". Palin fills two very important roles for the MCain campaign right now. She gives Hillary supporters a reason to vote (strong woman) while also giving the campaign an Obama level orator.

I will admit, I did not like the venom in the speech, and was not thrilled by the content. However, her delivery was excelent, even if it did seem scripted. I kept waiting for her to mouth the words "Pause for applause".

I admit, she did give the GOP a reason to be excited and put some energy in the race. I am anxious to see if McCain takes the high road tonight after the past few days of attacks (personal and otherwise), or if he continues the theme set forward in the past few nights.

The Batman

09-04-2008, 12:10 PM

She gives Hillary supporters a reason to vote (strong woman)

I really hate this woman support bullshit. I think thats more demeaning to women to say they will vote for her just because of gender, like black people voting for Obama because he is black. If they decide to vote that way then they are missing the point of the democratic process. (I know there will be a lot of people who will do it, saddly.) Also, she stands against most of the things Hilary supports, so to think that they would sway their vote because Palin has a vagina is silly.

redsox39

09-04-2008, 12:22 PM

kid_vidrio

09-04-2008, 12:23 PM

That isn't partisan at all.....

Obama makes great speeches, but he does NOTHING. He has been a part o my states legislature for a while now and has done NOTHING but vote present, or vote to ban guns.
I was critiquing the public speaking aspect of it only.

redsox39

09-04-2008, 12:24 PM

I really hate this woman support bullshit. I think thats more demeaning to women to say they will vote for her just because of gender, like black people voting for Obama because he is black. If they decide to vote that way then they are missing the point of the democratic process. (I know there will be a lot of people who will do it, saddly.) Also, she stands against most of the things Hilary supports, so to think that they would sway their vote because Palin has a vagina is silly.

I agree, but no one said the voting Public is smart. And in order to get in the white house to make changes, you have to make smart political moves.

There will always be people who vote for a black person because they are black.

And

There will always be people who vote for women just because they are women.

Heck,
In this election, there will be people who vote McCain because he is white.

Those are the real "one issue" retards.

The Batman

09-04-2008, 12:27 PM

I agree, but no one said the voting Public is smart. And in order to get in the white house to make changes, you have to make smart political moves.
There will always be people who vote for a black person because they are black.
And
There will always be people who vote for women just because they are women.
Heck,
In this election, there will be people who vote McCain because he is white.
Those are the real "one issue" retards.

I just have to believe that most hilary supporters are smarter than that.

redsox39

09-04-2008, 01:14 PM

I just have to believe that most hilary supporters are smarter than that.

lol, you do what you gotta do man, you won't get any hate from me.

Mr. Brown

09-04-2008, 01:19 PM

Biden Acknowledges Palin's 'Great Night'

VIRGINIA BEACH -- Sen. Joe Biden, the Democratic candidate for vice president, praised his rival Sarah Palin for "a great night" and a "very skillfully delivered political speech" but criticized her for not focusing on such key issues as health care and the economy.

"I was impressed with her," Biden said on "Good Morning America," as part of a series of interviews he did to respond to the Alaska governor's speech. "I was also impressed with what I didn't hear. I didn't hear a word mentioned about the middle class."

The Delaware senator, who will appear at a town hall here Thursday morning, has been very careful in his comments about Palin this week and generally sidestepped questions from reporters and Democrats about his opinions of her. Biden repeatedly praised her speech, noting she made "good, funny lines. ... I'm glad they weren't about me. I was sitting there thinking, whoa, zinger."

And he even embraced the GOP charge that Palin has suffered from sexism since she was chosen last week by Republican presidential nominee John McCain to be his running mate.

"The truth is some of the stuff the press and the others have said about the governor are outrageous," he said. "This stuff about how can she be a governor and a vice president and raise three kids, come on. Whoever those folks are don't know any strong women. ... Some of the stuff said has been over the top, totally unfair, and I think it has been sexist."

In interviews this morning with several networks, Biden repeatedly sidestepped questions about how he would take on Palin when the pair debates next month. But he said in response to her biting criticism of Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama, "I'm not going to change my tone" on the campaign trail.

Biden has sharply criticized McCain's views on health care, taxes and Iraq during the past few days, but he hasn't used the sarcasm sprinkled throughout Palin's remarks at the Republican National Convention.

Biden's response mirrored that of Obama campaign manager David Plouffe, who sent an e-mail to the campaign's supporters following Palin's speech defending Obama.

"Both Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin specifically mocked Barack's experience as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago more than two decades ago, where he worked with people who had lost jobs and been left behind when the local steel plants closed," Plouffe wrote. "Let's clarify something for them right now. Community organizing is how ordinary people respond to out-of-touch politicians and their failed policies."
link (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/04/biden_acknowledges_palins_grea.html)

Rover

09-04-2008, 01:23 PM

Because preteen pregnancies are okay as long as you're rich.

and RepublicanThe Palin family income does not qualify them as "rich" as defined by Barack Obama. They are middle class. I believe she makes $125K and her husband $90K. Also, the cost of living in Alaska is nuts.

You can tell where a nation is heading by how much it respects its rule of law.And how it treats the least of it's people

If Palin hadn't been nominated for Veep, does anyone really think McCain would've picked her for positions like Sec Def, Sec State, or anything else like that?What's your point? Is the VP supposed to be qualified for every aspect of the Cabinet. Personally, I would rather have a farming expert run the Department of Agriculture, but maybe that's just me.

My problem is not with a President believing in God. It's with a President, or potential President, allowing that belief to directly effect the decisions he or she is making while in office. By this I mean that Presidential decisions should be based on what is truly best for the country, and not based on what will or will not offend Catholic/religious supporters.

It seems that since Clinton and Bush have been President, religion has gotten mixed with politics far more than we should have allowed. If the President has a faith he believes in, that is fine. Don't mix that faith in the politics of a country that is made up of multiple faiths.It's okay if they have faith, but not if they actually lead their life according to their faith?? Most people of faith I know lead their lives according to their faith and it influences everything they do.

Why do you think its a better speech than the one Obama made?

I was critiquing the public speaking aspect of it only.It's being reported now, that the teleprompter was malfunctioning last night. This was fairly obvious with Guiliani last night, who went 10 minutes long and was ad-libbing from his prepared text. It was also obvious for Palin, somewhere in the middle of her speech she looked at the prompter said "Oh" under her breath and went to her notes.

I guess the prompter wasn't being stopped for applause. That makes her performance (and Rudy's) all the more impressive. I've seen video of Obama when the prompter goes down and it's funny stuff.

Pharon

09-04-2008, 01:24 PM

"She's got one hell of a rack for a 44 year old," Biden said on "Good Morning America," as part of a series of interviews he did to respond to the Alaska governor's speech. "She also has a pretty sweet ass and isn't as dumb as she looks."

}{arlequin

09-04-2008, 01:31 PM

if you donate to the obama campaign, you get daily texts w/ the campaign updates. wonder if it's the best way of spending your campaign money, but i guess it's cheaper than mailing paper.

Fletch

09-04-2008, 01:31 PM

It's okay if they have faith, but not if they actually lead their life according to their faith?? Most people of faith I know lead their lives according to their faith and it influences everything they do.

Yes, because the decisions they make don't affect 300 million people, a lot of whom don't share the same faith. The president can lead his life according to his faith, but he better put that aside when he is deciding on things that affect a hell of a lot of people.

And damn, I have a hard time watching any speeches like the ones at the conventions. Is it that hard for people to just sit and listen and not clap after every other word?

TheImpossibleMan

09-04-2008, 01:35 PM

What's your point? Is the VP supposed to be qualified for every aspect of the Cabinet. Personally, I would rather have a farming expert run the Department of Agriculture, but maybe that's just me.
Yes, because I was obviously suggesting she needs to be qualified for every position. I just find it interesting that McCain picked a VP that, let's get real, no one thinks would be in his govt. otherwise. I'm not just talking about Sec Def or Sec State - does anyone think she would wind up in any position in McCain's cabinet if she hadn't been picked for VP?

}{arlequin

09-04-2008, 01:41 PM

Yes, because the decisions they make don't affect 300 million people, a lot of whom don't share the same faith. The president can lead his life according to his faith, but he better put that aside when he is deciding on things that affect a hell of a lot of people.
you're either dreaming of this or hope for an automaton in the office. people are not robots and you'd prolly be very suprised that sometimes even the type of underwear they have on may affect their decisions.

so what? if a religious belief has gotten them this far, what's the difference if it goes any further? what if the decisions prior to the office affected 1 million people? would that be enough to show that 300 million isn't any different?

what if you found out (insert favorite pres here) made decisions based on a coin flip?

Mr. Brown

09-04-2008, 02:43 PM

Unbiased. Unprejudiced. Fair.

VoxAngelikus

09-04-2008, 02:51 PM

It's okay if they have faith, but not if they actually lead their life according to their faith?? Most people of faith I know lead their lives according to their faith and it influences everything they do.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . .they shall not use religious affiliation to dictate decisions affecting the people of this great nation."

That's in the First Amendment to the United States Consititution. Hey, if the President has faith, good for him. I don't care if he believes in God, Yahway, Buddha, Mohammed or Xenu - that's his prerogative to lead his life according to his faith.

But separation of Church and State explicitly states that faith should not effect his decisions. Just as a reporter is expected to maintain objectivity, so should the elected officials maintain that separation.

Fletch

09-04-2008, 02:58 PM

so what? if a religious belief has gotten them this far, what's the difference if it goes any further? what if the decisions prior to the office affected 1 million people? would that be enough to show that 300 million isn't any different?

When you are elected as a public official, you are now making decisions based on what is best for the country/state/county/etc... I don't think religion or faith should have anything to do with those decisions.

what if you found out (insert favorite pres here) made decisions based on a coin flip?I wouldn't like it. What does that have to do with anything that's being talked about here?

}{arlequin

09-04-2008, 02:58 PM

http://www.vpilf.com/

Gary_Busey

09-04-2008, 03:03 PM

I can't wait for the sex tape.

}{arlequin

09-04-2008, 03:07 PM

I wouldn't like it. What does that have to do with anything that's being talked about here?
everything.

the same way you'll never know whether someone has used religion in their decisionmaking. coin. religion. bad mood. cramps. blue balls. whatever.

you will never be able to isolate the decisionmaking to a level at which it is purely on its own merits. everyone has a slant one way or another.

also, what's good for the people may not be as good for the nation. a religious person might care more about not hurting the population, b/c of humanitarian caring or other reasons, whereas a leader who is a bit more pragmatic might do something that isn't as 'lofty' towards the people but it may strengthen the nation.

point is, every decision made in the gvt is influenced by something or other. so why not religion? as good an influence as any

VoxAngelikus

09-04-2008, 03:09 PM

What I want to know is this:

All this people sucking Sarah Palin's dick right now.... what would they be saying if Hillary Clinton gave that same speech?

Mr. Brown

09-04-2008, 03:11 PM

They would be calling her an aggressive cunt.

}{arlequin

09-04-2008, 03:12 PM

they'd be saying "ewwww!!!"

Gary_Busey

09-04-2008, 03:13 PM

They're from different parties, I don't think they would be saying the same thing.

Da Raider

09-04-2008, 03:16 PM

I don't hear any democrats/liberals complaining about Jimmy Carter right now. He most certainly was influenced by his religious beliefs.

Da Raider

09-04-2008, 03:26 PM

What I want to know is this:

All this people sucking Sarah Palin's dick right now.... what would they be saying if Hillary Clinton gave that same speech?

of course not. Hillary looks like a man in her pantsuit.

Mr. Brown

09-04-2008, 03:27 PM

touche

The Batman

09-04-2008, 03:31 PM

I don't hear any democrats/liberals complaining about Jimmy Carter right now. He most certainly was influenced by his religious beliefs.

Influence is okay. Its when its the deciding factor. I don't expect anyone with deep religious feelings to not make choices based on their religion, but ultimately it should be about whats good for the country, not their conscience.

Smokestack

09-04-2008, 03:31 PM

It's being reported now, that the teleprompter was malfunctioning last night. This was fairly obvious with Guiliani last night, who went 10 minutes long and was ad-libbing from his prepared text. It was also obvious for Palin, somewhere in the middle of her speech she looked at the prompter said "Oh" under her breath and went to her notes.

I guess the prompter wasn't being stopped for applause. That makes her performance (and Rudy's) all the more impressive. I've seen video of Obama when the prompter goes down and it's funny stuff.

Nice try. Oh, RedState...(http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0908/The_teleprompter_did_not_break.html?showall)

September 04, 2008
Categories: Convention (http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/index.cfm/category/Convention) The Teleprompter did not break

Sarah Palin delivered a powerful speech last night, but she did not "wing it."

Which is what Erick Erickson (http://www.redstate.com/diaries/redstate/2008/sep/04/breaking-sarah-palin-winged-her-speech-bec/), citing sources close to McCain, has written on his blog, RedState.

Erickson writes that "the Teleprompter continued scrolling during applause breaks. As a result, half way through the speech, the speech had scrolled significantly from where Gov. Palin was in the speech."

This claim has been picked up on Drudge and could quickly enter into the insta-mythmaking about a speech that need not be embroidered.

Perhaps there were moments where it scrolled slightly past her exact point in the speech. But I was sitting in the press section next to the stage, within easy eyeshot of the Teleprompter. I frequently looked up at the machine, and there was no serious malfunction. A top convention planner confirms this morning that there were no major problems.

Erickson writes that the same malfunction happened during Rudy Giuliani's speech earlier in the night. Again, I watched the Teleprompter during this speech, and it worked without problem. Giuliani, as is his wont, simply decided to go off-script and add some new lines, such as one attacking Obama for his "bitter" comments.

These extemporaneous comments, many of which drew huge applause, made the former New York mayor's speech run much longer than planned. So much so that a convention planner confirms that they had to scrap a planned video ahead of Palin's speech.

Rover

09-04-2008, 03:51 PM

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's highly anticipated speech at the Republican National Convention on Wednesday night nearly matched the record-setting numbers of Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.
Palin pulled in 37.2 million viewers across broadcast and cable networks, according to Nielsen Media Research.
That's 55% higher than Day 3 of the DNC, when her Democratic counterpart, Joe Biden, and President Clinton took the stage (24 million).
It's also up a sharp 99% from the Republican convention's third day in 2004 (18.7 million). In fact, it came close to upsetting Obama's historic address on Thursday -- the most-watched convention speech in history (38.4 million viewers).

http://www.thrfeed.com/2008/09/palin-ratings-s.html

The Dude

09-04-2008, 04:19 PM

wow, i guess i haven't read P & C enough...i didn't realize how many bleeding heart liberal left wing nuts there are on the board.

TheImpossibleMan

09-04-2008, 04:38 PM

wow, i guess i haven't read P & C enough...i didn't realize how many bleeding heart liberal left wing nuts there are on the board.
And with any luck, you won't visit much in the future, either.

Genius

09-04-2008, 04:54 PM

I don't hear any democrats/liberals complaining about Jimmy Carter right now. He most certainly was influenced by his religious beliefs.
I have no problem with people being influenced by their religious beliefs. I do have a problem with a VP nominee suggesting that the Iraq War is a mission from God, or basically a modern Crusade. That crosses the "influenced by religious beliefs" line, firmly into "rhetoric spewing religious zealot nutjob" territory.

Aside from that, America would never elect a devout Muslim, strictly because they were a devout Muslim. So I have no problem with anyone who decides to vote against a devout Christian, only because they are a devout Christian.

Smokestack

09-04-2008, 09:34 PM

Michigan Independents Cold to Alaska Governor

September 04, 2008 9:42 AM
The Detroit Free Press (http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080903/NEWS15/80904002) invited a panel of Michigan voters to weigh-in on Gov. Sarah Palin's speech last night. Their reactions run the gamut, but the independents didn't seem to care for her very much.

Ilene Beninson, 52, Berkley independent: "Her speech contained few statements about policy or the party platform. ... I am not convinced that Palin's experience as a mayor or governor in Alaska meet the qualifications to be vice president, much less one stroke or heart attack away from being commander in chief.”

Mike Kosh, 38, West Bloomfield independent: “The way it looks to me, she's the Republican vice presidential nominee for one reason: Because Hillary wasn't selected.”

George Lentz, 66, Southfield independent: “I was completely underwhelmed. She was a Republican novelty act with a sophomoric script. It was not even a speech I would expect for someone running for the local PTA, much less for vice president.”

Diane Murphy, 42, Sterling Heights independent: “It appears that, once she makes up her mind, that is the end of it. We live in a gray world, not every answer is black and white.”

Jan Wheelock, 58, Royal Oak independent: “Nothing worked for me. I found her barrage of snide remarks and distortions to be a major turnoff. She is not a class act. The most important point she made is that she will be an effective attack dog.”
- jpt

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/michigan-indepe.html

kid_vidrio

09-04-2008, 10:02 PM

wow, i guess i haven't read P & C enough...i didn't realize how many bleeding heart liberal left wing nuts there are on the board.
Although this is not the thread to debate it in, I would be curious to know what you mean by this statement in general.
And if that is how you would describe so 'many', how would you describe yourself?

Emjanss

09-05-2008, 01:39 PM

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . .they shall not use religious affiliation to dictate decisions affecting the people of this great nation."

Wow, do you really believe what you put in bold is part of the quotation of the US Constitution?

Do you not see the irony that in your attempt to protect this admendment you are actually advocating prohibiting certain persons from the free exercise of their religion?

freegood

09-05-2008, 02:17 PM

Wow, do you really believe what you put in bold is part of the quotation of the US Constitution?

Do you not see the irony that in your attempt to protect this admendment you are actually advocating prohibiting certain persons from the free exercise of their religion?

I don't mind prohibiting exercise of someone's religion in a government capacity or on government property. They can worship all they want as a private citizen on private grounds.

Smokestack

09-05-2008, 02:23 PM

Troopergate is being fast-tracked (http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5734511&page=1):

Investigation into Palin Now on Fast Track

Sources Tell ABC News that Report Will Be Released Almost Three Weeks Early

By LEN TEPPER

September 5, 2008—

ABC News has exclusively learned that Alaska Senator Hollis French will announce today that he is moving up the release date of his investigation into whether Gov. Sarah Palin abused her office to get the Alaska public safety commissioner, Walt Monegan, fired. The results of the investigation were originally scheduled for release Oct. 31 but will now come almost three weeks earlier, according to sources.
The announcement is set for 9 a.m. AKDT time.
The Alaska state senator running an investigation of Gov. Palin had accused the McCain campaign of using stall tactics to prevent him from releasing his final report by Oct. 31, four days before the November election.
"It's likely to be damaging to the Governor's administration," said Senator Hollis French, a Democrat, appointed the project manager for a bi-partisan State Senate Legislative Counsel Committee investigation.
Palin, who has denied any wrongdoing and has said she has nothing to hide, has hired private lawyers to represent her in the matter.

Emjanss

09-05-2008, 02:24 PM

kareyn01

09-05-2008, 02:43 PM

Claydon

09-05-2008, 03:42 PM

On a different note, an NPR commentator recently said that the Democrats would underestimate Palin at their own peril.

I thought it was interesting comment.

freegood

09-05-2008, 03:43 PM

Interesting, you have decided that people who choose a job that serves their country should forfeit this constitutional right to the free exercise of religion because they might be in a position to abuse it. What other right should we deny them? We should also deny them the right to free speach. As government officials, they shouldn't be allowed to express their opinions since their opinions could influence others because of their government position. Makes the same amount of sense. Maybe we should deny them the right to vote too? No way they should carry a weapon.

Our early history has a particularly nasty and bitter streak when it came to religious officials holding influential spots in government. Quite ironic when the descendents of the Mayflower started to discriminate wholesale against other denominations. The idea isn't to suppress religion completely; it was to allow all religions to practice (or not) freely with a decent degree of space and comfort.

Why should a Muslim Governor be allowed to call heavily for Sharia law and push his underlings to support his measure?

And while your argument carries a tinge of extremes in it, there's a lot of officials who do speak in according to their values without invoking religious wording such as God, Buddha, Muhammad, Jesus, etc... A politician can talk about a law that is in tune with the principles of a Bible passage without invoking the Bible as the credible reason behind the proposed law.

Smokestack

09-05-2008, 03:58 PM

On a different note, an NPR commentator recently said that the Democrats would underestimate Palin at their own peril.

I thought it was interesting comment.

How is a cliche an interesting comment?

The Batman

09-05-2008, 04:08 PM

Interesting, you have decided that people who choose a job that serves their country should forfeit this constitutional right to the free exercise of religion because they might be in a position to abuse it. What other right should we deny them? We should also deny them the right to free speach. As government officials, they shouldn't be allowed to express their opinions since their opinions could influence others because of their government position. Makes the same amount of sense. Maybe we should deny them the right to vote too? No way they should carry a weapon.

Its things like this that remind of someone I knew who said if we allow gay people to get married they will want to have sex with animals, because its all a slipery slope. No one should forfeit their right to excercise their religion, but they must remember that they are not being voted to excercise those religious rights. They are voted to provide a service that is impartial, effective, and whats best for the people who they represent. If they decide to use the morals that religion gives them as a guide, so be it, but to use religion as an excuse is not right. ie, because ban abortions because its in my religion, rather than because its unsafe and is harmful to the mother. Religion unfortunetly removes logic when it comes to conversations of government policies.

Debo

09-05-2008, 04:19 PM

Hypocrisy knows no bounds. Here is what the NYT op-ed page wrote back in 1984:

Published: July 3, 1984

Of All the Feminist Nerve On one side, Walter Mondale has been hearing some infuriating demands. If he wants to win in November, feminists are saying, he has to nominate a woman to run with him. Otherwise, as Judy Goldsmith, president of the National Organization for Women, said the other day, ''I don't know how we can go out to women and say 'Here's something to work for.' ''

On the other side, traditionalists sputter at what sounds like imperious presumption. The test of a candidate, they pronounce, should not be gender but qualification to be President. It's a dismaying dialogue on both sides.

The feminists suffer from a crippling coarseness of style. They may sometimes feel embattled, driven to shrillness. But if, as a matter of pure political arithmetic, they are right about putting a woman on the ticket, that should be obvious to any serious Presidential candidate. If not, issuing threats sounds even more shrill.

Yet to be shrill is no worse than to be righteous, like the people who insist that the women Vice Presidential candidates so far proposed lack the requisite standing and experience. Why, it is said, none of them is even a senator.

Where is it written that only senators are qualified to become President? Surely Ronald Reagan does not subscribe to that maxim. Or where is it written that mere representatives aren't qualified, like Geraldine Ferraro of Queens? Representative Morris Udall, who lost New Hampshire to Jimmy Carter by a hair in 1976, must surely disagree. So must a longtime Michigan Congressman named Gerald Ford. Where is it written that governors and mayors, like Dianne Feinstein of San Francisco, are too local, too provincial? That didn't stop Richard Nixon from picking Spiro Agnew, a suburban politician who became Governor of Maryland. Remember the main foreign affairs credential of Georgia's Governor Carter: He was a member of the Trilateral Commission. Presidential candidates have always chosen their running mates for reasons of practical demography, not idealized democracy. One might even say demography is destiny: this candidate was chosen because he could deliver Texas, that one because he personified rectitude, that one because he appealed to the other wing of the party. On occasion, Americans find it necessary to rationalize this rough-and-ready process. What a splendid system, we say to ourselves, that takes little-known men, tests them in high office and permits them to grow into statesmen. This rationale may even be right, but then let it also be fair. Why shouldn't a little-known woman have the same opportunity to grow? We may even be gradually elevating our standards for choosing Vice Presidential candidates. But that should be done fairly, also. Meanwhile, the indispensable credential for a Woman Who is the same as for a Man Who - one who helps the ticket.

Genius

09-05-2008, 04:30 PM

Holding the Times accountable for what it published in 1984 is a lot like holding W accountable for Watergate. I mean come on.

Debo

09-05-2008, 04:36 PM

Holding the Times accountable for what it published in 1984 is a lot like holding W accountable for Watergate. I mean come on.

The Times has been one of the loudest voices about Palin's experience, or lack of experience (according to the NYT), to run as the VP.

If Ferraro was good enough back in 1984, why isn't Palin good enough now? I guess that the R next to her name changed their opinion.

Claydon

09-05-2008, 04:37 PM

Debo

09-05-2008, 04:43 PM

In other news, Biden has demoted Palin to Lt. Governor of Alaska.

“I heard a very — by the way, and I mean that sincerely — very strong and a very good political speech from a lieutenant governor of Alaska, who I think will be very formidable — and very formidable not only in the campaign.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/04/AR2008090403267.html

Who the fuck doesn't know by now that Palin is the Gov of AK? Joe fucking Biden, that's who.

Smokestack

09-05-2008, 04:47 PM

The Times has been one of the loudest voices about Palin's experience, or lack of experience (according to the NYT), to run as the VP.

If Ferraro was good enough back in 1984, why isn't Palin good enough now? I guess that the R next to her name changed their opinion.

You hit it on the head there.

Hit the nail on the head? Sounds like bullshit revisionist history to me. The Times broke the story about Ferraro's finances that ultimately undermined her candidacy. It's a little silly to act like this has been the first time the press has vetted a surprise VP pick:

Two days after the convention, The New York Times reported that that Ms. Ferraro’s financial disclosure form filed with the House listed her as an officer and stockholder of her husband’s real estate and insurance business (http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA061EFC3A5D0C7B8DDDAE0894DC484D 81), P. Zaccaro Company, with holdings of under $15,000. She listed other assets of up to $140,000 in savings, and income from savings and securities of up to $100,000. But under an exemption that allowed members of Congress not to list assets of a spouse if they derived no economic benefit from them, she did not list Mr. Zaccaro’s assets. Yet she had described herself as her husband’s business associate. Wasn’t that a contradiction?http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/04/when-the-press-vetted-geraldine-ferraro/

Fletch

09-05-2008, 04:48 PM

Does someone need to list all the times George W. has said similar errors? People slip up and say the wrong stuff sometimes. Jesus.

Debo

09-05-2008, 04:51 PM

Does someone need to list all the times George W. has said similar errors? People slip up and say the wrong stuff sometimes. Jesus.

But Biden has a higher IQ than Bush does. Therefore, he should not make the same mistakes as a commoner like Bush.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FyEqyYUGk4I&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FyEqyYUGk4I&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Hit the nail on the head? Sounds like bullshit revisionist history to me. The Times broke the story about Ferraro's finances that ultimately undermined her candidacy. It's a little silly to act like this has been the first time the press has vetted a surprise VP pick:

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/04/when-the-press-vetted-geraldine-ferraro/

I didn't revise anything. Has the NYT not being one of, if not the, loudest critic against Palin?

The WSJ broke Bush's DUI story and they have the most conservative op-ed writer in the business. WTF does this prove? Nothing.

The Batman

09-05-2008, 05:11 PM

Does someone need to list all the times George W. has said similar errors? People slip up and say the wrong stuff sometimes. Jesus.

True, but the thing about Bush is that beyond saying all the stupid shit he has says, he also does a lot of stupid shit. Actually, an epic amount of stupid shit.

freegood

09-05-2008, 05:29 PM

Genius

09-05-2008, 06:00 PM

In other news, Biden has demoted Palin to Lt. Governor of Alaska.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/04/AR2008090403267.html

Who the fuck doesn't know by now that Palin is the Gov of AK? Joe fucking Biden, that's who.
I think you underestimate him. She took enough shots at everyone in the Democratic party two nights ago (some call for unity that was), this is his way of attacking back.

Debo

09-05-2008, 08:36 PM

I think you underestimate him. She took enough shots at everyone in the Democratic party two nights ago (some call for unity that was), this is his way of attacking back.

It was a political convention, of course they are going to take shots at their opponents. The events are designed to play to the base of each of the parties. The debates are designed to play to the middle.

Neither party wants unity. They both want control over all three branches of the government so they can force their agenda along. Hell, even the Libertarians want control of the government (even thought they wouldn't do anything once they got there).

I agree. He might have done it intentionally just to get under her skin. But the guy is know for being a pompous ass so I can't completely rule out him fucking it up.

Genius

09-05-2008, 09:36 PM

Neither party wants unity. They both want control over all three branches of the government so they can force their agenda along. Hell, even the Libertarians want control of the government (even thought they wouldn't do anything once they got there).

I know, I know. I just wish everybody would shut the fuck up about it then. Both candidates are playing up their role as a unifier, when everyone knows that no one ever unifies unless it fits their agenda. Who is the last president that can truly call himself a unifier? I know Reagan had Democratic support, but not because he made an effort to reach out. So...no president. Ever. MAYBE Washington.

Cornelius

09-05-2008, 10:15 PM

Sarah Palin, at the pool, with a rifle? (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/webscout/2008/09/palin-bikini-ri.html)

02:14 PM PT, Sep 4 2008
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/09/04/palinshotgunpool_2.jpg Those Sarah Palin photos that were all over the Web on Wednesday, with the GOP vice presidential nominee in an American flag bikini, brandishing a rifle and a big open-mouthed smile that looks semi-loony given her get-up, have been debunked on David Emery's Urban Legends blog (http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_sarah_palin_bikini_pic.htm). Emery traced the body in question to a Georgia flickr user's account (http://flickr.com/photos/97897149@N00/208036176). Palin's head was photoshopped in.
My colleague David Sarno has already called for a ban (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/webscout/2008/08/high-quality-vi.html) on stories about monsters, aliens or supernatural phenomena supported only by a photo. I would like to extend that plea to include -- at least for the time being -- all Palin-related photo "evidence."
First we had photos of Palin looking not-pregnant (http://www.giftsandfreeadvice.com/free_advice/sarah-palin-old-pregnant-photo-and-her-2008-pregnant-7-months-photo-lets-get-real/) used to support the theory that the Alaska governor faked being pregnant and giving birth to her 4 1/2-month-old son, Trig, to cover up for her 17-year-old daughter's actual pregnancy. (Which, if nothing else, attests to the degree to which "Mad Men" (http://www.amctv.com/originals/madmen/) has entered into the cultural imagination -- the unwed-mom-baby-switch-with-a-relative story is right out of this season's Peggy Olson (http://twitter.com/Peggy_Olson) plot line.) Then a photo appeared of Palin looking pregnant (http://technorati.com/posts/RT3Hh0AxvTXft_Nc0cSXBdvMZO2XeuEMTDnzFiuWytI=) right when she would have been eight months pregnant with Trig. At that point it was probably inevitable that some commenters (http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/31/234157/516/1017/581734) still kept the skepticism alive.
Then came the spate of "hot Sarah Palin" photos (http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1838041,00.html?imw=Y), including a nude shot supposedly from her beauty pageant days that ran in a Taiwanese newspaper. That one was revealed as a hardy perennial that used to circulate claiming to be Julia Louis-Dreyfus in the raw.
Visual literacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_literacy) is in a way much trickier than the reading kind. The idea that a picture's worth a thousand words doesn't mean any one of those words is actually true. Sadly enough, seeing is no longer believing.
The Palin story is generating striking images (http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2008/09/02/PH2008090200261.jpg) so quickly that it's even more important to look for some patient visual analysis (http://www.bagnewsnotes.com/).
And in the meantime I highly recommend watching the clever and funny Web series You Suck at Photoshop (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_X5uR7VC4M) for a reminder of the sheer emotional power contained in that magical picture-changing software.
-- Maria Russo

Saw that photo around here on GMF. Is someone here responsible for it? If so, they should fess up so they can get some serious Rep.

BIG PIZZLE

09-05-2008, 10:16 PM

Totally fake but not bad.

Genius

09-05-2008, 10:39 PM

Isn't that basically the image she's trying to cultivate? Shouldn't the McCain camp be claiming it's real?

Cornelius

09-05-2008, 10:59 PM

Only if they were struggling to get the vote of the deep south....

kid_vidrio

09-05-2008, 11:07 PM

That's about the 3rd time that pic has come up.
Get original or get out.
http://forum.gorillamask.net/showpost.php?p=84877&postcount=337
www.vpilf.com (http://www.vpilf.com)

vasili denisov

09-05-2008, 11:53 PM

Almoooooooooooooooooooooooost.

http://i33.tinypic.com/dceiab.jpg

Debo

09-06-2008, 12:03 AM

Earlier, the Times endorsed Hillary as their candidate only to lay criticism after another for her campaign.

All major media outlets criticize politicians even if the same editorial board praised them before.

I am pretty sure that the Times would endorse Castro over Clinton if they thought that Castro had a real shot at winning. After all, he is in favor of free health care. And that is what they care about more than anything else in the world.

nuclearjew

09-06-2008, 12:23 AM

http://zero.imt.uwm.edu/gallery/d/46774-1/f755dd1f5e9063484da6933ab39f2ec27da49339.jpg

Cornelius

09-06-2008, 12:26 AM

That's about the 3rd time that pic has come up.
Get original or get out.
http://forum.gorillamask.net/showpost.php?p=84877&postcount=337
www.vpilf.com (http://www.vpilf.com)

That's what I am saying. I had seen it here first over a week ago, and was just saying that if it was a member that was responsible for the pic they should let it be known.
Plus its pretty fucking hilarious that a pic like that made the LA Times.
Thats more than enough for a repost.

Ghostrider

09-06-2008, 01:53 AM

I love how everyone wants to make a big deal about her speech being scripted or written by Bush writers or whatever else they can cook up. The fact is she did not fail in her delivery, or make any gaffes the media could run with so everyone left of center is grasping for straws. ALL the speeches were written by someone else Obama famously employs the writers of both Clinton and Kennedy, so you'd expect his speeches to be excellent, but nobody is putting that little jab into replies about Obama's speech.

The fact is McCain is getting tons of free coverage and the attacks on Palin are backfiring. McCain doesn't even really have to discuss his policies just yet because of this pick, I think her choice worked out far better than he could have imagined.

nuclearjew

09-06-2008, 01:54 AM

Daily Show sliced and diced her speech, but that shit falls on deaf ears anyways.

mongo

09-06-2008, 01:58 AM

i'd fuck that 14 year old of hers. seriously. i would.

Mr. Brown

09-06-2008, 01:59 AM

i'd fuck that 14 year old of hers. seriously. i would.
if u even look at a woman with lust in ur eyes you have committed adultery

nuclearjew

09-06-2008, 02:02 AM

if u even look at a woman with lust in ur eyes you have committed adultery
What if you look at a woman and just want to punch her in the face?

Mr. Brown

09-06-2008, 02:03 AM

do on to others as you want them to do to you?

freegood

09-06-2008, 02:03 AM

I love how everyone wants to make a big deal about her speech being scripted or written by Bush writers or whatever else they can cook up. The fact is she did not fail in her delivery, or make any gaffes the media could run with so everyone left of center is grasping for straws. ALL the speeches were written by someone else Obama famously employs the writers of both Clinton and Kennedy, so you'd expect his speeches to be excellent, but nobody is putting that little jab into replies about Obama's speech.

That's the weakest logic I've seen to excuse a bad speech. If Bush writers suck cock, then find some good Republican writers instead of crying that Obama has better writers.

Mr. Brown

09-06-2008, 02:05 AM

Hey I tell you this; Obama's speech was inspiring, Palin's was entertaining, Biden's was informing, and McCain's was boring.

Da Raider

09-06-2008, 04:47 AM

Hey I tell you this; Obama's speech was inspiring, Palin's was entertaining, Biden's was condescending, and McCain's was boring.

heelsguy

09-06-2008, 06:35 AM

I feel bad for those times I wondered why McCain seemed so wooden with his arm movements....after learning both arms were broken in his capture and he simply cannot raise them above "frankenstein" level.

Mr. Brown

09-06-2008, 08:51 AM

You know to those who are bitching about the attacks on Palin, deal with it. It's like being the new person at school. Hey Obama had to go through all that shit when they said he was Muslim and his wife was a radical. Oh does anyone remember the pastor controversy? The attacks on family (other than spouse) are wrong but it's expected. I mean this is really pretty tame for the attacks so far.

Pharon

09-06-2008, 10:50 AM

That's the weakest logic I've seen to excuse a bad speech. If Bush writers suck cock, then find some good Republican writers instead of crying that Obama has better writers.
One of my friends used to be a speech writer in the Bush administration, and he said that it's far more important to write speeches that match the speaker's personality and speaking style than it is to come up with grandiose prose. If the candidate doesn't get the message across effectively, it most likely means that the speech wasn't tailored properly to his/her speaking style.

nirvanasaves

09-06-2008, 08:32 PM

I have to agree with Mr. Brown. Palin was just introduced last week and could possibly be our president once Old Man McCain croaks. We have every right to learn all we can about this person.

cAsE sEnSiTiVe

09-06-2008, 08:42 PM

I have to agree with Mr. Brown. Palin was just introduced last week and could possibly be our president once Old Man McCain croaks. We have every right to learn all we can about this person.

He's probably healthier than you are, toiletbug.

nirvanasaves

09-06-2008, 08:57 PM

Wow dude. you have a pretty solid argument there. I fear the person that needs to debate against you and your wit.

cAsE sEnSiTiVe

09-06-2008, 09:02 PM

Wow dude. you have a pretty solid argument there. I fear the person that needs to debate against you and your wit.

Yeah....just about as much substance as your assinine "Old Man McCain croaks" statement, eh?

nuclearjew

09-06-2008, 09:04 PM

Yeah....just about as much substance as your assinine "Old Man McCain croaks" statement, eh?
That's not that invalid. The Oval Office ages the fuck out of you. For a 72 year man to enter the office...he is going to be dogshit if he survives 4 years in it.

cAsE sEnSiTiVe

09-06-2008, 09:15 PM

That's not that invalid. The Oval Office ages the fuck out of you. For a 72 year man to enter the office...he is going to be dogshit if he survives 4 years in it.

I agree...no walk in the park. But too many are simply assuming he's gonna kick. His family has pretty good genes, and live quite a long time on average.

Unless someone off's him, my money is on him making it.

That said, I wish we had better choices than these two.

nuclearjew

09-06-2008, 09:22 PM

I don't really think he'll die in office, but he definitely won't be running in 2012.

Morfin

09-06-2008, 10:02 PM

The quality of the VP nominee is always relevant because you don't know what is going to happen, whether it is a Kennedy situation or a health situation (a la FDR). But, regardless of how healthy he is, the fact is that he is 72 years old. Many of you may be too young to remember that Reagan's age was a huge factor in 1980, with many people questioning whether he was too old (and he was years younger than McCain is now). Reagan diffused much of this by choosing Bush as a VP because Bush had a huge amount of national political experience, as the head of the Republican Nat'l Committee, experience as head of the CIA, and foreign policy experience. Plus, he had been vetted during the primary season running against Reagan. The choice of an experienced VP helped assuage concerns about Reagan's old age.

Now, contrast that to what McCain did. He chose someone with virtually no experience. Trying to put this as non-partisanly as possible, she was a mayor of a small town and governor for less than two years of a small population state. She has no national experience. Palin's selection provides little of the comfort that Bush provided in 1980. In my mind, it makes me lean more toward Obama.

Smokestack

09-06-2008, 10:04 PM

Mustard

09-06-2008, 10:24 PM

Sarah Palin: The gift that keeps on giving.

cAsE sEnSiTiVe

09-06-2008, 10:41 PM

Does the shit ever stop hitting the fan?

Not until you bump into it

cAsE sEnSiTiVe

09-06-2008, 10:43 PM

I don't really think he'll die in office, but he definitely won't be running in 2012.

No, he's made it pretty clear he'll be a one-termer

BusterPortugal

09-06-2008, 11:04 PM

Hypocrisy knows no bounds.

I absolutely agree, 100%...

UmBveDQW1_Q

in case youtube takes it down, http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=184086

Smokestack

09-07-2008, 12:17 AM

I don't hear any democrats/liberals complaining about Jimmy Carter right now. He most certainly was influenced by his religious beliefs.

Maybe because it's not 1976?

Not until you bump into it

Sorry, the internets are hard to avoid in these modern times.

freegood

09-07-2008, 12:49 AM

I don't really think he'll die in office, but he definitely won't be running in 2012.

I'd say McCain's chances of dying in office the first 4 years are around the same as Obama....

nuclearjew

09-07-2008, 12:51 AM

Assassinati0wn3d?!?

vasili denisov

09-07-2008, 03:45 AM

No, he's made it pretty clear he'll be a one-termer
So far, he's made it pretty clear he'll be a no-termer.

cAsE sEnSiTiVe

09-07-2008, 04:12 AM

So far, he's made it pretty clear he'll be a no-termer.

we will see.

So far, yes, people seem to be buying the "change" bs.

zeronine

09-07-2008, 08:16 AM

we will see.

So far, yes, people seem to be buying the "change" bs.

VS the McCain campaign...such as when Romney said at the convention: "We need change all right, change from a liberal Washington to a conservative Washington."

Yeah clearly the last 8 years have been a figment of my imagination, what with Repub control of the White House AND Congress.

Hanover Fist

09-07-2008, 08:25 AM

VS the McCain campaign...such as when Romney said at the convention: "We need change all right, change from a liberal Washington to a conservative Washington."

Yeah clearly the last 8 years have been a figment of my imagination, what with Repub control of the White House AND Congress.

The Republicans controlled Congress the last 8 years? Why wasn't I informed of this?
If that's the case why the fuck would we make Pelosi and Reid Majority leaders?

Genius

09-07-2008, 09:57 AM

George Bush isn't a conservative anyway. I'm not sure what he is, or if he even knows what he is. But he certainly isn't a conservative.

Grieves

09-07-2008, 10:39 AM

George Bush isn't a conservative anyway. I'm not sure what he is, or if he even knows what he is. But he certainly isn't a conservative.Understatement of the millennium.

The Batman

09-07-2008, 10:50 AM

George Bush isn't a conservative anyway. I'm not sure what he is, or if he even knows what he is. But he certainly isn't a conservative.

True. He is retarded. Its kind of a party of his own.

http://www.retards.com/chat/attachments/politics-retarded/6d1211919761t-george-bush-retarded-george-bush-dick-cheney-dumb-fuck-mountain.jpg

Rover

09-07-2008, 12:09 PM

Obama Palin is an empty vessel to which Democrats Republicans are projecting their most desperate hopes and dreams.And I would argue that Obama is more empty. At least you can dig through Palin's past experience and make criticisms. Obama just attached his name to 100's of pieces of Illinois Senate legislation and decided he was ready to be president.

Pharon

09-07-2008, 12:17 PM

I don't understand this obsession with exclusively equating legislative experience to Presidential qualifications. It's just one piece of the puzzle, and not even a prerequisite by any means.

Rover

09-07-2008, 12:48 PM

I don't understand this obsession with exclusively equating legislative experience to Presidential qualifications. It's just one piece of the puzzle, and not even a prerequisite by any means.It's the only relevant experience Obama has. I'm not particularly concerned with how he handled class discussion while teaching ConLaw, or how he graded exams, or if he managed to get everyone on the block to register to vote.

If you take away discussion about Obama's legislative experience, he really doesn't have anything. Are you willing to risk the presidency solely on promises? Granted every politician makes random promises during a campaign, but Obama has ZERO track record of experience to back up his claims. It's why governors make presidents. When they make claims they can point to supporting evidence. Obama has none of that.

Pharon

09-07-2008, 01:23 PM

If you take away discussion about Obama's legislative experience, he really doesn't have anything.
We'll just have to agree to disagree on this, then. Knowing Constitutional law is most certainly relevant experience for someone who will lead one of the three branches of government. And being involved at the grass roots level of one of the poorest areas in America is also relevant, because he knows first-hand what kind of problems exist there, and what kind of programs work.

And as for gubernatorial experience -- sure, I'd say it's relevant, even though in Palin's case it's less than 2 years. Do you think that being mayor of a town of 7,000 people makes her qualified to lead the free world?

I think the point is that you can't excuse one level of inexperience and exaggerate the other. That's just inconsistent.

freegood

09-07-2008, 03:12 PM

Why is being a community organizer mocked at by Republicans?

Aren't they the boosters of Faith Based Initiatives?

Okie Medicvet

09-07-2008, 03:35 PM

Okay, I had to read through every page of this thread here because I wanted to make sure this has not been brought up as an issue yet, and it hasn't. I take this very seriously and it is scary to me..that a woman who wants to ban books could become a heartbeat away from the presidency. Now that shit is hitting too close to home for me.

And the fact that she put gag orders up is doubly scary. I don't want a freaking religious fundie in the white house. I would leave the fucking country if that happened.

At some point in those fractious first days, Palin told the department heads they needed her permission to talk to reporters. "She put a gag order on those people, something that you'd expect to find in the big city, not here," says Naegele. "She flew in there like a big-city gal, which she's not. It was a strange time, and [the Frontiersman] came out very harshly against her."
Stein says that as mayor, Palin continued to inject religious beliefs into her policy at times. "She asked the library how she could go about banning books," he says, because some voters thought they had inappropriate language in them. "The librarian was aghast." That woman, Mary Ellen Baker, couldn't be reached for comment, but news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire Baker for not giving "full support" to the mayor.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1837918,00.html

Now I don't care about how many people think that Time is a "biased source", I want to know if she refutes as false or not.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v149/amvet91alpha/statement%20pics/books.jpg\

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v149/amvet91alpha/statement%20pics/your_brain.jpg

Smokestack

09-07-2008, 04:16 PM

And I would argue that Obama is more empty. At least you can dig through Palin's past experience and make criticisms. Obama just attached his name to 100's of pieces of Illinois Senate legislation and decided he was ready to be president.

Have you been hiding under a rock for the last two years? Obama has campaigned and addressed the myriad issues that face a president, more comprehensively than McCain I might add, that to see emptiness is sheer ignorance. This tunnel vision on a singular kind of experience (we get it, McCain's old and Palin built a hockey rink for her town) is laughable. So, try to understand that when people, including Charles Krauthamer, call Palin an empty vessel it is that not only is her record thin but she has been on the national stage for about a week, refusing to give interviews and citing putting a private jet on eBay that she didn't sell along with standing against the bridge to nowhere (yes, after she was for it) as her credentials. At least Obama, for all his lack of the experience that you seem to need like a junkie needs his fix, has been on the trail and elaborating on who he is for quite some time now.

Now I don't care about how many people think that Time is a "biased source", I want to know if she refutes as false or not.

Apparently, anyone who delves into Palin's past in a "biased source."

cAsE sEnSiTiVe

09-07-2008, 04:19 PM

I don't want a freaking religious fundie in the white house. I would leave the fucking country if that happened.

More reason than ever to get behind Palin.

The line starts behind that Baldwin prick....oh wait, he's still here.

BiōHazard

09-07-2008, 04:34 PM

I think the fact that Obama beat Hilary for the nomination says alot even with "no experience".It shows that people are caring less about experience and more about change and not the "same old shit in the White House". Palin didn't beat anyone, she was just appointed to this position. If she were to run on the repub ticket, everyone would be like who the fuck are you and not vote for her, but she got a free pass and everyone is all on her bandwagon when they know nothing about her.

Cornelius

09-07-2008, 06:32 PM

More reason than ever to get behind Palin.

The line starts behind that Baldwin prick....oh wait, he's still here.

[APPLAUSE]
Every disgruntled American that doesn't get his or her way seems to make that very same claim. They bitch and moan and threaten to leave, but when the time comes they don't, because deep down they know if they do they are rebuking the very essence of this country. And as citizens, and hopefully patriots, they don't want run away from their homes simply because they are unhappy with the majorities decisions.

Okie Medicvet

09-07-2008, 06:38 PM

More reason than ever to get behind Palin.

The line starts behind that Baldwin prick....oh wait, he's still here.

Comparing me to Baldwin? Get real. I never said that being in Iraq would make me want to leave, or even actually leave our country. I never have said anything like wanting to leave this country before Palin came along, because never before has a known wannabe book burner [come]*this close to becoming the leader of this nation.

I wouldn't want to live in a theocracy, no matter what the nation, and I dearly love my home, but would not want to live somewhere in a version of "The Handmaids Tale"...oh and not entirely coincidentally, that book is one of the most "challenged" book on the ALA list, meaning that Palin would want to yank that book off the library shelves too. I would be willing to bet that there are some books on this list that Palin would applaud if they were removed. Anyway, here's the list:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_commonly_challenged_books_in_the_U.S.

Sorry, had to make an edit to add the *come.

Fletch

09-07-2008, 06:44 PM

Comparing me to Baldwin? Get real. I never said that being in Iraq would make me want to leave, or even actually leave our country. I never have said anything like wanting to leave this country before Palin came along, because never before has a known wannabe book burner this close to becoming the leader of this nation.

I wouldn't want to live in a theocracy, no matter what the nation, and I dearly love my home, but would not want to live somewhere in a version of "The Handmaids Tale"...oh and not entirely coincidentally, that book is one of the most "challenged" book on the ALA list, meaning that Palin would want to yank that book off the library shelves too. I would be willing to bet that there are some books on this list that Palin would applaud if they were removed. Anyway, here's the list:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_commonly_challenged_books_in_the_U.S.

This has nothing to do with Palin but, looking at that list...what problem do people have with Where's Waldo??

Okie Medicvet

09-07-2008, 07:05 PM

you would be amazed at the things people find for banning books sometimes..it boggled the mind....but then again, banning books period boggles my mind.

dadaelus

09-07-2008, 07:29 PM

[APPLAUSE]
Every disgruntled American that doesn't get his or her way seems to make that very same claim. They bitch and moan and threaten to leave, but when the time comes they don't, because deep down they know if they do they are rebuking the very essence of this country. And as citizens, and hopefully patriots, they don't want run away from their homes simply because they are unhappy with the majorities decisions.

I'm unhappy with the Palin pick and I have no intention of leaving the country. (I was hoping he would be enough of a maverick to pick Hagel)

Saying that, the problem I have with the definition of 'majority rights' from the social conservative view is that the social conservative majority seems to consider that the minority have either diminished no rights at all. A classic example of that is Utah's liquor laws. At one point Utah had a law on the books that prohibited the advertising of booze. The office of legislative research even advised that the law was unconstitutional and would be impossible to defend but it was passed anyway. (You can still find the neon Miller logo signs WITHOUT the word Miller or beer because the logo was legal but not the words.) The drinkers(and tavern owners and advertising companies) of the state had to go to the appellate courts to get it overturned.

That a person has strong religious convictions is one thing. That they use those convictions to shape their worldview is another. But that they use that religious conviction to advocate or create 'social' laws that restrict or diminish the rights of others I find offensive.

Lets face facts: A number of social conservatives would consider this board to be offensive and would like to find a way to make the materials and information found here illegal.(In some countries it may already be) The social conservative views of those that would aggree to prohibit access to the books on that ALA list would see no conflict in creating laws that would make Claydon a felon for for associating with 'degenerates' on this board.

Cornelius

09-07-2008, 08:46 PM

I'm unhappy with the Palin pick and I have no intention of leaving the country. (I was hoping he would be enough of a maverick to pick Hagel)

Saying that, the problem I have with the definition of 'majority rights' from the social conservative view is that the social conservative majority seems to consider that the minority have either diminished no rights at all. A classic example of that is Utah's liquor laws. At one point Utah had a law on the books that prohibited the advertising of booze. The office of legislative research even advised that the law was unconstitutional and would be impossible to defend but it was passed anyway. (You can still find the neon Miller logo signs WITHOUT the word Miller or beer because the logo was legal but not the words.) The drinkers(and tavern owners and advertising companies) of the state had to go to the appellate courts to get it overturned.

That a person has strong religious convictions is one thing. That they use those convictions to shape their worldview is another. But that they use that religious conviction to advocate or create 'social' laws that restrict or diminish the rights of others I find offensive.

Lets face facts: A number of social conservatives would consider this board to be offensive and would like to find a way to make the materials and information found here illegal.(In some countries it may already be) The social conservative views of those that would aggree to prohibit access to the books on that ALA list would see no conflict in creating laws that would make Claydon a felon for for associating with 'degenerates' on this board.

I agree with your point entirely. I do not however agree with the context in which you have put it. To compare the outcome of a "popular election" in the U.S. to "majority rights" is a stretch. You use the example of Utah restricting alcohol based advertising as if it has made any effect on the national stage. We see those kind of unconstitutional decisions being made in states like Utah because the vast majority of the population is adheres to a social group; in this case Mormons. Thank god they do not speak for the rest of our nation. And I guarantee that it will be reverse in years to come simply because it is unconstitutional.
But when you say that a "social conservative majority seems to consider that the minority have either diminished no rights at all", is simply because you must be part of the minority as of now. That is the greatness of this country; there is no totalitarian standard for how we do things. I have no doubts in my mind that if/when Obama wins this election, a few years down the road someone else in your similar situation will state that a "social liberal majority seems to consider that the minority have either diminished no rights at all".

bk3030

09-07-2008, 09:04 PM

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/images/2008/06/27/alecbaldwin.jpg

What the fuck did you say about Alec Baldwin?

BIG PIZZLE

09-07-2008, 09:31 PM

Who said shit about baldwin?

dadaelus

09-07-2008, 09:38 PM

I agree with your point entirely. I do not however agree with the context in which you have put it. To compare the outcome of a "popular election" in the U.S. to "majority rights" is a stretch. You use the example of Utah restricting alcohol based advertising as if it has made any effect on the national stage. We see those kind of unconstitutional decisions being made in states like Utah because the vast majority of the population is adheres to a social group; in this case Mormons. Thank god they do not speak for the rest of our nation. And I guarantee that it will be reverse in years to come simply because it is unconstitutional.
But when you say that a "social conservative majority seems to consider that the minority have either diminished no rights at all", is simply because you must be part of the minority as of now. That is the greatness of this country; there is no totalitarian standard for how we do things. I have no doubts in my mind that if/when Obama wins this election, a few years down the road someone else in your similar situation will state that a "social liberal majority seems to consider that the minority have either diminished no rights at all".

I am extending a state's example to the country. Mormons are a minority nationally but they hold onto a number of social conservative ideals. You are dismissive of them as a class but their social and religious values have a definitive impact on the laws of the state, and the conduct of business. To some Utah politicians it is a natural extension of their faith to have their beliefs shape their legislation. Their social values are easily recognizable and could easily scale to a national level. You immediately jump on to the 'it can't happen on a national scale' but tell me why it cannot happen. You may have faith in the wisdom of crowds but I do not.

As to a liberal majority and the possible creation of a diminished set of social conservative rights, feel free to find the most liberal state or country you want and lets look at how the social conservatives may be being marginalized. (Gun laws, and higher average taxes springs to mind right off the bat) Utah is the easy example in the other direction since they have some interesting legislative history the speaks to their social conservative values:

Cable Decency Act (Overturned after a nasty two year legal fight)
Utah Liquor Laws (There are a raft of them)
Night club regulations
Utah Anti-Cruising laws (Against the law to cruise back and fourth on teh same street)

Your 'Thank God' statement begs a follow up question: If Romney had won the Republican nomination would you have not voted for him? If the answer is no, and you see yourself as a conservative, what is the criteria on which you have based your decision?

bk3030

09-07-2008, 09:39 PM

Who said shit about baldwin?

More reason than ever to get behind Palin.

The line starts behind that Baldwin prick....oh wait, he's still here.

Pharon

09-07-2008, 09:41 PM

Stephen Baldwin >> Alec Baldwin

http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/020401/11551__usual_l.jpg

Cornelius

09-08-2008, 12:51 AM

Your 'Thank God' statement begs a follow up question: If Romney had won the Republican nomination would you have not voted for him? If the answer is no, and you see yourself as a conservative, what is the criteria on which you have based your decision?

I am fairly moderate to start. I hate the polar division in this country, and yes I would probably have voted for Romney if he had won the ticket, but not because he is a "Republican" but because the economy is the biggest issue that effects me personally and I think off all those who ran he would have best managed it. So no I would not have dismissed him because he is a Mormon, nor was that my point before.

Deadhead Derek

09-08-2008, 01:35 AM

Why is being a community organizer mocked at by Republicans?

Aren't they the boosters of Faith Based Initiatives?
and weren'tthey holding up signs at the convention that said service"

The Batman

09-08-2008, 09:54 AM

I am fairly moderate to start. I hate the polar division in this country, and yes I would probably have voted for Romney if he had won the ticket, but not because he is a "Republican" but because the economy is the biggest issue that effects me personally and I think off all those who ran he would have best managed it. So no I would not have dismissed him because he is a Mormon, nor was that my point before.

You know, to most people who aren't Christian, the religion is kind of a stretch in terms of belief. But, Mormonism sounds like a bad acid trip. And to have a president who believes in the things Mormon's believe in doesn't sound encouraging.

freegood

09-08-2008, 10:25 AM

and weren'tthey holding up signs at the convention that said service"

Who practices what they preach nowadays?

BusterPortugal

09-08-2008, 12:27 PM

Why is being a community organizer mocked at by Republicans?

Aren't they the boosters of Faith Based Initiatives?

Hmm, how things change. It wasn't THAT long ago that they would likely have been considered "Points of Light."

I have spoken of a thousand points of light, of all the community organizations that are spread like stars throughout the Nation, doing good. We will work hand in hand, encouraging, sometimes leading, sometimes being led, rewarding. We will work on this in the White House, in the Cabinet agencies. I will go to the people and the programs that are the brighter points of light, and I will ask every member of my government to become involved. The old ideas are new again because they are not old, they are timeless: duty, sacrifice, commitment, and a patriotism that finds its expression in taking part and pitching in.

Okie Medicvet

09-08-2008, 05:12 PM

The Batman

09-08-2008, 05:16 PM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080908/ap_on_el_pr/bridge_to_nowhere_fact_check_1

THE FACTS: Palin did abandon plans to build the nearly $400 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport. But she made her decision after the project had become an embarrassment to the state, after federal dollars for the project were pulled back and diverted to other uses in Alaska, and after she had appeared to support the bridge during her campaign for governor.
McCain and Palin together have told a broader story about the bridge that is misleading. She is portrayed as a crusader for the thrifty use of tax dollars who turned down an offer from Washington to build an expensive bridge of little value to the state.
"I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere," she said in her convention speech last week.
That's not what she told Alaskans when she announced a year ago that she was ordering state transportation officials to ditch the project. Her explanation then was that it would be fruitless to try to persuade Congress to come up with the money.
"It's clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island," Palin said then.
Palin indicated during her 2006 campaign for governor that she supported the bridge, but was wishy-washy about it. She told local officials that money appropriated for the bridge "should remain available for a link, an access process as we continue to evaluate the scope and just how best to just get this done."

Debo

09-08-2008, 06:29 PM

Palin is an empty vessel to which Republicans are projecting their most desperate hopes and dreams. Anti-corruption reformer? It's already been shown she was for the "bridge to nowhere" and other earmarks before it became politically expedient to be against them. Patriot? Sometimes, unless there's a good secessionist party to hang out at. Beacon of family values? I guess she and her daughter did choose life...wait, "choose"? And now we can throw fiscal conservative out the window as well:Debt Service Increased 69 Percent Under Palin.
In fiscal 2003 — the last fiscal year Palin approved the budget — the total government debt service was $658,662. In fiscal 1996 — the year before Palin took control of the budget—the debt service was $390,385. The increase was 69 percent. [Wasilla Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 2003, Table 1]
Palin Left Behind Almost $19 Million In Long-Term Debt, Compared to None Before She Was Mayor.
In fiscal 2003—the last fiscal year Palin approved the budget—the bonded long-term debt was $18,635,000. In fiscal 1996—the year before Palin took control of the budget—there was no general obligation debt. [Wasilla Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 2003, Table 10]
Long-Term Debt Was $3000 Per Capita When Palin Left, Compared to None Before She Was Mayor.
In fiscal 2003—the last fiscal year Palin approved the budget—the bonded long-term debt per capita was $2,938. In fiscal 1996—the year before Palin took control of the budget—there was no general obligation debt. [Wasilla Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 2003, Table 10]
When Palin Left Office, 6.24% of Government Spending Was On Debt Service, Compared to None Before She Was Mayor.
In fiscal 2003—the last fiscal year Palin approved the budget—the ratio of debt service to general government expenditures was 6.24 percent. There was no long-term debt before she took office. [Wasilla Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 2003, Table 11]

(http://mudflats.wordpress.com/2008/09/05/palin-vetting-documents-from-2006-for-hard-core-palin-addicts-only/)

Does the shit ever stop hitting the fan?

You fail at life.

Sorry, NoPalin. But if you would have taken the time to look at the city of Wasillas's web site, link (http://www.cityofwasilla.com/index.aspx?page=136) you would have seen all of the fiscal reporting from 1994-2005. These reports show that when Mayor Palin left office in 2002 (due to term limits) the city had a surplus of revenue of almost $300K. In addition, they also had over $22 million dollars in a special fund account.

The voters of Wasilla passed a $15 million bond intiative in 2002 to fund a sports complex plus a $5.5 million bond in 1998 for road construction.
link (http://www.cityofwasilla.com/index.aspx?page=136).

Not sure how voter passed infrastructure bonds can be translated into fiscal ineptitude.

P.S. the voters also passed a 0.5% sales tax increase in 2002 to specifically payoff the sports complex. This is all so terribly routine.

From the comments section here:
http://www.anchorrising.com/barnacles/006280.html

Rover

09-08-2008, 07:04 PM

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this, then. Knowing Constitutional law is most certainly relevant experience for someone who will lead one of the three branches of government. And being involved at the grass roots level of one of the poorest areas in America is also relevant, because he knows first-hand what kind of problems exist there, and what kind of programs work.

And as for gubernatorial experience -- sure, I'd say it's relevant, even though in Palin's case it's less than 2 years. Do you think that being mayor of a town of 7,000 people makes her qualified to lead the free world?

I think the point is that you can't excuse one level of inexperience and exaggerate the other. That's just inconsistent.I didn't say his knowledge of ConLaw wasn't relevant. I said teaching a class was irrelevant experience to being president. Also, I'd question his ConLaw knowledge based on his supporting the DC gun ban that was overturned.

A small town mayor is just as familiar as a community organizer with the problems that plague the working class and the types of solutions that would work to correct problems. As far as Obama's community organizer experience goes, I think the only thing he's learned from ACORN is how to turn out the dead vote.

Okay, I had to read through every page of this thread here because I wanted to make sure this has not been brought up as an issue yet, and it hasn't. I take this very seriously and it is scary to me..that a woman who wants to ban books could become a heartbeat away from the presidency. Now that shit is hitting too close to home for me.We have an "Obama is an Alien" (http://forum.gorillamask.net/showthread.php?p=98690#post98690)thread if you want to keep discussing chain emails you get.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/palin/bannedbooks.asp

Genius

09-08-2008, 07:11 PM

A small town mayor is just as familiar as a community organizer with the problems that plague the working class and the types of solutions that would work to correct problems.
I happen to agree with this. While they obviously aren't totally equivalent, I'm sure they share a lot of things in common. What I don't agree with then, is the entire McCain campaign, Palin included, taking blatant cheap shots at Obama and at community organizers in general. That was fucked up bottom-of-the-barrel politics that smacks of desperation. It tells me that the McCain people also realized that their VP candidate had less practical experience than Obama, taking away a huge argument, which required them to fire off cheap preemptive strikes as to why her experience was "better" than his. One of the keys to this election is winning over independents, and that's not the way to do it.

Okie Medicvet

09-08-2008, 07:33 PM

I didn't say his knowledge of ConLaw wasn't relevant. I said teaching a class was irrelevant experience to being president. Also, I'd question his ConLaw knowledge based on his supporting the DC gun ban that was overturned.

A small town mayor is just as familiar as a community organizer with the problems that plague the working class and the types of solutions that would work to correct problems. As far as Obama's community organizer experience goes, I think the only thing he's learned from ACORN is how to turn out the dead vote.

We have an "Obama is an Alien" (http://forum.gorillamask.net/showthread.php?p=98690#post98690)thread if you want to keep discussing chain emails you get.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/palin/bannedbooks.asp

Hon, I was not talking about a chain email, I was getting this from TIME MAGAZINE, and until they print a retraction if necessary, I am going to go with what they have printed. She didn't get books banned, but did ATTEMPT to, and in MY book, that is more than enough.

Oh and now I have the links to show you what she said..it wasn't a chain email either, but I SAW IT HER SAYING IT ON A NEWSCLIP WITH MY OWN EYES, and she was saying that it was "God's will" for us to be in Iraq.. I hadn't had time to get an internet link to it yet..was thinking someone else might have done it by the time I got back, but since it hasn't happened yet, here you go:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/09/08/yellin.palin.faith.cnn

and just for good measure, here is the link I posted in the first post:

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1837918,00.html

CNN is also reporting on this too...are they going to be deemed an incorrect source?

oh and one last thing, (and no, I'm NOT being serious!), of course he is an alien..don't you see the big O? And people who say he wasn't born in the US? He must have been born on the same planet as Superman, and is indeed an alien! :p

Rover

09-08-2008, 07:46 PM

Asking if books can be banned is not the same as banning books. And since I don't see evidence of a campaign to ban books, I think it's irrelevant. When the next president is sworn in and asks, "How do I set off the nukes?" It doesn't mean they're spoiling for a nuclear winter. Maybe she was curious as to whether or not books can be banned.

Most religious people believe that things are God's will.

Okie Medicvet

09-08-2008, 07:57 PM

I don't know about you, but most of the religous people I know pray for peace and not war.

EDIT: especially if they have a child involved in the war themselves. Now Palin may not care about her son to the extent that she doesn't WANT war (which has NOTHING to do with whether one is necessary or not) so he won't be placed in harm's way unnecessarily, but my son will be 18 in less than two years, and she can't have MY child, and if things continue the way they are, there will be a draft, don't tell me there won't because we are thisclose to having one right now.

cAsE sEnSiTiVe

09-08-2008, 08:12 PM

....and if things continue the way they are, there will be a draft, don't tell me there won't because we are thisclose to having one right now.

Really? I hadn't heard this. Where did you hear this, if I might ask?

Hanover Fist

09-08-2008, 08:14 PM

The Batman

09-08-2008, 08:17 PM

Okie Medicvet

09-08-2008, 08:34 PM

Really? I hadn't heard this. Where did you hear this, if I might ask?

OKAY, THIS IS ME RANTING:

You want to know how close we are to a draft right now? Hell, watch C-span, which is unedited and hear what is being said by the generals in their talking points to congress right now. But I am not trying to spread rumors without facts to back them up right now, so I will just say that as of right now it is my gut instinct, especially after talking to the people I still know in the service that have been getting tired of being back-doored. I am far from the only person that thinks this. I have even gotten a promise from my son that if they try to draft him that he will leave the country with me, and if Palin becomes prez, with her thinking that God WANTS a war in Iraq, what on earth makes you think she wouldn't have a draft?

Let other people go to war and shed their blood for oil to fill their fucking hummers, they can't HAVE my son!!!!!

Okie Medicvet

09-08-2008, 08:37 PM

Okie I think you're just plain nuts. We aren't even remotely close to a draft. We are probably further away from any sort of draft than we were 3 years ago. You probably have a better chance of being hit by lightning while riding a meteor as you wave your winning powerball ticket than having your son get conscripted.

You know, unlike our wannabe vice prez, I am praying not to have that happen, I am not praying for God to have us in a war, I am praying for peace...but maybe the fact that I'm not a fundie Christian might have something to do with it?

Just answer me this..how many people do you know currently in the service have you talked to personally?

And yes, I'm fucking nutz.....crazy enough to not allow my son to go to war for oil.

Genius

09-08-2008, 09:18 PM

Jesus Okie, we're not going to have a draft. Not unless they want mass rioting when they try to arrest the couple thousand people that don't show. Which they obviously don't. A draft would wreck McCain's campaign, and everyone knows it. It would also wreck four years in the White House, if it was instituted following a McCain victory. It would also have to be instituted by a Democratic-controlled Congress, which would lead to them getting rolled in elections for years to come. A draft can only work in this day and age if a large enough majority feel there is a cause worthy enough. MAYBE it could have happened directly after September 11th, but certainly not now.

Okie Medicvet

09-08-2008, 09:21 PM

VoxAngelikus

09-08-2008, 09:24 PM

A war that is God's will... isn't that called a Crusade?

freegood

09-08-2008, 09:26 PM

Record Contradicts Palin's 'Bridge' Claims (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122090791901411709.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news)
By ELIZABETH HOLMES and LAURA MECKLER
September 9, 2008

The Bridge to Nowhere argument isn't going much of anywhere.

Despite significant evidence to the contrary, the McCain campaign continues to assert that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin told the federal government "thanks but no thanks" to the now-famous bridge to an island in her home state.

The McCain campaign released a television advertisement Monday morning titled "Original Mavericks." The narrator of the 30-second spot boasts about the pair: "He fights pork-barrel spending. She stopped the Bridge to Nowhere."

Gov. Palin, who John McCain named as his running mate less than two weeks ago, quickly adopted a stump line bragging about her opposition to the pork-barrel project Sen. McCain routinely decries.

Getty Images
Republican presidential candidate John McCain (right) and his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, at a campaign rally in Lee's Summit, Mo.
But Gov. Palin's claim comes with a serious caveat. She endorsed the multimillion dollar project during her gubernatorial race in 2006. And while she did take part in stopping the project after it became a national scandal, she did not return the federal money. She just allocated it elsewhere.

"We need to come to the defense of Southeast Alaska when proposals are on the table like the bridge," Gov. Palin said in August 2006, according to the local newspaper, "and not allow the spinmeisters to turn this project or any other into something that's so negative." The bridge would have linked Ketchikan to the airport on Gravina Island. Travelers from Ketchikan (pop. 7,500) now rely on ferries.

A year ago, the governor issued a press release that the money for the project was being "redirected."

"Ketchikan desires a better way to reach the airport, but the $398 million bridge is not the answer," she said. "Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project, and it's clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island. Much of the public's attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here. But we need to focus on what we can do, rather than fight over what has happened."

On Monday in Missouri, Gov. Palin put it this way: "I told Congress thanks but no thanks for that bridge to nowhere. If the state wanted to build a bridge we would built it ourselves."

Senior adviser Mark Salter pointed to her role in killing the project while in office and allocating the money elsewhere. When pressed further that it was actually Congress that stopped the earmark, Mr. Salter said: "She stopped it, too. She did her part." Mr. Salter added that he welcomed a fight over earmarks with the Obama campaign.

Democratic candidate Barack Obama used a town-hall style event in Flint, Mich., to attack Gov. Palin over the "Bridge to Nowhere" debate. He accused the vice presidential nominee of lobbying for the bridge and then hiding her initial position when she ran for governor and the project became unpopular.

"You can't just make stuff up. You can't just recreate yourself. The American people aren't that stupid," he said. It's like "being for it before you were against it," Sen. Obama said, a reference to a damaging statement John Kerry made in 2004.

Why is this one issue such a big deal? Sen. McCain's anti-earmarks stance has been paramount to his campaign. The Arizona senator has blamed everything from the Minneapolis bridge collapse to Hurricane Katrina on Congress's willingness to stuff bills full of pork barrel spending.

As such, Gov. Palin's image as a "reformer" is part of the storyline the McCain campaign needs to compliment the top of its ticket. Her quip about passing on the bridge and "building it ourselves" has been a staple of her stump.

But she's drawn considerable fire as result. Sen. Obama's campaign released an advertisement pointing out her original support of the bridge. And on Monday, an Obama staffer emailed a photo of Gov. Palin holding up a T-shirt that was made shortly after the bridge caught national attention. It reads "NOWHERE ALASKA" and "99901," the zip code of Ketchikan.

The McCain campaign jumped back with spokesman Brian Rogers calling the attacks "hysterical."

"The only people 'lying' about spending are the Obama campaign. The only explanation for their hysterical attacks is that they're afraid that when John McCain and Sarah Palin are in the White House, Barack Obama's nearly $1 billion in earmark spending will stop dead in its tracks," Mr. Rogers said.

At a rally today, Sen. McCain again asserted that Sen. Obama has requested nearly a billion in earmarks. In fact, the Illinois senator requested $311 million last year, according to the Associated Press, and none this year. In comparison, Gov. Palin has requested $750 million in her two years as governor -- which the AP says is the largest per-capita request in the nation.

--Amy Chozick contributed to this story.

Write to Elizabeth Holmes at elizabeth.holmes@wsj.com and Laura Meckler at laura.meckler@wsj.com

For a good look at what Alaska normally receives in Government funding per person, check out this link:
http://services.alphaworks.ibm.com/manyeyes/view/SMpBZGsOtha68KE2qsZhG2-
2005 numbers...

Okie Medicvet

09-08-2008, 09:29 PM

But she's about change, and is a gutsy woman.. (shit, I broke my eyes from rolling them too much with that one..)

Don Scrappy

09-08-2008, 09:30 PM

So now Palin said that Fannie and Freddie were too big. She clearly knows dittly shit about the function of the companies.

Claydon

09-08-2008, 09:31 PM

But she's about change, and is a gutsy woman.. (shit, I broke my eyes from rolling them too much with that one..)

Yah...change... like having a 30 year career loud mouth senator as your VP. Change..... change like saying one thing and doing another which they are all guilty of but now Obama would seem to be the most egregious. Change like saying you will shrink defense spending back in 2007, and now wants to continue to grow defense spending.

Yah, change.... the only thing that is going to change is when our tax rates go up further.

Freegood and others have such a hardon for palin (which i don't blame them) and focusing on her they fail to see how McCain...the old man seems to be neck and neck and in some polls pulling ahead of obama.

For all Obama's hype, things seem to be the same and the republicans have done a classic dem's move.... ie CO OPT.

Genius

09-08-2008, 09:37 PM

I am not talking about McCain and whether he would institute a draft or not, I am talking about the woman who could become only a 72 year old's heartbeat away from the presidency, and do I think she would start a draft? Well, yeah, in a...yes, I will say it...HEARBEAT.

I am just talking about Palin, because this thread is solely about Palin, and that is one scary bible thumping book banning bitch.
I'm almost 100% sure that she couldn't do it on her own. She'd have to have Congressional support. And a Democratic Congress would fight her tooth and nail, if they want to stay where they're at. Plus, the Karl Rove, Mike Duncan, Rick Perry types in the GOP might let the topic come up for debate, they know that taking that type of action would be potentially devastating to the party, and would squash it.

Okie Medicvet

09-08-2008, 09:37 PM

They are only neck and neck because they ripped of pages from Obama's book in a pale imitation of his "change" and their bitchin about "experience" is now utterly undermined since the Palin nomination.

Sad when you have to steal from the oppositions playbook to win.

And doubly sad when supporters of McCain and Palin shout "USA, USA, USA", like they have a monopoly on patriotism.

Claydon

09-08-2008, 09:39 PM

The Batman

09-08-2008, 09:41 PM

Okay, more evidence of her fundamentalism has surfaced ..who has seen the time she addressed graduating seniors in a church and said that the a new oil pipeline and the war in Iraq was "God's Will". Scary..

I'll post a link in a little while gotta go

awww crap.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/08/palin.pastor/index.html

"For more than two decades, current Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was a practicing Pentecostal."

Great, now she is a complete loon.
*I have many friends that are pentecostal. In fact I went to a pentecostal church in when I was searching for God, and by far these people are the wackiest. The whole talking in tongues thing is the craziest thing you will ever see.

The Batman

09-08-2008, 09:41 PM

Is it sad...clinton did it for 8 years and he is considered to be a great president.

I wouldn't say he stole, i would say he did what few people did, cross the party lines to get shit done. Thats all we need is someone willing to do whatever it takes to get shit done.

Claydon

09-08-2008, 09:43 PM

I wouldn't say he stole, i would say he did what few people did, cross the party lines to get shit done. Thats all we need is someone willing to do whatever it takes to get shit done.

welfare reform for which clinton was reviled by his party.

this was only done because of the switch in congress to the right .

Archetype

09-08-2008, 09:45 PM

Did she show her tits yet?

Debo

09-08-2008, 09:45 PM

welfare reform for which clinton was reviled by his party.

this was only done because of the switch in congress to the right .

Clinton vetoed the welfare bill...twice. He finally gave in the third time around.
http://www.senate.gov/~rpc/releases/1999/wf080599.htm

Claydon

09-08-2008, 09:48 PM

Clinton vetoed the welfare bill...twice. He finally gave in the third time around.
http://www.senate.gov/~rpc/releases/1999/wf080599.htm

was this before or after the change in congress?

The Batman

09-08-2008, 09:50 PM

welfare reform for which clinton was reviled by his party.

this was only done because of the switch in congress to the right .

Then I would say that's a positive thing, right? Isn't that what we need? someone who doesn't care about this partisan crap and only cares about what matters?
Bush veto's EVERYTHING that came across his desk that the democrats proposed because he had no notion of what getting things done is like.

Claydon

09-08-2008, 09:52 PM

Then I would say that's a positive thing, right? Isn't that what we need? someone who doesn't care about this bipartisan crap and only cares about what matters?
Bush veto's EVERYTHING that came across his desk that the democrats proposed because he had no notion of what getting things done is like.

Like a appropriations bill that attempted to usurp executive authority with regards to US forces in Iraq, or like a massive expansion of the so called SCHIP program? Or the insanely bloated 300 billion farm bill?

Debo

09-08-2008, 10:03 PM

was this before or after the change in congress?

From my link:

After his second welfare reform veto, Clinton praised Wisconsin's welfare reform plan and promised a federal waiver. Here's what that plan's architect, Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson, had to say about Clinton: "Four years after promising to end welfare, the president is bragging about a piecemeal, Washington-knows-best waiver process. We can't end the 50-year social disaster called welfare by handing out one waiver at a time." (5/18/96)

The Batman

09-08-2008, 10:04 PM

Like a appropriations bill that attempted to usurp executive authority with regards to US forces in Iraq, or like a massive expansion of the so called SCHIP program? Or the insanely bloated 300 billion farm bill?

I am pretty sure there is a long list of stupid bills that the republicans have tried to pass....

Debo

09-08-2008, 10:05 PM

Then I would say that's a positive thing, right? Isn't that what we need? someone who doesn't care about this bipartisan crap and only cares about what matters?

This statement doesn't even make sense. You claim that we need someone who doesn't care about bipartisan crap, but then you state that Clinton working with the GOP is a positive thing. Am I missing something?

BIG PIZZLE

09-08-2008, 10:14 PM

Yes you are. Clinton is a democrat.

leafsmack0

09-08-2008, 10:23 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DX06URJvCew

The Batman

09-08-2008, 10:23 PM

This statement doesn't even make sense. You claim that we need someone who doesn't care about bipartisan crap, but then you state that Clinton working with the GOP is a positive thing. Am I missing something?

When I say not caring about the partisan crap, I am referring to someone who doesn't take sides, someone who just wants to get stuff done.

Debo

09-08-2008, 10:27 PM

When I say not caring about the bipartisan crap, I am referring to someone who doesn't take sides, someone who just wants to get stuff done.

Isn't that the definition of bipartisan? You need to substitute bipartisan with partisan in your statement.

The Batman

09-08-2008, 10:28 PM

Isn't that the definition of bipartisan? You need to substitute bipartisan with partisan in your statement.

yeah, i realized that. thanks.

Debo

09-08-2008, 10:34 PM

yeah, i realized that. thanks.

Man. I thought that I was going crazy there for a minute.

Cornelius

09-08-2008, 11:19 PM

Does anyone feel that they have proved their point? Shit this thread got boring when everyone simply started ranting.

nirvanasaves

09-08-2008, 11:33 PM

Secretary of State Rice passed on an opportunity to endorse Palin and her foreign policy experience and simply stated "she gave a terrific speech".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rOhCDSvQN0

Rice seems to hold Biden in higher regard stating "Biden is obviously a very fine statesman."

Hanover Fist

09-08-2008, 11:37 PM

Well it would be kind of dumb to endorse her foreign policy experience since everyone knows she doesn't have any and if she had endorsed it the liberal morons would be screaming about that. Clearly not an important factor to McCain in selecting her. Thankfully it won't matter. Biden has foreign policy experience but it mostly consists of talking a lot and being wrong on things.

Okie Medicvet

09-09-2008, 02:22 AM

awww crap.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/08/palin.pastor/index.html

"For more than two decades, current Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was a practicing Pentecostal."

Great, now she is a complete loon.
*I have many friends that are pentecostal. In fact I went to a pentecostal church in when I was searching for God, and by far these people are the wackiest. The whole talking in tongues thing is the craziest thing you will ever see.

The church she CURRENTLY goes to, the minister and founder of Jews for Jesus says that Israel is getting judgement from God.

You can't make shit like this up...!

Debo

09-09-2008, 06:34 AM

The church she CURRENTLY goes to, the minister and founder of Jews for Jesus says that Israel is getting judgement from God.

You can't make shit like this up...!

I would suggest leaving where the candidates went to church out of the discussion. I am sure that Obama has a pastor or two that he would like everyone to forget about.

Mr. Brown

09-09-2008, 07:17 AM

Um no we should talk about her church since it's suppose to be an even playing field. So we can bash the hell out of Obama back then but now we have to leave "personal affairs" alone. That's b.s.

heelsguy

09-09-2008, 08:18 AM

anyone know the schedule and quantity of the Prez and VP debates?

kid_vidrio

09-09-2008, 08:22 AM

Palin's per diem and charges for nights at home - still only 25% of predecessor...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/08/AR2008090803088.html?wpisrc=newsletter

The Batman

09-09-2008, 09:42 AM

It just keeps getting better with this lady.
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1839724,00.html?xid=site-cnn-partner

"Back to reality. Of the 50 states, Alaska ranks No. 1 in taxes per resident and No. 1 in spending per resident. Its tax burden per resident is 21/2 times the national average; its spending, more than double. The trick is that Alaska's government spends money on its own citizens and taxes the rest of us to pay for it. Although Palin, like McCain, talks about liberating ourselves from dependence on foreign oil, there is no evidence that being dependent on Alaskan oil would be any more pleasant to the pocketbook. "
"As if it couldn't support itself, Alaska also ranks No. 1, year after year, in money it sucks in from Washington. In 2005 (the most recent figures), according to the Tax Foundation, Alaska ranked 18th in federal taxes paid per resident ($5,434) but first in federal spending received per resident ($13,950). Its ratio of federal spending received to federal taxes paid ranks third among the 50 states, and in the absolute amount it receives from Washington over and above the amount it sends to Washington, Alaska ranks No. 1. "

Smokestack

09-09-2008, 09:51 AM

Biden has foreign policy experience but it mostly consists of talking a lot and being wrong on things.

Sounds a lot like a certain presidential candidate, too. Tap that experience into my veins!

Smokestack

09-09-2008, 10:19 AM

Looks like Palin's Bridge to Nowhere lies are starting to get comprehensively reported in the press:

Newsweek: http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2008/09/08/politics-of-the-bridge-to-nowhere.aspx
Washington Post: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/08/claiming_the_maverick_brand.html#more
AP: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/B/BRIDGE_TO_NOWHERE_FACT_CHECK?SITE=TXHOU&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Wall St Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122090791901411709.html

Waiting for the McCain's response about sexism...

kid_vidrio

09-09-2008, 11:23 AM

In 2005 (the most recent figures), according to the Tax Foundation, Alaska ranked 18th in federal taxes paid per resident ($5,434) but first in federal spending received per resident ($13,950). Its ratio of federal spending received to federal taxes paid ranks third among the 50 states, and in the absolute amount it receives from Washington over and above the amount it sends to Washington, Alaska ranks No. 1. "
To be fair, she was not the Guv in 2005 or before.

Hanover Fist

09-09-2008, 04:02 PM

Heheh, nice photoshops here.
http://www.freakingnews.com/Sarah-Palin-Pictures---2099.asp

nom nom nom
http://i36.tinypic.com/30l322g.jpg

The Batman

09-09-2008, 06:22 PM

I masturbated to Sarah Palin.
http://gorillamask.net/gm_media.php?show_page=video&page_id=18886

leafsmack0

09-09-2008, 06:43 PM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/deadlineusa/2008/sep/03/juneauorjuno

The comparison has been made ad nauseam already (http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/sarahpalin/ig/Sarah-Palin-Pictures/Bristol-Palin-Juneau.htm), but the saga of Bristol Palin (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/02/uselections2008.palin) is eerily similar to the plot of last year's award-winning movie Juno. Are we missing any similarities here?

Pharon

09-09-2008, 06:52 PM

I feel bad for Bristol. She didn't ask for any of this, and I'm sure that this pregnancy is stressful enough for her already without having to deal with millions of people talking about it.

leafsmack0

09-09-2008, 07:00 PM

Debo

09-09-2008, 09:29 PM

I am sure that everyone already knows this, but apparently McCain and Palin are using secret codes (http://wcbstv.com/politics/paterson.mccain.palin.2.813646.html) when they talk about Obama.

Genius

09-09-2008, 10:26 PM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/deadlineusa/2008/sep/03/juneauorjuno
Juno was way more annoying than any person I've ever met in my life. My God that movie was fucking awful. The fact that people even dare to bring that movie up in the same sentence as Little Miss Sunshine does a major disservice to cinema in general. Fuck Juno.

BIG PIZZLE

09-09-2008, 10:27 PM

I feel bad for Bristol. She didn't ask for any of this, and I'm sure that this pregnancy is stressful enough for her already without having to deal with millions of people talking about it.

What about the dude. One minute you're banging on some sweet tail and the next minute you're the most famous babydady/fiance in america.

kareyn01

09-09-2008, 10:28 PM

I am sure that everyone already knows this, but apparently McCain and Palin are using secret codes (http://wcbstv.com/politics/paterson.mccain.palin.2.813646.html) when they talk about Obama.

I'm not saying that Paterson is right, but what other logic or reason do they have to literally make a joke of Obama's work as a community organizer? How, specifically, do you compare community organizing to being a small town mayor in the way that they have? Palin's current job is Governor of Alaska, Obama's is Senator from Illinois. Prior to that, Palin was mayor of Wasilla, Obama was an Illinois State Senator. Prior to THAT Palin was on the Wasilla city council, Obama was a Con. Law Professor at Chicago U. Before entering politics, Palin was sportscaster, and Obama was a community organizer.

You can't just pick jobs randomly from people's past and compare them with jobs that don't conform to the timeline. No matter what you think of "secret codes", Palin's and Giuliani's making a mockery of community organizing is a joke. Its almost up there with John McCain's daughter saying that "no one knows what war is like but my family-period" earlier today.

Pharon

09-09-2008, 10:32 PM

What about the dude. One minute you're banging on some sweet tail and the next minute you're the most famous babydady/fiance in america.
Yeah, that poor bastard's life is over.

Debo

09-09-2008, 10:40 PM

I'm not saying that Paterson is right, but what other logic or reason do they have to literally make a joke of Obama's work as a community organizer? How, specifically, do you compare community organizing to being a small town mayor in the way that they have? Palin's current job is Governor of Alaska, Obama's is Senator from Illinois. Prior to that, Palin was mayor of Wasilla, Obama was an Illinois State Senator. Prior to THAT Palin was on the Wasilla city council, Obama was a Con. Law Professor at Chicago U. Before entering politics, Palin was sportscaster, and Obama was a community organizer.

You can't just pick jobs randomly from people's past and compare them with jobs that don't conform to the timeline. No matter what you think of "secret codes", Palin's and Giuliani's making a mockery of community organizing is a joke. Its almost up there with John McCain's daughter saying that "no one knows what war is like but my family-period" earlier today.

It seems to me that Patterson is simply says that mocking Obama's time as a community organizer is insulting to black people. How? I have no idea.

It your other points, they mocked his title of community organizer because it is the only only that requires decision making. I agree that Palin is jumping from AAA ball to the majors. But at least she has been in charge of a community before (not just organizing a community).

Obama's time as a professor is just that...time teaching. And his time in the state senate is less of a qualification than Palin's as mayor of Wasilla.

When you mention his time in the US Senate, you should point out that he has spent the majoirty of his time in office running for POTUS. Rudy and Palin did a fine job of highlighting this points in their speeches.

kareyn01

09-09-2008, 10:50 PM

It seems to me that Patterson is simply says that mocking Obama's time as a community organizer is insulting to black people. How? I have no idea.

It your other points, they mocked his title of community organizer because it is the only only that requires decision making. I agree that Palin is jumping from AAA ball to the majors. But at least she has been in charge of a community before (not just organizing a community).

1) Palin's and Giuliani's derision of community organizers is insulting to a lot of people who have a lot of different backgrounds, who have either been community organizers themselves (including Bush I's 1000 Points of Light) or those that have been helped by community organizers.

I think that a lot of African Americans view it as a specific attack on the black community because the vast majority of organizing groups are either based in traditionally minority neighborhoods, or have strong historical links with the black community through the civil rights movement.

2) You saying Obama's only position that required decision making is community organizer is not only wrong (not to mention truly moronic), but the logic its based on would necessarily imply that John McCain has also never held a position that required decision making, and by extension neither had John F. Kennedy or Abraham Linclon, both of whose most advanced experience was as a US Senator.

BIG PIZZLE

09-09-2008, 10:51 PM

Yeah, that poor bastard's life is over.

It could also be a pretty sweet meal ticket. In this situation, I think he should develop a coke habit. Easy divorce or doing a lot of coke on uncle sam's dime. It's win/win baby.

Pharon

09-09-2008, 10:53 PM

It could also be a pretty sweet meal ticket. In this situation, I think he should develop a coke habit. Easy divorce or doing a lot of coke on uncle sam's dime. It's win/win baby.
You're always thinking 3 steps ahead. I like that.

Debo

09-09-2008, 11:01 PM

1) Palin's and Giuliani's derision of community organizers is insulting to a lot of people who have a lot of different backgrounds, who have either been community organizers themselves (including Bush I's 1000 Points of Light) or those that have been helped by community organizers.

I think that a lot of African Americans view it as a specific attack on the black community because the vast majority of organizing groups are either based in traditionally minority neighborhoods, or have strong historical links with the black community through the civil rights movement.

2) You saying Obama's only position that required decision making is community organizer is not only wrong (not to mention truly moronic), but the logic its based on would necessarily imply that John McCain has also never held a position that required decision making, and by extension neither had John F. Kennedy or Abraham Linclon, both of whose most advanced experience was as a US Senator.

I said that it is the only one that requires decision making because when you are a member of the senate you cannot dictate the agenda of the senate unless you are the senate majority leader. The committee that Obama headed up never did much of anything.

In contrast, as a mayor or as a governor you a required to be the final word. In a sense the buck stops with Palin and the buck doesn't even know who Obama is.

Your points about applying my logic to senators is why senators make bad candidates for POTUS and why governors make good candidates for POTUS.

How is that for moronic?

P.S. Learn to spell Lincoln correctly.

heelsguy

09-09-2008, 11:03 PM

1) but the logic its based on would necessarily imply that John McCain has also never held a position that required decision making, .

so, being in the military does not require any decision-making and leadership and responsibility?

obama has not been singularly responsible for anything until this campaign.

Debo

09-09-2008, 11:06 PM

so, being in the military does not require any decision-making and leadership and responsibility?

obama has not been singularly responsible for anything until this campaign.

But he is in charge of his campaign!! Doesn't that count for anything?

kareyn01

09-09-2008, 11:41 PM

so, being in the military does not require any decision-making and leadership and responsibility?

obama has not been singularly responsible for anything until this campaign.

That wasn't my logic, that was Debo's. And again, by his logic that only executive experience counts for anything, especially decision making, wouldn't that mean that McCain hasn't been "singularly responsible" for anything in his political career either?

Governors make good presidents? You consider Bush a good president? And I'm going to say that Lincoln, Truman, and Kennedy were all fairly respectable presidents coming out of the Senate.

freegood

09-09-2008, 11:55 PM

You're always thinking 3 steps ahead. I like that.

The 3rd step to Pizz is always in some form of unshakable coke habit.

Ghostrider

09-10-2008, 01:17 AM

Feng

09-10-2008, 02:03 AM

Palin makes me stand at attention!

URFloorMatt

09-10-2008, 02:47 AM

When you mention his time in the US Senate, you should point out that he has spent the majoirty of his time in office running for POTUS.

No, he hasn't. I'm not sure where this claim got started, but my guess is whoever writes the Republican talking points probably can't count worth a damn. Obama was elected in 2004, not 2006. From January 2005 until February 2007, he was not running for president. In fact, you might say Obama has spent more time in the Senate not running for President (25 months) than Sarah Palin has spent being Governor of Alaska (21 months).

I guess you could be cynical and say "He's always been running for president." But then you run up against that curious and unfortunate reality that John McCain actually did run for president in 2000. That puts him at 8 years and counting, with no results. God forbid he should take over our armed forces with that kind of track record.

freegood

09-10-2008, 09:44 AM

I am sure that everyone already knows this, but apparently McCain and Palin are using secret codes (http://wcbstv.com/politics/paterson.mccain.palin.2.813646.html) when they talk about Obama.

Apparently the McCain campaign would rather Palin call herself a female dog than have any hint of Obama calling her a pig.
yZd_Y_D-RaA

/fake outrage

JohnQRotten

09-10-2008, 09:56 AM

Personally I think the community organizer thing is just something to get people comparing Barak to Jesse Jackson or AL Sharpton. And it plays into the inexperience thing. It is better to have an inexperienced number 2 than in the number one office. If it works for McCain, Palin will have 4 years of experience under her belt when she battles Hillary for the presidency in 2012. It is stange how it seems to be Palin vs Barak and the old grey's running with them are getting almost no real attention.

That's our youth-obsessed culture for ya! Plus, it seems like Americans are determined to elect a "first" this year, whether it be a black man or a woman. McCain was smart to jump on that train. If he'd picked just another white guy he wouldn't be getting even the secondhand attention he's getting now.

halfabubbleoff

09-10-2008, 12:51 PM

McCain was smart to jump on that train. If he'd picked just another white guy he wouldn't be getting even the secondhand attention he's getting now.

I think that hits it on the head there. It is all about Palin and Obama now. I have been waiting to hear the chorus yelling "flip-flop" to McCain for going from "Experience" to "Change" or for Palin being "for the Bridge before she was against it".

Call me jaded, but I figured out that it doesn't matter what party to are, the entire U.S political system is a big pile of mud. Both sides are filled with hypocrites and are backed by extremists.

Honestly, folks, we are electing these people to lie for us and to us. We don't want to know or need to know all the dirty things our nation has to do in order to survive. It comes down to who has the most charisma or makes us feel better about ourselves while they are doing it.

Everyone bashing Obama for his lack of experience ignores the fact that Palin has been Gov less time than McCain has been campaigning for president. Everyone calling the slams on Obama as veiled attempts at racism then use a lot of the same language to describe Palin's time in PTA or local government.

Both campaings pledged to keep this on the issues and not stoop to personal attacks, but they keep coming. Why do you think that is? Simple. That is all the public cares about. It is good theater. They want their leaders to tell them that their problems are someone else's fault. THey want to see powerful people they don't agree with dragged through the mud because it makes them feel better about themselves.

The end result is leaders like Bush on the right and Kennedy on the left. Pretty soon this will be an entire nation run by failed used car salesmen.

(sorry, folks, that turned into a rant quicker than I thought)

Pharon

09-10-2008, 01:17 PM

Everyone bashing Obama for his lack of experience ignores the fact that Palin has been Gov less time than McCain has been campaigning for president.
QFT.

JohnQRotten

09-10-2008, 02:52 PM

I think that hits it on the head there. It is all about Palin and Obama now. I have been waiting to hear the chorus yelling "flip-flop" to McCain for going from "Experience" to "Change" or for Palin being "for the Bridge before she was against it".

Call me jaded, but I figured out that it doesn't matter what party to are, the entire U.S political system is a big pile of mud. Both sides are filled with hypocrites and are backed by extremists.

Honestly, folks, we are electing these people to lie for us and to us. We don't want to know or need to know all the dirty things our nation has to do in order to survive. It comes down to who has the most charisma or makes us feel better about ourselves while they are doing it.

Everyone bashing Obama for his lack of experience ignores the fact that Palin has been Gov less time than McCain has been campaigning for president. Everyone calling the slams on Obama as veiled attempts at racism then use a lot of the same language to describe Palin's time in PTA or local government.

Both campaings pledged to keep this on the issues and not stoop to personal attacks, but they keep coming. Why do you think that is? Simple. That is all the public cares about. It is good theater. They want their leaders to tell them that their problems are someone else's fault. THey want to see powerful people they don't agree with dragged through the mud because it makes them feel better about themselves.

The end result is leaders like Bush on the right and Kennedy on the left. Pretty soon this will be an entire nation run by failed used car salesmen.

(sorry, folks, that turned into a rant quicker than I thought)

Exactly! At the end of the day we all just pick the man (or woman) we most want to see lie to us on TV for the next 4-8 years. Personally, I just consider who is least likely to use the red phone and vote accordingly.

The Batman

09-10-2008, 03:14 PM

Exactly! At the end of the day we all just pick the man (or woman) we most want to see lie to us on TV for the next 4-8 years. Personally, I just consider who is least likely to use the red phone and vote accordingly.

Does that mean no Batman for president?
http://www.likecool.com/Gear/Phone/Batman%20Phone/Batman-Phone.jpg

nirvanasaves

09-10-2008, 08:21 PM

Another Celebrity is voicing their opinion on the matter. Matt Damon likens a Palin Presidency to "a really bad Disney movie"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6urw_PWHYk

Hanover Fist

09-10-2008, 08:23 PM

Another Celebrity is voicing their opinion on the matter. Matt Damon likens a Palin Presidency to "a really bad Disney movie"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6urw_PWHYk

He was that one actor in Team America right?

I knew it
gnPWJOJYVKc

nirvanasaves

09-10-2008, 09:08 PM

Jason Bourne for President
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Aqe3EunuVYc&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Aqe3EunuVYc&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Debo

09-10-2008, 09:11 PM

Apparently the McCain campaign would rather Palin call herself a female dog than have any hint of Obama calling her a pig.
yZd_Y_D-RaA

/fake outrage

The video is dead.

I don't see anything wrong with using the expression "lipstick on a pig" we used it all the time when I was a broker. My problem is the pig comment together with this one:
"You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called 'change,' it's still going to stink," Obama said. "After eight years, we've had enough of the same old thing. It's time to bring about real change to Washington and that's the choice you've got in this election."From the WSJ:

This isn't the first time in a 24-hour period that lipstick has become an issue. As he was introducing Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Biden, Missouri Rep. Russ Carnahan said Palin had "zero experience in national government, zero experience in foreign affairs. There's no way you can dress up that record, even with a lot of lipstick."
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/09/09/obama-attacks-gop-tickets-mantra-of-change/

Taken together, one can infer that he was in fact talking about McCain and Palin. He might have gotten away with saying it once, but Carnahan stumping for Biden used it less than 24 hours before.

I am telling you, once Obama gets off script his impromptu speaking abilities are average at best.

Debo

09-10-2008, 10:38 PM

That wasn't my logic, that was Debo's. And again, by his logic that only executive experience counts for anything, especially decision making, wouldn't that mean that McCain hasn't been "singularly responsible" for anything in his political career either?

Governors make good presidents? You consider Bush a good president? And I'm going to say that Lincoln, Truman, and Kennedy were all fairly respectable presidents coming out of the Senate.

Governors make more electable Presidents because they can point to their accomplishments. The majority of our senators have a long track record of voting on various hot topic issues (e.g., guns, abortion, taxes, etc.) and they spend the majority of their tie defending their prior votes.

Meanwhile, governors can tailor their campaigns around their accomplishments as governor of their respective state.

Outside of Lincoln, Truman and Kennedy can you name any others that were senators? Right now we are talking about 3 out of 43 or 7% of the population pool. That is hardly enough to prove anything.

Calling Kennedy a respectable president is a joke. He wasn't even in office for a full term and he had several foreign policy blunders during his short time in office. He wasn't a good president or a bad president, he wasn't there long enough to judge him.

freegood

09-10-2008, 10:43 PM

The video is dead.

I don't see anything wrong with using the expression "lipstick on a pig" we used it all the time when I was a broker. My problem is the pig comment together with this one:
From the WSJ:

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/09/09/obama-attacks-gop-tickets-mantra-of-change/

Taken together, one can infer that he was in fact talking about McCain and Palin. He might have gotten away with saying it once, but Carnahan stumping for Biden used it less than 24 hours before.

I am telling you, once Obama gets off script his impromptu speaking abilities are average at best.

Meh... Carnahan could've said it off the cuff. I think it'll take more evidence to prove that it was a deliberate effort. A lot more to launch commercials accusing Obama of sexism, IMO.

Fake outrage doesn't suit Republicans....

Debo

09-10-2008, 10:50 PM

Meh... Carnahan could've said it off the cuff. I think it'll take more evidence to prove that it was a deliberate effort. A lot more to launch commercials accusing Obama of sexism, IMO.

Fake outrage doesn't suit Republicans....

It could be a coincidence or bad timing, who knows.

In the grand scheme of things, I think that this shows how PC we have really become as a nation. I do kind of wish that Palin came out an said that it is a non-issue. But, I understand why she is sitting back and letting Obama try to explain himself.

And I am amazed that nobody is talking about the old fish comment that followed the pig comment. Taken together, JM/SP could paint his comments as intentional if they wanted to since one could be assumed to be a shot at Palin and the other at McCain.

freegood

09-10-2008, 11:18 PM

It could be a coincidence or bad timing, who knows.

In the grand scheme of things, I think that this shows how PC we have really become as a nation. I do kind of wish that Palin came out an said that it is a non-issue. But, I understand why she is sitting back and letting Obama try to explain himself.

I do too... it would shit over the commercial (that dead Youtube link) the McCain campaign hastily brought out.

And I am amazed that nobody is talking about the old fish comment that followed the pig comment. Taken together, JM/SP could paint his comments as intentional if they wanted to since one could be assumed to be a shot at Palin and the other at McCain.

Because everyone and their two bit reporter cousin is still up in arms to protect that cuddly wuddly precious Governor of Alaska like she's some endangered panda.

Ooops, I described her as an animal.

freegood

09-10-2008, 11:23 PM

There's a reason why that Youtube link is dead....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080910/pl_politico/21051;_ylt=Ai8yg8IvRbIXqQniUav6sY.s0NUE

CBS takes down McCain webad, suggests it's 'misleading'

Ben Smith Wed Sep 10, 4:04 PM ET

YouTube (http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/politico/pl_politico/storytext/21051/29042872/SIG=10psi9dkb/*http://www.youtube.com/) has removed a webad that casts Sarah Palin as the victim of sexism on the request of CBS, whose anchor Katie Couric was featured in the ad.
ADVERTISEMENT
http://ad.yieldmanager.com/pixel?adv=23351&code=113;264;657;820&t=2http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=QYlRftG_Rt1aH0a.SF_qpgQHGBwIkEjIkIkACsP3&T=1aeup4ruq%2fX%3d1221103753%2fE%3d2023015362%2fR% 3dnews%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3 d143694850%2fH%3dY2FjaGVoaW50PSJuZXdzIiBjb250ZW50P SJBbWVyaWNhbjtIaWxsYXJ5IENsaW50b247dmlkZW87cmVmdXJ sX2Jic19jbHV0Y2hmYW5zX25ldCIgcmVmdXJsPSJyZWZ1cmxfY mJzX2NsdXRjaGZhbnNfbmV0IiB0b3BpY3M9InJlZnVybF9iYnN fY2x1dGNoZmFuc19uZXQi%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d3B47BFD1&U=13f96uf9c%2fN%3d_zriCtG_fyk-%2fC%3d674272.12808346.13086337.11951997%2fD%3dRMP %2fB%3d5236828%2fV%3d1
http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=QYlRftG_Rt1aH0a.SF_qpgQHGBwIkEjIkIkACsP3&T=1ae10q25d%2fX%3d1221103753%2fE%3d2023015362%2fR% 3dnews%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3 d476711562%2fH%3dY2FjaGVoaW50PSJuZXdzIiBjb250ZW50P SJBbWVyaWNhbjtIaWxsYXJ5IENsaW50b247dmlkZW87cmVmdXJ sX2Jic19jbHV0Y2hmYW5zX25ldCIgcmVmdXJsPSJyZWZ1cmxfY mJzX2NsdXRjaGZhbnNfbmV0IiB0b3BpY3M9InJlZnVybF9iYnN fY2x1dGNoZmFuc19uZXQi%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d3B47BFD1&U=13g8naam5%2fN%3dADviCtG_fyk-%2fC%3d624324.12915176.13166095.11952034%2fD%3dSIP R%2fB%3d5393528%2fV%3d1http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=QYlRftG_Rt1aH0a.SF_qpgQHGBwIkEjIkIkACsP3&T=1afcrupsa%2fX%3d1221103753%2fE%3d2023015362%2fR% 3dnews%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3 d2499968321%2fH%3dY2FjaGVoaW50PSJuZXdzIiBjb250ZW50 PSJBbWVyaWNhbjtIaWxsYXJ5IENsaW50b247dmlkZW87cmVmdX JsX2Jic19jbHV0Y2hmYW5zX25ldCIgcmVmdXJsPSJyZWZ1cmxf YmJzX2NsdXRjaGZhbnNfbmV0IiB0b3BpY3M9InJlZnVybF9iYn NfY2x1dGNoZmFuc19uZXQi%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d3B47BFD1&U=13fs0s40a%2fN%3d.TriCtG_fyk-%2fC%3d674272.12804817.13083710.1414694%2fD%3dLREC %2fB%3d5406486%2fV%3d1
“One of the great lessons of that campaign is the continued and accepted role of sexism in American life," Couric is quoted in the ad.
In the original clip, which aired months before Palin entered the race, Couric was talking about Hillary Clinton. The ad applies her words to Palin.
Asked about the ad, CBS spokeswoman Leigh Farris said, "CBS News does not endorse any candidate in the Presidential race. Any use of CBS personnel in political advertising that suggests the contrary is misleading."
YouTube's page displaying the ad now tells visitors, "This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by CBS Interactive Inc."
Couric's original commentary can be seen here. McCain still has the ad, "Lipstick," on his website.

_________

Free press for McCain's website!!

Rover

09-10-2008, 11:45 PM

Taken together, one can infer that he was in fact talking about McCain and Palin. He might have gotten away with saying it once, but Carnahan stumping for Biden used it less than 24 hours before.

I am telling you, once Obama gets off script his impromptu speaking abilities are average at best.I believe the lipstick comment Obama made was an honest mistake. What I think happened is that the campaign was kicking around ideas of what to do about Palin and someone made a "pig with lipstick" comment, everyone laughed, and said, "We can't do that, but it's funny." So, Obama's tired and made a slip of the tongue. What he should have done is corrected himself as soon as he saw how it was playing to the crowd. The crowd got the joke. Just look at them. They know what he 'meant'. Obama should have immediately said something like: I, uh, well, that was, uh <long pause>, not what, um, you know, I meant. That was, uh, <longer pause> meant, uh, not meant, you know, that, uh, way. I <longest pause>, you know, that, uh, didn't come, um, out, uh, correctly.

Because everyone and their two bit reporter cousin is still up in arms to protect that cuddly wuddly precious Governor of Alaska like she's some endangered panda.

Ooops, I described her as an animal.
Well, it's natural for reporters to over correct themselves. They spent the first 5 days reporting on every rumor as fact. Whether she's banning books, or fighting for Alaskan independence, or secretly covering up her daughter's pregnancy by raising the baby as her own. Now they're a little bit scared to report on her. As they should be.

Atrevido82

09-10-2008, 11:47 PM

Pardon me if this has been said already: What an incredibly cynical choice by the Republican party. Fuck them - and I'm registered repub...

marquis

09-10-2008, 11:54 PM

I believe the lipstick comment Obama made was an honest mistake. What I think happened is that the campaign was kicking around ideas of what to do about Palin and someone made a "pig with lipstick" comment, everyone laughed, and said, "We can't do that, but it's funny." So, Obama's tired and made a slip of the tongue. What he should have done is corrected himself as soon as he saw how it was playing to the crowd. The crowd got the joke. Just look at them. They know what he 'meant'. Obama should have immediately said something like: I, uh, well, that was, uh <long pause>, not what, um, you know, I meant. That was, uh, <longer pause> meant, uh, not meant, you know, that, uh, way. I <longest pause>, you know, that, uh, didn't come, um, out, uh, correctly.

Well, it's natural for reporters to over correct themselves. They spent the first 5 days reporting on every rumor as fact. Whether she's banning books, or fighting for Alaskan independence, or secretly covering up her daughter's pregnancy by raising the baby as her own. Now they're a little bit scared to report on her. As they should be.

Obama's comment had nothing to do with Palin. What he said was (referring to McCain's "we are for change" bs) "...John McCain is saying 'Watch out Pres. Bush, except on Economic policy, Education policy, Foreign policy, etc.' You know you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig."

He never mantioned Palin at all in that statement. And everyone there knows it. Anyone who listened to the entire clip and not just "lipstick on a pig" knows it.