So, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is emerging as the possible VEEP candidate for McCain. While I’m a Romney supporter, I like the Dark Horse approach. She’s young, attractive, smart, and — perhaps very importantly in this campaign — a woman. Looking over her record, I think she’s a candidate that conservatives could get behind, courting the support there that McCain would need, and also chipping away at Obama’s advantage among female voters.
The downside, is that there’s still some gender bigotry out there so it may turn a few away — but those are unlikely to translate into Obama votes. Also, I’m not sure that she brings the fundraising ability that a Romney pick would have provided, something McCain probably needs to beat the well-funded Obama. A fresh face can be as big a liability as it is an asset, and I think every effort will be made to make her look like a ditzy beauty queen. So that’s a potential problem as well.
I’m admittedly biased, but I think Sarah Palin will do far more for McCain’s campaign than Joe Biden is doing for Obama’s. This is so much fun to watch!
Popularity: 38%
Related posts:
It WAS all he had to say about it!
:@:)
Loading ...
{ 354 comments… read them below or add one }
Mitt would be the better money choice, that’s an easy one. But that fluctuating fraction (about 20%?) that wouldn’t vote for a mormon would kill them. It must have been a smaller percentage that will not vote for a woman. It’s a good choice to get a fresh face because we Republicans keep getting bashed for lack of change. She seems nice. Good enough for me.
I don’t know much about Ms. Palin. I am sure we will all find out soon on how she stands on issues that we are facing as a Nation. I do know this, she has more experience and time under her belt in Government than what the Democratic Presidential Candidate has. With the background and the experience that the Republican ticket possesses, regardless of the race or gender that involved, I feel more optimistic about their ability to make the difficult choices about the direction our country needs to head.
I understand she’s a conservative pro-life candidate, so I wonder if she’s one of the 40% (or so) of Americans who think evolution is scientific bunk.
If she is, I can’t wait until Stewart/Colbert get ahold of that. Great fun for all to watch!
Biden will have a fine line to walk when their debate comes, but I’m sure he’ll do just fine.
Is this woman the best candidate to take over as President, should something happen to McCain?
Channel 6 reports she is a native of Sandpoint, Idaho and a graduate of the U of Idaho in 1987 with a degree in Journalism. I’ll have to look more at her political record, but initially I’d like to say “Yeah, you go girl!!” from one Idaho gal to another!
Wow…the info about this woman is coming fast & furious! Under investigation for improper conduct concerning a state trooper, opposes a woman’s right to choose in the case of rape or incest, doesn’t even know what the office of VP entails!
Any woman who was a Hillary supporter sure isn’t going to change tickets just because of Sarah Palin. It’s obvious that McCain figured any woman on his ticket would woo those voters, and boy did he get it wrong again!
Ooh_child, I don’t know where you are getting your information from or if you are embelishing it a little, but from what I am reading on CNN and MSN it not really the way you are presenting it. She is pro-life, HOORAY, but I don’t see anywhere where she is stating that she doesn’t agree to abortion in the specific cases of rape or incest. I am looking forward to finding out what this State Trooper thing is all about. I hope that we get the true story of it instead of some spin on it that makes the issue appear different than it truly is.
Hey, did anyone watch when Bill Clinton when he was talking about his support of Barack Obama the other night and that the 8 years in the office of President had shown him that Obama was the man for the office? Does anyone remember all of the dirt that Clinton was involved in? I could start listing it all, but it would take a long, long, extremenly long time. In short, anyone that Bill Clinton endorses is not for me, and anyone that would accept an endorsement from Bill Clinton is not for me.
What does anyone else think?
We were talking about that exact same thing this morning at work Porter. (re: your second paragraph)
Unbelievable! All the mud slinging Clinton was throwing at Obama during the campaign, and now saying “he’s the best man for the job” is just too funny!
That is awesome an Idaho native and a University of Idaho Vandal is on the top ticket. She is a babe, hands down.
From what I’ve read, the state trooper firing issue was not her fault, a staffer acted without her permission, and she punished the staffer (as opposed to Bush’s promise to fire anyone involved in leaking classified information then backpedaling when it turned out Rove/Cheney leaked and Bush selectively declassified). Find a real problem with Palin if you want, but this won’t be it.
I was disappointed in Obama’s choice of Biden. I am less inclined to vote for Obama since he picked a guy who is part of the problem in Washington. However I am just as disappointed in McCain’s choice of someone who’s only experience is a 4-year mayor, 1 year commission head, and 1.5 year governor. Does she even have her direct deposit paychecks set up yet?
We are again faced with the lesser of two evils in this campaign instead of the better of two outstanding candidates. Palin seems a desperate choice by Grandpa McSame. I think it shows he is not the true conservative people’s choice, he is merely the party product. Why not a truer conservative choice like Romney or Huckabee or brother Bush?
Obama for the win in November as a result.
I take some of that back. It appears she was a councilwoman for 4 years, and mayor about 6 years (though the information is vague).
At first I thought her ethics crusade bit was nothing, (thinking what that’s her only accomplishment?), but reading about it on her wikipedia page it appears she really truly bucked the party system to turn in some corrupt officials. That raises her stature in my view. As mayor she also reduced her own salary and cut property taxes 60%. She has also stood up to the corrupt Senator Ted Stevens (Idaho politicians should take a cue on this when they reflect how they did NOT stand up to Larry Craig the pervert.)
I’m now thinking Palin may be the better choice over McCain! Is there still time to swap them?
Excellent thoughts, Guest. And very even-handed.
Wow, this is going to be a great thread. I hope everyone will keep the debate up in an appropriate manner and this won’t turn into a name calling session. I am going to love to read the many different oppinions about this issue, and can’t wait to give mine. This is a perfect topic at a perfect time in our country. Thanks for starting it up Open Mind. I look forward to following this.
On April 18, 2008, while in office as governor, Palin gave birth to her second son and fifth child, Trig Paxson Van Palin, who has Down syndrome.[66] She returned to the office three days after giving birth.[13] Her decision to have the baby after prenatal genetic testing revealed he had the disorder was applauded by the pro-life community. — From Wikipedia
Sort of interesting given the discussion in Candid.
Hi Just an Observer….I was thinking the same thing. . . quite coincidental. . .
This discussion has been great. . . .
Here is a link to the current ethics investigation against Palin. She ordered the director of Alaskan public safety to fire her ex brother in law after he divorced Palin’s sister. The director refused saying there was no reason to fire him so Palin fired the director. And this is the woman conservatives are willing to risk being president. . . . . very scary.
http://www.ktva.com/ci_10026165
Anonymous, thanks for the link. If anyone hasn’t had the time to read through that, it is worth your time. I am looking forward to the outcome of the investigation. Again, thank you.
Well, I just her voice for the first time on the radio this afternoon. I hope the pundits harp on her shrill & grating tone as much as they harped on Hillary’s!
Still don’t know if she cackles……
The said thing is that we have come down to the voice or the laugh even being an issue.
I just wish substance were more valued than things we can snicker at (albeit I’m sure all those snickering folks have NICE snickers, not cackling snickers, right?…)
I meant “sad” thing, of course. aarrgghh.
Hi, Porter…
You said:
“I don’t know much about Ms. Palin. I am sure we will all find out soon on how she stands on issues that we are facing as a Nation. I do know this, she has more experience and time under her belt in Government than what the Democratic Presidential Candidate has.”
Obama has exactly same same amount of experience Abraham Lincoln had when he was elected President. Check out Wikipedia on both of them. Ms. Palin has much less than either.
As far as experience goes-
I’m curious if Ms. Palin has ever been out of the United States. I’m sure she must have stopped in Canada, but has she ever been overseas?
How much experience can such a young woman gather? She is the youngest in the entire field, and lives in Alaska, which isn’t exactly around the corner from the rest of the country.
Given that John McCain is 71, had cancer, and has his foggy moments in his town hall meetings right now, that One Heartbeat From the Presidency thing is more on my mind than when Dan Quayle occupied that spot. McCain was already badly crippled in his Hanoi Hilton stay before he entered politics, and 60 years of age hasn’t helped his other ailments any.
We already saw mental failure in Reagan’s last days, and he was in a lot better shape.
The other thing that concerns me deeply is Ms. Palin’s infant. The Vice-Presidency is not a Mommy job, period. I hate the thought of that baby being raised by a nanny.
As president of the Senate, the nest VP will have to be respected and connected to steer through a lot of tough legislature that will be part and parcel of this election. The Senate works on seniority, and Biden’s got that in spades. Palin has none whatsoever.
That the women who voted for Hillary will readily switch to the Republicans just ain’t gonna happen. The media tried to make this much more an issue than it really was, and the convention settled the matter once and for all.
Those ladies are Democrats first, and came to the party for the same reasons disaffected men did. Hillary couldn’t have made this more clear in her speach, which concluded with “No More! No Way! No McCain!”
This campaign has already descended into cynicsm, snark, and fear tactics. It all boils down to this:
Are we ready to face the 21st Century or not?
Right now, we have one party that definitely laid down that they were ready.
So far, the other party is still re-playing the tactics that worked in 1994. So far, it’s the 20th Century vs. the 21st, and clocks don’t run backwards.
Those who are fearful of the future always want to go back to the nostalgic past, and those who aren’t look forward. Either way, 14 years ago is close to a full generation, and 1994 ain’t coming back, ever.
If conservative thinking doesn’t adjust, the Republican party will become as relevant as the Whigs by the 2012 election.
By then, all those kids born in 1994 will be old enough to vote.
Do you think Ms. Palin has the right stuff?
Hello Boomer,
I think that is a great post. It is my belief that neither team is up for the battle that we face as a nation in the 21st century. It is my belief that the Republican Candidate has a platform that the democrats had in years past and the current Democratic Candidate has a Socialist platform. Where are there any true Republicans in this race? It is my contention that there truly isn’t one.
As far as trying to compare Abraham Lincoln to either one of these candidates, it is to great of a stretch for me to make the comparison. President Lincoln lived in a much different time with a much different background than either of the candidates. I wish we had a President Lincoln in the race, he would have my vote. There are also comparisons that can be made to President Kennedy, his age, having kids in the White House etc., but here again I think the comparison can’t be made because the times and issues that are being faced by this country are to different and he was a father figure instead of a mother. That is my comparison only, nothing to reflect on what you have said.
From what I have seen, it is my understanding that Obama has been an active senator for about 143 days. Please correct me if I am wrong. Which would be less than any of the other individuals that are apart of this race.
The age issue with McCain is a pro and a con. With age comes experience, but also illness and other infirmities. With the Con, I then ask myself if McCain should ever come to a point where he is incapacitated or cannot fullfill his duties as President, could Palin replace him? I don’t know, I hope she would. I do however think that she would represent my values as an American better than Obama who seems to have a socialistic view.
I don’t want a government that fosters free health care, free housing, free food or free anything. I want a government that will enable people to have a good work ethic. I want a government that won’t take my freedoms away from becoming something from my own hard work instead of enslaving me with welfare to the point I can’t afford to get off of it. This is what you see in our big cities where there has been such an influx of Welfare help without any accountability from the people that are recieving it. You can find that within our own community. I don’t want anything free. I want the opportunity to work for it and then recieve the benefits of my hard work. Socialism is everything I don’t want. I don’t think that either candidate can give me the government I want so I am placed in a position of having to choose from the lesser of the two evils. In my opinion the lesser of the two evils would be McCain/Palin.
“The age issue with McCain is a pro and a con. With age comes experience, ”
Porter, that statement really means nothing. Experience is only good if used appropriately. As Nemesis stated in another post, this is starting to look like another episode of Wilde/Cook. Experience to do what? To create the same ol’ good ol’ boy, get rid of/kill our people? Makes no sense to me. He did vote much the same as Bush did and look at the mess that Bush has created. Bush and all of his experience certanly didn’t help us any. Anyone using that strategy probably isn’t going to sway my vote.
Age is an issue if the VP winds up running the Oval office. We are talking about a mother who admittedly has a mentally challenged young child. That’s time consuming! Or is she merely not too interested in that child and therefore the nanny’s can raise him?
And finally, don’t we all want a government that will enable people to have a good work ethic? You’re missing the whole point. What is enslaving some of these people to stay on welfare? Think about it. With prices of absolutely everything going through the roof, low-paying wages, the high cost of child care, lack of education, etc., most would figure it’s quite the no-win situation to go off. While the rich continue racking in the bucks, the destitute remain destitute. Would you agree?
Some of your posts confuse me as they seem to talk about the very things that most of us don’t want, but refer to the wrong candidate to fix it.
If you want the same thing in Government as I do hmm, then why are you backing a socialistic platform? That is what Obama is!!! I want a change too, but it is not to become a socialist country. I wish that we had a different candidate other than McCain, but he will get my vote for the simple fact he isn’t promoting socialism.
You and I are in absolute agreement that age is an issue and with what you mentioned on experience, very important.
McCain has supported Bush in areas that I have agreed with and I have disagreed with him in others. McCain’s experience in my mind still outweighs Obama’s lack of experience. When compared to the way that McCain has voted on issues vs. Obama, I will support the so called Republican platform. It best fits with my values.
As far as raising a disabled child in the White House should Palin ever become President, she would probably spend about as much time with that child as much as she does the rest of her children. I would hope that her Husband plays an active role in raising their children and assisting in the special needs of their disabled child. I do believe that her carrying the child to full term and then giving birth to that child backs up her stand on pro life which I am all for.
Hi, Porter…
Thanks for your thoughts.
Obama has been a Senator since the 2004 elections, and previously was in the Illinois House for 7 years. Before that, he wasn’t in politics as a profession. Lincoln had exactly the same political hisory- 7 years in Illinois, 1 term in the Senate. Both were political activists before first seeking election.
I didn’t mean to imply anything else at all by my remarks. I agree that trying to make any meaningful comparisons to a 19th century President to a candidate in the 21st century is a long stretch on most counts.
You may well be right in believing neither party is up to the tasks ahead. This election, far more than others in the past, is largely faith-based. Not in a religious way, but in faith that the fundamental beliefs of one party or the other will be close enough to guide us out of the mess we’re all in.
The choices have never been more starkly different, and this is the most crucial turning-point election I’ve ever participated in.
I also agree that neither party is what it once was. I’m not so sure as you in which ways they have changed, but I think that this election will cause even more shifts from the past in both of them; the one that shifts least will be the one that wins.
I used to be a conservative Republican, and I still believe in a lot of the once traditonal Repub values, especially on things fiscal and concerned with individual rights. I jumped the fence, though, when Jimmy Falwell started injecting religion into politics, back in 1980. Since I didn’t like Carter’s evangelical bent, or Reagan’s willingness to embrace them, I didn’t vote for either. I believe in strict seperation between Church and State. I’m not an atheist, either. The two simply don’t mix.
All I’m thinking now is that the old solutions to 20th century problems don’t work any more, from either side of the aisle. Obama was a big question mark for me a year ago, but since then, I’ve watched him, and I think he has the right stuff for me. I’m not as much concerned with experience as leadership, and I think he has lots of that.
My Mom, the real Democrat in the family, thought Hillary had the right stuff. My brother, the remaining Republican, thought McCain is the one. My sis won’t say what she thinks until after the election. My kids are all for Nader, and my best friend is going to vote for Ron Paul. My dog’s gonna vote for the poodle down the block.
There ya go… ain’t it grand! You can really make yer pick and take yer chances in this one.
CNN’s John Cafferty always asks listeners what they think on issues and they send in their answers…..today he asks what people think of McCain’s new running mate…a guy answers — what a crack up!
Jack,
I think John McCain just wants Sara Palin available for CPR.
Mike C
Wethersfield, CT
#23 you said: “I used to be a conservative Republican, and I still believe in a lot of the once traditonal Repub values, especially on things fiscal and concerned with individual rights. I jumped the fence, though, when Jimmy Falwell started injecting religion into politics, back in 1980.”
Thought you might enjoy these lyrics:
http://www.royzimmerman.com/lyrics/homeland_falwell.html
(Moderator note: changed lyrics to a link)
Hi, Observer…
Thanks for the link!
It about summed up my reasons, and it’s pretty funny in spots, too!
I believe in God, and I’m still religious — just not in the late Dr. Jerry’s version. I don’t know where he went, but I hope I go someplace different when my number’s up.
I hope my place has a few good dogs there, keeping the same good company with all my dear departeds that they gave me here.
Personally, I like the late Rev. Howard Finster’s preachings best… he preferred to paint them rather than preach them in his later years, after he had a vision, but he was powerful good either way.
Here’s a couple of his thoughts:
Heaven is full of nice people who love each other.
There are no cold Cokes in Hell. Even if there were, it would still be Hell.
People are always going to find something that they don’t like in candidates. However, what seems to be missing from this discussion is as important as experience……namely, integrity, and the ability to reform Washington. Both parties candidates appear to be concerned about the country and want to see the best for the United States.
In my estimation, the real ability to reform Washington rests with McCain and Palin. No one can point to one earmark McCain has ever attached to legislation. Palin told Congress to take the Bridge to Nowhere monies and keep them for something else. She also sold back a lear jet big oil gave to Alaska in the Frank Murkowski Administration. The fact that she turned in current and former Republican officials for ethics violations bodes well for her independence and ability to put the country first and party second. This is what the country needs and deserves. For too long both parties have taken all of us for a ride.
Think about it. McCain and Palin have not made friends from either party. This means they are doing their job and doing it without regard to the political consequences. This is how reform can and does happen….without regard for oneself. So, Obama can talk about how he is going to reform the system, but he is surrounding himself with a running mate and other political players that have been a part of the problem for 30 years or more. Senator Biden is a decent man, but he has played the game and been in the Senate longer than McCain. Obama’s mantle of change we can believe in is just that—a belief. McCain and Palin have served for the right reasons and to challenge the status quo and serve the common good. They have worked for reforms and will continue to do so. They constitute more of a threat to business as usual in Washington. McCain is not Bush and Palin is not Cheney. That Democratic talking point won’t work anymore. I am ecstatic that the Republicans have finally nominated candidates that aren’t Rockefeller Republicans that are just in it to take care of the fat cats and political donors.
This truly is a historic selection for many reasons. I look forward to the coming debates and the comparison and contrast(s) of positions. America will inevitably be served better by this election than many we have had in decades.
Comment #24: indicates that this quip is a “crack up”:
“Jack,
I think John McCain just wants Sara Palin available for CPR.
Mike C”
yep, blatant sexism is always a “crack up”!. I guess, as an attractive woman, her only value would be to do mouth to mouth.
Imagine if this joke were about Obama, and, instead of sexism, contained racism. . . would anyone really think that was funny?
It wasn’t so much sexism as a reference to his age, imo.
#28 easterner, you took offense at something that others thought was very funny. (In fact, I looked at that comment the same as you did, but I am a female and that might have something to do with how I viewed it.)
The situation reminds me of Idahogie on the “candid” thread…he was offended by something that others thought was very funny.
I hope that since it’s you making this comment, instead of him, that others will be more respectful of your viewpoint. Good luck with that…and have a great day.
Very well said Nemesis. But when the shoe is on the other foot, things change here.
How anti-semetic for anyone to point out anything about easterner. And maybe sexist, racist and age discriminatory as well. LOL
In August at a town hall meeting Senator McCain answered a woman’s question ,would he choose a pro-life VP? Answer was he would choose someone with his values(quote) And also went on to explain a job of the VP was only to look after Presidents health and well being and cast a tie vote. This kind of scares me when should something happens to the president the VP has to keep us safe and be Commander and Chief . The video I’m writing about was after August 16th when he and Senator Obama was at the church with Pastor Warren.If Senator McCain really believes a VP isn’t that important I think we are in trouble.
Hi, Bundy…
Most excellent comments!
We may disagree on our candidates and the outcome, but you pointed out McCain’s and Palin’s best strengths very well- the best and most carefully reasoned of any comments I’ve read so far.
Well done.
Fascism – a system of governance marked by centralization of authority under a dictator … supression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism (read IFTers) … oppressive, dictatorial control.
Yup, that describes the … er mods and eagle pretty much.
they’re now taking stuff off of live chat that disagrees with their view. cool!
#35, aren’t you a little bit backwards, my dear?
anon #32, loved your comment! You made my point for me!
Nem, I was actually just referencing back to the whole “Obama on the cover of New Yorker” post; if this comment had been directed at Obama’s race, rather than Palin’s sex, I do think an uproar would have ensued. . .
As you can see by the comments, “easterner” making this kind of “special interest” whine engendered the same reaction Idahogie or anyone else would have received.
My point is to show how silly it all is: I actually thought the statement was pretty funny, being an equal-opportunity slam: McCain’s age and Palin’s sex, all in one fell swoop.
yes m’am. just a backwards kinda soul is me!
??? I’m not a moderator….
or did I simply misunderstand Selohssa’s post?
selohssa’s name – kind of sounds like someone is ticked at everyone else if you read it backwards…..
I sense it’s the same 1-2 people, but I could always be wrong. If you are so angry at everyone here, esp the mods and Joe, maybe a calm break from internet time would help? A hobby to take the place of online posting? Works for me when I get tired of it.
reader, you rock!
I read that name several times, trying to figure it out. . . thought it was an anagram. . .
After McCain’s pick – it’s now over.
Short on experience.
Lacking in depth.
Limited on scope of political spectrum.
I think I’m watching ‘American Idol.’
The Ron Paul campaign has a lot more momentum!
and the winner is Nem, who figured it out in #36! Woooooooo Whoooooo!!!!!
Reference #42,
I beg to differ about experience. If you mean the experience to screw things up, not make things better, and fail to fix problems then the type of experience most politicians have is the real problem.
As for depth, I am not certain what you mean by that. Depth can and does mean many things. Mrs. Palin has a college degree, she played basketball and won a state championship, she has been a mother of many children who appear to be successful, happy, and focused. Her oldest is due to deploy with the US Army. Appears to me that she has taught her children the value of public service. She has been married 20 years. She has been a city councilperson and a mayor for over a decade of public service. She ran for governor against the Republican Party nominee and WON! She had the political and moral courage to turn in numerous Republican and Democratic officials, including a former Alaska Attorney General for ethics violations. She taxed Alaskan oil companies and returned the money to the people of Alaska ($1200 per citizen), she passed sweeping ethics reform laws as and advised Senator Ted Stevens to come clean on the FBI investigation against him for taking bribes.
I have no idea what you mean by “Limited Scope on Political Spectrum”. But if the argument is that she doesn’t have much experience in politics, then I would regard that as a plus. The public needs to stop taking the word of lawyers and political players that they are the only ones who can “represent” us. It is important to note that it doesn’t take an MBA or a Doctorate of Jurisprudence to make a good office holder. It takes someone with the integrity to make fair decisions, the ability and willingness to learn about the subject at hand and ask questions to find out if they don’t know what they need to. I don’t see Mrs. Palin as being ignorant of issues around her. She obviously is smart and intelligent to get where she is at and has not make shady backroom deals to get there. For me, that is a big plus. The other candidates can’t make these types of claims. So, if you want more of the same, elect lawyers Obama and Biden. If people truly want change and reform, the real deal is McCain and Palin.
Palin is a good woman, and a fine Governor. The fact that she’s a supporter and member of the NRA, and active participant of pro-life looks more than good, it’s very good; for Mr. McCain. It looks good, but probably won’t count on election day.
McCain’s biggest criticism of Obama is his lack of experience. So what does he do? He picks a running mate with less experience than even Obama has, or doesn’t have.
Palin, herself, stated how surprised she was that she’d been picked as a running mate, and that there were many politicians who were hoping for the chance as VP running mate (and she hadn’t even thought about it), and that they were all more qualified than she was. It appears, to me, that she was chosen to upstage Obama, and turn America’s attention back to McCain. Well done, that’s exactly what he accomplished. But that’s not going to get him elected.
Citizens of the U.S. of A. will now have to decide if they can trust in the rather grandiose promises of Obama, based on the need for change, or McCain’s obvious backpeddeling with no promises of anything.
Less than three months left to the longest presidential campaign period in U.S. history.
This is the experience and history the Obama can give us. I find this very interesting and it speaks volumes about where he wants to lead this country.
• He voted for partial birth abortion.
• He voted no on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state a bortions.
• Supports affirmative action in Colleges and Government (quotas).
• In 2001 he questioned harsh penalties for drug dealing as being too severe.
• Says he will deal with street level drug dealing as minimum wage affair.
• Admitted his use of marijuana and cocaine in high school and in college.
• His religious convictions ( murky at best).
• Has said that one of his first goals after being elected would be to have a conference with all Muslim nations. Why?
• Opposed the Patriot Act.
• First bill he signed that was ever passed was campaign finance reform.
• Voted to allow law suits against gun manufacturers.
• Supports universal health-care.
• Voted yes on providing habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees.
• Supports granting driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants.
• Supports extending welfare to illegal immigrants.
• Voted yes on comprehensive immigration reform.
• Voted yes on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social S ecurity.
• Wants to make the minimum wage a ‘living wage’.
• Is a big believer in the separation of church and state.
• Opposed to any efforts to Privatize Social Security and instead supports increasing the amount of tax paid into Soc. Sec. Tax Increase.
• He voted No on repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax which now hits middle income brackets. Tax Increase.
• He voted No on repealing the ‘Death’ Tax. Tax Increase.
• He wants to raise the Capital Gains Tax. Tax Increase.
• Has repeatedly said the surge in Iraq has not succeeded…which is not true.
• He is ranked as the most liberal Senator in the Senate today and that takes some doing.
We are not ever going to have or find a politician that we agree with 100%. There are several of the points listed above that I completely agree with, and several that I am dead set against. I really think that before we can really judge a candidate by his/her voting record, we need to understand the whole bill. Was there something in the bill that was not to our liking?
Somehow I hit the wrong key and my comment got posted before I was ready for it to happen, so to finish out —
I have been so unhappy with the way the world is going, the direction our politicians are leading us, the fact that they don’t think they have to listen to the people who put them in office and just everything in general that I have often threatened that when I go to the polls, I will not vote for any incumbent no matter what. I think we need new blood and new unspoiled leadership. Maybe a Obama/Palin ticket would be the answer. One liberal and one conservative. Think of the possibilities.
I like Mccaine and the Vice President that he picked. She seems smart and is willing to solve those problems. That said, that is all I have to say as I am a man of few words and reasons.
# 47
In the interest of being “fair and balanced” let’s take a look at McCain’s voting record with respect to the troops and veterens.
I’m not clever enough to put in the actual link so anyone interested will need to cut and paste this into a browser window:
http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/articleid/9559
“Not that many people know just how horrific his voting record is when it comes to the troops. And it is pretty consistent – whether it is for armor and equipment, for veteran’s health care, for adequate troop rest or anything that actually, you know, supports our troops.”
Here are a few highlights:
*** September 2007: McCain voted against the Webb amendment calling for adequate troop rest between deployments.
*** May 2006: McCain voted against an amendment that would provide $20 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for health care facilities.
*** April 2006: McCain was one of only 13 Senators to vote against $430,000,000 for the Department of Veteran Affairs for Medical Services for outpatient care and treatment for veterans.
*** March 2006: McCain voted against increasing Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in FY 2007 to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes.
*** October 2003: McCain voted to table an amendment by Senator Dodd that called for an additional $322,000,000 for safety equipment for United States forces in Iraq and to reduce the amount provided for reconstruction in Iraq by $322,000,000. ”
“John McCain is yet another republican former military veteran who likes to talk a big game when it comes to having the support of the military. Yet, time and time again, he has gone out of his way to vote against the needs of those who are serving in our military. If he can’t even see his way to actually doing what the troops want, or what the veterans need, and he doesn’t have the support of veterans, then how can he be a credible commander in chief?”
#47 in this post you said:
• [Obama] Is a big believer in the separation of church and state.
I don’t understand how can anyone think this is a bad thing. Perhaps someone can enlighten me.
I personally really like this quote by JFK:
“I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute; where no Catholic prelate would tell the President — should he be Catholic — how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote; where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference, and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him, or the people who might elect him.
I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish; where no public official either requests or accept instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source; where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials, and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all. “
Its a right wing sex ed success story. And a clear case of right wing hypocrisy.
The McCain camp is confirming that Palin’s underage daughter is five months pregnant. When it was Jaime Spears getting pregnant conservatives nationwide were up in arms about the moral decline of our country even though she decided to have her baby and marry the father. Now though when its Bristol Palin who is pregnant its suddenly a beautiful thing and an example of morality in action.
There are also some very strong rumors out there that Sarah Palin’s 4 month old baby with Down’s syndrome is actually Bristol’s as well. Sarah didn’t reveal to anyone that she was pregnant until less than one month before she allegedly gave birth. They claim Bristol is 5 months pregnant right now but depending on the actual timing it still could be possible.
Honestly, I think it is pretty low to jump on the “down’s- syndrome- baby-is-really-the-daughter’s-baby-because-Mom-never-looked-pregnant” Gasp! Add that to the urban legend about how Palin didn’t take proper precautions while pregnant and that’s why she had a Down’s syndrome baby. . . .http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/alerts/476
Repugnant. And scientifically idiotic (um, I think the theory that a mom travelling in her 9th month “causes” Down’s syndrom lost some steam when amniotic testing became available. . . assuming that ever was a theory!)
This is pretty low; both stories have already been debunked (and removed completely, in some cases!)on two liberal outlets, “daily kos” and “liberaland”.
I also think the (confirmed) fact that Palin’s oldest is pregnant confirms Palin’s absolute belief in her ideals as a pro-lifer: compare her support of her daughter with Obama’s quote about what would happen if one of his girls was to ever get pregnant:
“Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6
years old,” he said. “I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”
Punished? Weird word choice.
And this comes from someone (me!) who is very strongly pro-choice!. I don’t agree with Palin’s abortion stance. But I do respect that she is living by her professed beliefs and political stance.
Moreover, I don’t recall McCain or Palin making public statements about Jamie Lynn Spears. Did they?
easterner — just wondering — what is your source for this quote?
““Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6
years old,” he said. “I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”
here you go:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbZJYWjkAPo
straight from Obama’s mouth, at about :42 into the video.
here is a plain, vanilla transcript from CNN without the Youtube flotsom and jetsam:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0803/29/bb.01.html
Taken out of context easterner. He’s talking about abstinence information, information on contraception. That’s a huge difference between not “punishing” them with abortion. At least try not to misconstrue the story.
On # 56, nevermind easterner. I googled and found it.
Tommy Vietor, an Obama campaign spokesperson, issued a follow-up statement to reporters who asked about the right’s reaction to the remark you referenced in your post.
“What Sen. Obama said and what he believes is clear — children are ‘miracles,’ but we have a problem when so many children are having children,” Vietor said. “As Sen. Obama said on Saturday — and on many other occasions — parents have a responsibility to teach their children about values and morals to help make sure they are not treating sex casually. And while he understands the passions on both sides of this difficult issue, Sen. Obama believes we can all agree that we should be taking steps to reduce the number of teen pregnancies and abortions in this country.”
So …. I’m really wondering, easterner. Do you seriously think that Obama thinks of parenthood as “punishment”? And if you don’t think so, then what’s the point of your fuss? Since you are a self-confessed “pro-choicer” then I think the fact that he’s he’s pro-choice, but committed to reducing the number of abortions would be reasonable to you as well. The fact that Obama is pro-choice is no big surprise to anyone.
Obama believes teenagers should be given as much accurate information as possible so they can make the right choices. If a teenage girl makes a mistake, forcing her to accept an unwanted pregnancy is a punishment of sorts, isn’t it?
Perhaps I’m missing my far-right talking-points decoder ring, but somehow this just doesn’t sound like something to make a fuss about.
so, how is it that even when I link to the entire statement from a CNN transcript, as well as video footage of Obama’s speech itself, that I get accused of “taking out of context”?
regardless of what “debate” he was attempting to frame, the words mean what they mean. I have provided the context and yes, he was discussing sex ed (which, inherently, contains the issue of pregnancy!). . . .and very clearly stated that if either of his daughters were to become pregnant, he would not want them “punished” with a baby.. . .no amount of spinning can make it mean something else. . .
as noted above, I am very firmly pro-choice so in essence, I agree that abortion should remain legal. . . I don’t know if I would ever refer to a baby as “punishment” as that sounds a bit fire-and-brimstone-esque to me.
thanks for the discussion!
In post #54, that is just rumor and gossip.
In post #56 “I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.” It might as well say that if they make a mistake I don’t want them to have to face the consequences of the decision they made to engage in sex. Pregnancy is a natural consequence of sex and there are wonderful adoption agencies out there that can help find homes for infants and give those little souls parents that will take care of and nurture them. That should be the option instead of oborting a life. Pro choice isn’t allowing the individual who is ultimately involved a choice. It is silencing that choice. That is what Obama backs, silencing that aborted individuals rights at life.
I think I’m missing that de-coder ring too egalitarian gal.
Porter, Comment 62 – “Pro choice isn’t allowing the individual who is ultimately involved a choice. It is silencing that choice. ”
Does that mean if abortion is available, adoption isn’t? When did that happen? How does that silence the choice? I’m not even in favor of abortion and I still seem to need that decoder ring.
easterner, did you even read #60? would you like to respond?
repeating “decoder ring” over and over really doesn’t change the fact of Obama’s statement.
why not embrace his statement and his commitment to readily-available abortion?
is it because he hasn’t been very steady on his abortion “principles”, such as his flip-floppy vote in the Illinois senate on one abortion issue (i.e. the “born alive” bill) or his opinion, in 2004, anyway:
“During a speech at Benedictine University in October 2004, Obama said, according to the Illinois Leader, that “the decision concerning a baby should be left to a woman, but that he
does not see himself as supportive of abortion.” ”
Ah, what a difference 3 1/2 years make. . .and public opinion polls, of course.
# 66 ” …. and his commitment to readily-available abortion?”
He did make the statement you quoted. And Obama is pro-choice. No one is diputing that. And you are taking it out of context, easterner, which is very apparent when one goes to view the links you provided (thank you!).
How about answering this: Do you seriously think that Obama thinks of parenthood as “punishment”? I respectfully suggest you go back and read #60 and then think about it before you pop off another response.
I have answered it: he is definitively stating that having a baby would be “punishment” for his girls for, apparently, making poor choices. Sounds kinda churchy to me. . . .
Yet he has flip-flopped widely on even this! Even going so far, in 2004, as to say he doesn’t support abortion–unless, I guess, his daughters were being “punished” (his 2007-08 stance). The guy is all over the place. If the polls want him pro-choice, he is pro-choice; if he is talking to a Catholic university, suddenly he is not pro-choice. . . if he is asked at what point, legally, does a fetus become a human being, he hedges and fails to answer. . . this is my point.
He needs to find a position and stick with it.
I feel the same way that he does easterner. I am not exactly supportive of it, but if two people decide for whatever reason they feel the need to have one, then like you (and Obama), I think they probably should. My preference would be that they give the baby up for adoption, or if possible, keep it. But I can’t decide for the parents of another baby, how they should handle it. I struggle with the issue and so do many.
I know I’m late to the topic, but I wrote a post on why Idaho should be hesiatant on proclaiming Palin a native and which dovetails into these comments. There’s going to be much vetting of the newbie so we should all learn as much as possible until November. Click my name if you care to read it.
Also I’m confused why so many social conservatives in Idaho, the ones who supported the Idaho Family Task Force to change Idaho law to “help keep mom at home”, think Palin is one who represents their values. Sure she talks the talk but….
YOWZA!! You rock, Sisyphus (and obviously it’s a BIG rock, pun intended).
Wow. Good stuff, and great dialogue there (and good gosh you popped those ‘bubbles’, didn’t you?)
I agree with Obama, leave her family out of this. But she herself, now…you make a good point.
How exactly is it that her being the VP represents the movement to “help keep Mom at home”, raising the children where she “belongs” ???
Please excuse my comments because I have some things to say that you may not agree with. We must give this Palin who has great amount of genius some time. She seems to have more experience than this Obama. I am thinking that everyone must like him because he is a Democrat but I could be wrong. What if Obama was part of das Republik Party? What is the people’s answer here? I cannot tell you what the answer is because you can have an opinion and be true oder falsch. Excuse my english as I am trying to write fantastically. My point is this you must think of what each candidate has and maybe to vote who would be the best. It might not be Obama or it could be McCain and the other way around. You must think and if I were you to hold a debate within your community who has the better opinion. We do this a lot in Austria and it seems to help. In my opinion I think McCain and Palin would be right for the job. Obama and Biden lack a lot of depth. This Biden also might open his big mouth and say something he regrets a lot. Obama has a wish list but has no way to figure out how he solve the problem. Beispiel: Obama wants healthcare for everybody in America? How is he going to manage this? He is not said it in the speech. Obama hates to be criticized as well. In his change campaign, what is Barack Obama going to change? That is something to think about in the mind and do this talk amongst the peers in the community.
hmmm, thank you for response #69. . .
I would agree with Obama on this issue, except that he has changed his tune from 2004 through 2008. . . I worry that he is deciding how he feels about abortion based on public opinion polls. . . that is, and has been, my concern. When the race between Obama and Hilary was on, I was siding with Obama. I thought he was a breath of fresh air and even if I didn’t agree with everything he stood for, I believed, at the time, that he had some strongly-held convictions.
His changing stance (you are free to disagree with me, but his statements speak for themselves) on something as important as abortion, coupled with his flip flops on public financing for his campaign, his stance on offshore drilling and continuing military presence in Iraq, have made me realize that he is tilting to whatever windmill the public opinion polls present to him. Unfortunately.
Voter’s choices, on election day, have dwindled to, once again, the lesser of two evils.
Sisyphus, that is impressive! I haven’t finished the whole thing but so far you’ve made excellent points! Thanks for sharing that.
Harold, what country did we place this site in for hits? We’re getting a lot of foreigners on here it seems. In answer to your question re: what if Obama was Republican; clearly he wouldn’t represent what we’re looking for in a leader. The Democrats and the Republicans seem to have different views on how to fix things and what to get involved in and what not to involve ourselves in. Therefore, if he were republican, his views would probably not be what we want.
easterner, I was in favor of Hillary too and was sad to see her drop by the wayside. The conclusion I finally came to was simply in deciding which issues were of primary importance to me personally. Obama represents what I want to see with those issues. Of primary importance of course is the war in Iraq. Tax breaks to the rich run neck and neck with health care for the poor (imo).
All of the candidates have flip flopped on many issues. Obama is no exception but nor is McCain. Hopefully, he won’t flip flop on his decisions about the war. If he does, obviously I will regret my decision to vote for him.
No disrespect intended — this is just too, too funny!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RN5xbWtNSU&
btw ……. loved your post on 43sb Sisyphus!
I just love excellent writing!
egalitarian gal, too funny! Was it my imagination or did he keep looking at her uhhh…chest? Funny link!
I don’t know if it was her chest or her behiney. Did you also notice how he kept fingering his wedding ring while his eyes were wandering!?!
Omg, had to go back and look but yes, saw that too! That’s too funny!
Okay, I’m just a chump. At first I was offended, because it’s just feels wrong to make this into something it’s not. It smacks of cheap partisanship, a distraction from the issues.
And then, I realized that I’m just getting old, and YouTube does this kind of thing in an egalitarian way (no one is immune from the ‘funny’) and I’m sure there are plenty of ‘funnies’ out there about Obama, too. This one just bothers me because I’m supersensitive to the sexism issues out there since Palin was named as the Republican VP candidate.
Give me some time to think about it. I’m hoping it will be funnier to me tomorrow.
You know, I always loved pretty foul humor, and therefore George Carlin, too…then I heard him use the “C” word (no, not “Canada”) and I was bothered for weeks…until I decided I was just too doggone old if I could be offended by a silly word. So I reluctantly came around.
I’m sure I will eventually come around on this issue, too.
Nemesis, we’re not THAT separated by that age thing! My pop almost landed on the keyboard instead of down my throat when I saw it.
You’re right Nem, it is (probably) making it into something it’s not. It’s just that in this day and age of technology and YouTube, no one is immune, whether you’re conservative, liberal or a celebrity. I sort of like irreverent humor as long as it’s not at the expense of a particular class of people.
I’m wondering if Palin and her husband will send the girl off to the wild to have her baby?, isn’t the Mr. Palin part Eskimo?. I was hoping the Repubs convention would have gone on full steam I was looking forward to seeing Palin kill a moose with her bare hands while holding her NRA card. I think this Palin situation doesn’t say much for Mccain’s judgement. Being a member of the PTA doesn’t qualify someone to control nuclear weapon…NRA Member or Not.
I really fail to see hypocrisy in Palin’s actions. I love it when the liberals who would normally say the daughter’s conduct is a private family matter and should be left alone now come out of the woodwork to attack. The only hypocrisy here is from the Democrats. Now, if Palin aborted the downs syndrome baby or made her daughter get an abortion, then the Dems could rightfully wail and cry foul. The fact is that Palin does walk the talk and that really ticks the left off.
I also fail to see the connection between Palin and the Idaho Family Values Forum. Sisyphus says, “Also I’m confused why so many social conservatives in Idaho, the ones who supported the Idaho Family Task Force to change Idaho law to “help keep mom at home”, think Palin is one who represents their values. Sure she talks the talk but….”. Who are you referencing exactly? Who are you attributing to this link to? And just exactly how does Palin seem to be carrying water for Idaho Social Conservatives who want to keep women at home? Being socially conservative does not automatically equate with keeping women subjugated. That is a slap in the face as much as if I said that social liberals want to allow child molesters the right to post child porn in the name of the first amendment (which most do not).
The main point is that Palin is her own person and not some toaty for social conservatives. She has family issues just like the rest of us. Is she supposed to be super human or something? The lack of substance this thread is turning into: MCain playing with his ring, eskimos, false pregnancies…..this site is turning into the Huffington Post.
Bundy…Don’t forget the Moose, he got dragged into this but he has substance.
Sarah Palin is far to inexexperienced for the White House. Don’t get me wrong, she has definatly worked hard to get where she is, but she should stay there.
If the McCain/Palin team is elected, and in the unfortunate event that Mr. McCain passes, we the people are going to trust the fate of our nation to a woman with absolutly no foreign policy or internatinal experience. -Not a good idea
Being VP is not a ‘learn on the job’ position. It takes an incredible amount of dedication, hard work and experience, and there are many others out there who would have been much better choices.
The more I hear about Palin, the more I question her judgments & abilities to handle the job of VP. Let’s face it: the job has changed quite a bit since the days of “breaking ties & inquiring as to the health of the president.” Presidents these days rely heavily on the office of VP; look at the responsibility Dubya has given Cheney.
Palin obviously has too much on her plate to attend to her family properly. What information did she provide Bristol as she was preparing to enter adulthood? Just say no? That didn’t work. And if she did provide Bristol with a proper, comprehensive sexual education, then why did she become pregnant? In my experience, those girls who end up pregnant in their teens have very little support (growing up) from their fathers. They seek the male attention they lack, just in other areas. Where was he in all this? And what about her other daughters; does she recognize the mistakes she & her husband have made with Bristol in order to avoid them with her other children?
Secondly, she has a special needs infant who will require a lot of attention for the rest of his life. I may be socially progressive, but I still believe in one parent staying home with the kids, at least until they’re in school. I just don’t see how she can attend to her wonderful family & get up to speed as quickly as she needs to, in order to fill the office for which she’s been nominated.
I can’t believe McCain properly vetted this woman. Is this the kind of nominations we can expect from him, should he win the White House? Are we in for another Harriet Myers debacle?
This womans family has nothing to do with her being able to perform her job effectively. Please, lets drop the whole daughter with baby BS! It’s far from relevant!
I agree with #89 lets keep family out of the politics. It is far more impotant to talk about what is relevant. And family is not one of them. How come I never hear anything negative said about Obama? It always is McCain this and McCain that. Also, Bush this and Bush that. There are things that could be addressed with Obama. I could think of a lot of things that could be addressed with him but it would be a long list. What about his change campaign? What is he going to change? The water? What I am saying put that thing you call a brain people and talk about something important. I could care less what drama happened in someone’s family. What say you on this?
# 88 – Great comments ooh_child. Good stuff to consider and think about.
I’m sure there is plenty being said about Obama, but to see that you’ll have to visit a thread with “Obama” in the title.
I also think that family has it’s place in politics-if our Pres, VP, or Gov. can’t properly run a family, what makes America think that they can properly run a state or an entire country.
Oh Yeah, Kitty! Well said. You go …. MEOW!
bundy, the hypocrisy isn’t necessarily in Palin’s actions, its in the reason she was selected in the first place, to placate social conservatives. And nobody is disputing that. If you are let me know and I’ll send you some links. I’m not attacking Plain so much as I’m questioning the process that got her here.
As far as the Idaho Family Task Force I’ve linked to another post from the past year in which their advocacy for just those postions is made clear. “What can we do to keep mom at home? . . . . There is no substitute, there is absolutely no substitute for families taking care of children.” is a quote from Rep. Tom Loertscher of whom I’m sure you’re familiar. Granted they seem to be most extreme. They are also in charge of the state House of Representatives, have a proponenent in Idaho’s first congressional district, and appear to have taken control of the Idaho Republican Party when they sent Sullivan packing.
You ask: “She has family issues just like the rest of us. Is she supposed to be super human or something?” No, just qualified for the job. I’m mostly questioning here why she seems such a great representative for the religious right when they prefer women home with their kids.
Thanks for the kind words Nemesis, egalitarian gal and hmm, and for making this ex-homey feel welcome.
“running ones family” and performing a job are two different things. How one was raised has nothing to do with how they’ll turn out. I’ve known plenty of LDS folk raised with “seemingly” good morals and values that have ended up hooked on drugs or pregnant. I would invite everyone to rent and watch the movie “Happy Valley”. It talks about how SLC and Utah have twice the national average of drug abuse. Both prescription and illegal. As well as teen pregnancy being well over the national average. So judging a candidate for something their child has done is utterly ridiculous and is something the liberals are using because they’ve got nothing else to go after with this woman. Why don’t you take a look at her job performance instead. Even your good buddy Obama said we need to keep ones children and family out of the discussion.
A person can raise their children as best they can, but it’s still up to that child to do the right thing. And any of you that actually have children would know this. So get off your liberal soapboxes and come up with something better to complain about.
unfreakingbelievable!
Good for Obama, I’m glad he said that. I hope he feels empowered now. But that’s his opinion. You want to agree with him Anonymous, Great. Thats the beauty of politics and freedom of speech. Dont try to take away everybody elses rights because our views dont agree with you and Obama. If we all agreed with Obama, then an election would be pretty pointless, dont you think?
Well if we do it to politicians, than maybe we should start doing it to people in the workforce in every line of work. Each time you submit a job application they’ll do a background check on your children or husband and your close relatives to see if they have or haven’t been “model” citizens their whole lives. I’d be willing to bet even you kitty have quite a few “family skeletons” in your closet you wouldn’t want the world to know about. And I imagine they probably don’t affect your job performance either, do they? Just as I thought.
And what defines a “model citizen”. Her daughter got pregnant and is marrying the father. Big deal! Did you wait to have sex until you were in your mid 20’s or 30’s? I doubt it. I know I didn’t. And I also know I didn’t always use birth control, just as thousands of kids don’t do each and every year. Sure I was educated by my parents and grew up in a loving household, but I didn’t always listen to my parents, just as I’m sure you didn’t always listen to yours.
So lets drop the issue with the candidates family members. They have nothing to do with how a candidate will perform in office.
BTW, who’s “rights are trying to be taken away”. that comment made no sense to me.
Y’know, McCain said some pretty bad things about Chelsea Clinton. Was he wrong to bring up the president’s family?
Clinton was roundly criticized by the conservative right wingers when his “family affair” came to light. Were they wrong to bring that into discussion? What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, folks.
Since Palin is against abortion even in the cases of rape and incest, I’d say her personal beliefs will impact the way she governs. She belonged to a church which preaches the soon-to-come end days. The preacher condemned to hell any his his flock who would vote for Kerry. Since it was fair to criticize Obama for his church affiliation, can we also discuss hers? Or is that something else that should be off limits, when it comes to the Republican candidates?
The thing about this election is that it seems to be so very polarizing. Folks that would normally be civil to one another become very uncivilized.
Like Jon Stewart said about his visit to Colorado last week about there being “no middle ground”:
” … you’re either a rapture-awaiting promise keeper, or you drive a car that runs on gorp.”
Well said ooh_child!!!
Thank you anonymous for giving us your life story, and as a matter of fact yes I did wait to have sex and concieve a child until I was married, (credit given to my parents instilling strong family morals and values). Fine look into me and my family’s history, my six year old son pushed another kid in kindergarten, my parents divorced while I was kindergarted. my first husband passed away while serving his country in Iraq. Yup your right, lots of skeletons in my closet and sleezy sleepovers in my teens.
Why is it that to get a prision job, they look into your credit history, that’s not relevant.
when someone is trying to be elected in office, it is our right to know everything about this person? How are to rely on a person to run our country and fair decisions to benfit the people if their family values are off limits?
Yup, I waited until I was married to have sex, too. I also think how someone runs their family says a lot about how’ll effectively they’ll govern. Wasn’t it some LDS “prophet/president” who said “no success can compensate for failure in the home”??? And how is the world is Palin going to be effective when she has all these personal issues going on — downs child, pregnant child, lawsuits, etc.
Seems Gov. Palin was for “the bridge to nowhere”, before she was against it.
Also, it’s very interesting that she has a higher regard for those nasty congressional earmarks McCain is so fond of bashing. She used a lobbying firm while she was mayor in order to secure 27 million dollars in federal funds for her little town of 7,000 people. Let’s get out the calculator: that’s almost $4K per person in earmarks! Wow! I wish the folks in my little town here in California could get that kind of money.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/01/AR2008090103148.html
So what do you fiscal conservatives think about that?
Yeah ok, so everyone on this site waited until they were married…..yeah, I believe that one! and I’m Pope Benedict in disguise.
The point is it’s NOT relevant but you people would rather discuss her daughter then Palins accomplishments as a governor. Talk about some judgemental people on this site. amazing
But then it’s always the “perfect” ones that are the most judgemental.
I’m not saying I’m perfect, but I didnt get knocked up at an unmarried age of 17, and none of my kids are unmarried and knocked up either. But if you dont want to believe me or the ONE other person who say they waited that’s fine. Dont! I dont believe you either-I dont believe that your ignorant enough to believe what you write.
People’s families, especially children, are off limits as far as Obama’s concerned, according to his statement yesterday. It was made quite clear that he doesn’t feel it is politically relevant. Of course, if you feel like attacking her on a personal level, it’s a free country.
Regardless of what Obama think or says, the canidates family’s are going to sway the voters one way or the other. Becoming the President and Vice President of the United States is more than just a ‘job’ and campaining is more than just a ‘job interview’. This a serious lifestyle change. Our entire country is relying on the elected people to make decisions based on the what’s good for the people, or just a select few. Its far from working at McDonalds and shouldn’t be treated as just another job. Many factors have to be taken into consideration when choosing who we think is right. And why shouldn’t the people also consider that she already has a full plate. I lost a job because my son started have seizures and other symptoms of epilesy. I had been working there for years and rarely call in sick, but when I had to take four consecutive days off while my son was in the hospital, they felt that my family needed me more, and they needed someone who was not going to be distracted with family issues. -And that was for a measly secretary job at a potato processing plant- not a Vice President of U.S. postion. So if my employer could think that way and be judgmental of me, why can’t I be judgemental of someone who is potentially holding the future and fate of my FAMILY and CHILDREN in their hands.
I recall a poster once saying that when a topic reaches 100 comments it usually turns away from actual debate and what’s important regarding the topic, to petty arguing, such as this one has done. No longer are we discussing what’s relevant, but nitpicking the candidates. The point is, none of us are perfect and for us to expect a candidate and or their family to be, is simply foolish thinking.
I think I’ll move on to another post now. this one has run its course.
McCain canceled an appearence on Larry King because Campbell Brown from CNN “Crossed the Line” when she asked a McCain minion “What hard descions has Palin made concerning the Alaska National Guard”. Apparently McCain needs to learn how the National Guard works when it comes to activation to the regular army. Palin hasn’t made any descions concerning the Alaska National Guard, they were called up for active duty in Iraw\q and there was nothing she could do about it other that get her Passport from the State Department and go visit the Alaskan Troops in Kuwait, then she did a sight seeing tour in Germany after the visit. McCain knew about her daughter before he picked her, McCain threw the kid in the spotlight, as did Palin for Political Gain!.
While I have to agree that this post has wandered a bit off the main topic, I kinda like having a place where people can go to voice there opinions. They may not be directly related to the publishers initial post, but are still somewhat indirectly related.
What I think is ridiculous, is when people start getting thier feelings hurt when others don’t share the same views, people being flat out viscious with personal attacks, name calling, or the over kill of personal information-who cares how old you were when you first had sex or whether or not you used birth control.
But I think the worst thing is, when people post to the thread just to say that they they dont like the whats being discussed and that they are moving on. SO WHAT-bye. I’m sure we could have survived without knowing that. The sad thing is, I’ll bet they all come back-at least once.
Thank you all for your opinions, whether we share the same views or not. They are enlightening and something to consider. I wish you all the best this election year. Looks like we’ll all need it.
Here is why I think Bristol Palin’s pregnancy is relevant: Jaimie Spears.
Jamie if you recall is the little sister of Britney Spears and like Bristol recently had it revealed to the nation she was a pregnant, unwed, teen. Like Bristol she announced her intentions to keep the baby and marry the father. This was some months ago so both these things may have happened by now as I haven’t heard.
Point is that conservative America freaked out and blasted Jamie’s mother Lynne Spears as being unfit, being a horrible role model, etc, etc. Yet suddenly conservative America is defending Sarah Palin as being this great mom. Hypocrisy at its finest. And that hypocrisy is why I think its a relevant subject to discuss. Its not about Palin so much as its about the blatant hypocrisy that exists when one can’t take off the partisan blinders. And have no doubt that were this Obama’s daughter that conservative America would be on the attack. After all it was Rush Limbaugh who put up a picture of teen Chelsea Clinton and barked at it and it was conservative America who thought it was fine comedy.
So let’s talk about my last points, then. Palin professes to back McCain’s policies, but she’s as much of a pork-barrel project promoter as anyone in Congress. She was for the Alaskan Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it. She believes the war in Iraq was a task from God; does that mean she wants to stay there forever? Does she support the Alaskan separation movement; and if so, how does that play into the “Country First” motto being promoted by the Republicans?
Folks, here’s the beef. How do you conservatives respond to these issues?
Ooh Child… they don’t, they all go to the same “Spin School” to get their very narrow talking points. Notice that all the Twits at the Repub Convention when asked about Palin pretty much says the same thing, they must be reading off a teleprompter off camera.
It wasn’t conservative America that blasted Jamie Spears, it was Liberal America, just like what’s happening on this site. It’s all the liberals with their holier than thou attitude like this garbage even matters. Who gives a rats arse about Jamie Spears? I sure as heck dont. Obviously you don’t because you brought it up. Lets get back on topic shall we?
#110 “How do you conservatives respond to these issues?”
They don’t. They change the subject and move back to their own talking points. I watched Tucker Carlson do this over and over again just yesterday. It’s really quite entertaining to watch!
#109 Yes. It’s the neo-con hypocrisy that’s so annoying. They moralize and moralize until someone like Palin comes along and then it’s all about defending why she’s such a great person, mother, and potential VP.
Been reading the Federalist Papers this week, especially looking for what Hamilton, Jefferson and Jay had to say about partisanship and party politics. I’m particularly struck by what Alexander Hamilton says here(from Letter No. 1):
So numerous indeed and so powerful are the causes which serve to give false bias to the judgment, that we, upon many occasions, see wise and good men on the wrong side as well as on the right side of questions of the first magnitude to society. This circumstance, if duly attended to, would furnish a lesson of moderation to those who are ever so thoroughly persuaded of their being in the right in any controversy. And a further reason for caution, in this respect, might be drawn from the reflection that we are not always sure that those who advocate the truth are influenced by purer principles than their antagonists. Ambition, avarice, personal animosity, party opposition, and many other motives not more laudable than these, are apt to operate as well upon those who support as those who oppose the right side of a question. Were there not even these inducements to moderation, nothing could be more ill-judged than that intolerant spirit which has at all times characterized political parties. For in politics, as in religion, it is equally absurd to aim at making proselytes by fire and sword. Heresies in either can rarely be cured by persecution.
Though Hamilton uses this to set up the framework for the series of letters urging support of the U.S. Constitution over the Articles of Confederation, I find his rhetoric and passion equally applicable to partisan politics on the whole.
Everywhere in American politics today we see those false biases, that lack of moderation, and that intolerant spirit. It is as Jon Stewart says, as quoted on this post earlier – we’re regarded or regard each other only as rapturers or gorpers. Both parties are trying so hard to differentiate themselves that they’re driving politically moderate people like myself away, leaving us in a political netherworld that is disenfranchised because there are no politicians to our liking on the ballot. Do we vote with the rapturers or the gorpers, or, as it has been suggested, throw away our votes on the Naders and Pauls, or just don’t vote at all? The posts on this thread clearly illustrate the final point in this quote from Hamilton: “For in politics, as in religion, it is equally absurd to aim at making proselytes by fire and sword. Heresies in either can rarely be cured by persecution.” The people here in agreement are agreeing with what they already agreed to, and those in opposition are falling into that “personal animosity, party opposition, and many other motives not more laudable than these” in stating their arguments and trying to persuade others. It’s easy to agree with stuff you already agree with. If someone dares ask you to consider something else, well, those false biases show up, where we cling to a cause because it’s what we’ve always clung to.
The two major parties and the media (from the left-wingers to the right-wingers) are falling into this petty trap that Hamilton warns us against. The Huffington Post is argle-bargling about the Republicans’ apparent lack of family values due to the Palin situation. Fox news is still trying to convince us that George W. Bush eats flowers and poops rainbows. I listen to both sides and want to throw the heck up, especially when the candidates from both sides say that this kind of stuff doesn’t matter, but, wink wink, if other people want to chatter about it, hey, it’s a free country. Our national judgment and most of the media messages we get are based not on sound argument, but false bias. Nowhere have we learned this lesson of moderation that Hamilton advises – simply because there’s little room for moderation. False biases in both parties get the base riled up and to the polls, while a few olive branches to the moderates convince them to vote for what frankly comes down to the lesser of two evils. As a moderate, I’m tired of that kind of non-choice.
I’m new to this site, and after reading this thread in its entirety, i almost thought twice about staying, it’s pretty brutal, LOL.
Anyway, Anonymous, I totally agree with your latest post about the Spears’ girl. The mom was shot at from every direction, and her parenting style was looked at under a microscope. Why are people being barked at for doing the same thing to Sarah Palin? Instead people people are congratulating her on her impending grandparenthood and congratulating the daughter on making the right choice to keep the baby. Have people forgotton that adoption is an option?
#114
Dear Bloop,
Thank you for a thoughtful post. You gave me pause and caused me to re-think a couple of things. Like the fact that being willing to listen to an opinion different than my own is a good thing.
I particularly liked this:
” …see wise and good [wo]men on the wrong side as well as on the right side of questions of the first magnitude to society. This circumstance, if duly attended to, would furnish a lesson of moderation to those who are ever so thoroughly persuaded of their being in the right in any controversy. “
So Thanks! I think I’ll sit back and “listen” for awhile and try a little moderation.
Early this year, an op-ed in the Anchorage Daily News ripped into Gov. Sarah Palin’s appearance on a morning “shock jock” radio show as “plain and simple one of the most unprofessional, childish and inexcusable performances I’ve ever seen from a politician.”
So what happened? Palin has repeatedly feuded with the state’s Senate president, Lyda Green, over a wide range of legislation. Last January, Palin appeared on “The Bob and Mark Show,” whose host Bob Lester despises Green. That’s when the trouble started.
Check this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKkydrUnBZE
Palin laughs as her opponent is called a “b*tch”, “cancer” and taunted about her weight.
“For in politics, as in religion, it is equally absurd to aim at making proselytes by fire and sword. Heresies in either can rarely be cured by persecution.” –pretty funny quote, bloop, from a guy who died in a duel borne of a political feud. Absolutely one must separate the wheat from the chaff. That’s what we’re trying to do here. I think I see honest attempts in these comments of people trying to grapple with the facts, and exposing the bias of a source has to do with that process. I say more to sekpticism and critical analysis since, as you point out, it ain’t happening in the trad med.
Bloop #115, I am very moved by your comment. I also have been very moderate (not liberal enough for the liberals, definitely not a conservative anymore) and I’m tired of the lesser of two evils, but that seems to be the system as it is today.
I voted for John Anderson in 1980 (my friends were angry that I lost the election for Carter). My kids voted for Ralph Nader in 2000 (their friends were angry that they lost the election for Al Gore). We wanted to make a statement that the system was failing us…but instead, we just basically threw away our votes. Nothing has changed.
So, trying to work within the system leaves a bad taste in my mouth but how do we truly effect change?
*** Twilight Zone Music Plays In Background ***
In a strange twist of fate, what was once a traditional rallying point of “conservatives” about the evils of underage pregnancy, now liberals have taken the torch and run with it for political gain.
In another strange twist, now that a woman has been nominated to an important position, liberals who once supported women’s lib and the right to balance work and family have now turned against these trains of thought for political gain and said the woman just can’t handle it and it’s not fair to the family. Another poster spouts off religious doctrine to denouce Palin for somehow failing because her daughter is pregnant? How is that failure in the truest sense of the word? It must be like Obama’s statement that having a baby is somehow punishment…….
What I am getting at here is the fact that time and time again, the liberal orthodoxy is shaped and molded to get results that are inconsistent against the principles and beliefs espoused to get there. It’s like a rubber band, it can be stretched to fit just about anything here…and it smells of hypocrisy.
It seems to me that many people on the left are really worried about Palin, otherwise they wouldn’t be going after her and her kids so hard.
And finally,
the music stops.
Oy Bundy, please put up. Who here is going after her kids? Playing the victim in an effort to quell discussion is pretty feeble. The only hypocrisy demonstrated is from the social conservatives thinking that she’s such a great choice for them. For years Democrats exposed the hard choices made by working women, advocated on thier behalf and we were instumental on achieving fairness in the workplace for women over the constant objection of those on the right. We’re proud that a woman has been named by your party to lead the country, we’re just struck by the immense amount of cynicism behind it. And we have a few questions regarding her experience and ties to the corruption that plagues the Alaska Republican Party.
Like Nemisis, I tossed away a couple of my votes voting for independents who had no chance of winning, too. Never again.
What I’m seeing here is the same thing that’s going on all over the country right now. Both sides want the same thing, but both are largely mired in the way politics has been done for the past 30 years, and the divisions that have come from those politics are showing up here in full Technicolor.
The great divide isn’t going to be bridged this election, on either side. The best we can all hope for is a few little swinging bridges to be built, with the hopes of building the big ones next time.
It’s obvious that Bundy won’t ever give up his Republican stance this time. Maybe next time, maybe never for him. Same goes with Sisyphus, me, and the others that are Democrats this time around, too.
But argue it out, but think about what the other side has to offer, always. If anyone refuses to see any good on the other side, they’re stuck in the past, and will be swept under the rug in this new century. That old thinking is pretty much the tar pit that trapped us all over the past 16 years.
And just why isn’t she a great choice for social conservatives? Are you kidding me that you think the fact her daughter is pregnant negates her values, morals, and role to play in issues that matter to these voters? Her views don’t shift with polls or politics. To say that you are struck by the cynicism behind her appointment is puzzling to me. The only cynicism is coming from the left. So, you can’t put that label on social conservatives. Despite the cynicism that you have shown as well as those from your fellow left wing bloggers, the fact is that she is and has been an energizing force to people of faith and moral values. I wish I could truly disagree with you but I can’t even do that because I don’t understand this supposed hypocrisy that you are trying to cook up. It just isn’t there, except in the the fantasy world created to dismiss a talented, smart, focused and EXPERIENCED candidate.
No one can truly define experience. You know it when you see it. Experience runs in many facets. Character matters. Integrity matters. So, while you are busy beating her up over her daughter’s choices, understand that there is more to her than the media has told you about. Her life has been committed towards raising a family and maintaining a marriage for 20 years. In that stead, she began a long road to public service in the city council, mayor and now governor’s office. I would gladly put her up against Biden and Obama. The debates should show us what we are really counting on: the ability to speak about issues that matter to our health, safety and welfare. We see things differently as Boomer suggested, that will probably not change. I don’t proclaim that Republicans have all the answers anymore than the Democrats do. What I do want is someone that has been enacting policies based on rock solid principles that do not waver. Thanks for the debate!
Let us keep this family sequence out of the equation. I don’t care if the teen had a baby or not. That is the family’s problem and not the publics. You must be focusing on the exact issues. I beg you to not look at the least important of something that happened 20 years ago with the husband. He was charged how do you say with a dwi. This happened so long ago and should be vergessen (forgotten). In my native land we don’t focus on the family because it is private and should be so. Bitte (please) focus on what is recent and important. Please excuse my writing as that I use German words by mistake. Like hurricanes, the strong winds are coming and are churning at a high gust which is called politics and you will have to think in your country who will be able to take on this job as being the Prime Minister or President. In Europe thats how we refer to people as a President. That said I wish all of you on your voting techniques and be able to pick the best one for das Job. I hope me writing in English was gut.
Here are 3 things I think I think, these last few days:
1. Our legs are getting collectively pulled on this site with all these odd comments purporting to come from, how do you say it, “WAY out of towners”…
2. Sisyphus for President has my vote if s/he wants it, for the time being, all things being equal today.
3. Politics is like religion. All you can do is share your views, and if folks try to argue against them it only entrenches you to staunchly defend your position. I wish we didn’t feel the need to try to tear the other “team” down, and could instead, just say what’s right with our favorite “team”.
That’s not a Pollyanna wish, by the way. It’s a reasonable expectation, unhindered by the desire to engage in the competitive sport of fighting to win.
Because it’s perfectly obvious, after reading all these comments, that each of us has no firm opinion about what’s right with our own candidates, or what is wrong about the other person’s candidates, or each others’ political spectrum positions in general…..
Live Long and Prosper
____________________________________________________________________
Comment # 110 by Anonymous on September 2, 2008 @ 3:02 pm
Here is why I think Bristol Palin’s pregnancy is relevant: Jaimie Spears.
Jamie if you recall is the little sister of Britney Spears and like Bristol recently had it revealed to the nation she was a pregnant, unwed, teen.
Point is that conservative America freaked out and blasted Jamie’s mother Lynne Spears as being unfit, being a horrible role model, etc, etc. Yet suddenly conservative America is defending Sarah Palin as being this great mom. Hypocrisy at its finest.
_____________________________________________________________________
?¿? Anon, other than being pregnant, unmarried teens, what do Bristol Palin and Jamie Spears have to do with one another. Further more, what do Lynne Spears and Sarah Palin have in common other than being mothers of young, unmarried teen daughters? A. Nothing.
America largely criticized Jamie Spears because she was a popular teen role model for millions of teens across the American continent, and the world. They criticized her parents because in spite of their preached Christian values, both their famous daughters publicly demostrated unchristian like behaviors; unbecoming to the adults who’d trusted them to entertain their children.
17 y/o Bristol Palin failed herself and her family when denying the conservative Christian values she’d been taught. Still, her parents remained by her side when she told them what she’d done, and allowed them to help her make the right decision about what to do with her life, and the life of her unborn child. Bristol is a private citizen, and not a public role model. Big difference.
This is a great thread … Thanks for the great posts…
I just wish people would look at the issues and not the person. Look at the platform and not whether the person is a man, woman or a person of color… Good grief – if you vote based on any of the aformentioned criteria and not on the platform – don’t bitch when we are in worse shape four years from now.
Increasing taxes on any corporation that keeps americans working is a mistake – this point cannot be debated – pure and simple, its a mistake.
Promoting anything by any candidate that doesn’t promote putting americans to work – making american goods for the market and keeping these same americans from using an already over-stressed social support system is the only way to stimulate the economy.
I had a conversation with a friend the other day and he made a light come on. I told him I couldn’t understand why people were supporting heavier taxation to bolster social programs so people could get more handouts – instead of supporting programs that would create more jobs, so you could work hard for a piece of the american dream…..his answer???
“You don’t understand xxxxx – some people don’t want to work”…. This about blew me away -I guess I just thought everybody wanted to work… I believe every “able bodied american” should work –
This country was founded by those who were willing to die for her… no free rides… they died so we can have this chat and argue about whether a woman who has raised her children and stood up to the federal gov’t when they were wrong, is qualified to be VP. They even died so people can burn the flag and argue for Obam’s attempt to implement socialism…
We owe those outstanding people that paid the ultimate price more than that… We have to do what is right for this country – to hell with your political affiliation – Vote for security, vote for less taxes (giving you more money to spend, which will create more jobs for your fellow americans). Vote for being energy dependent – vote for the candidate that will do this… I’m not going to mention names – you read what the candidates platform is all about and you make the decision.
Okay getting off point from the teenage pregnancy but can anyone tell me what big descions did Palin make concerning the Alaska National Guard?. Newt (I cheated on my wife) Gingrich could answer that after he raised that question tonight at the convention. Then again Newt didn’t mention the lobbyist Palin hired to get $20+ million for her little town in Alaska…Idaho needs Mayors like her.
I’m with you Nemesis. It all sounds like circles with (and without) foreign accents. I’m hopping off the merry-go-round for now.
The real reason McCain picked Palin. Seriously, watch McCain in this and you can totally see the man who would go out and cheat on his crippled wife.
*warning some adult humor in video – not obscene but adult*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qUVQDmLf7s
Anonymous made some excellent points, for the conservative side. For me, as a progressive, I think the main issues for this election should be: who’s going to extricate us from this occupation in Iraq based on what the Iraqis & the American public want, who’s going to protect a woman’s right to choose to be either pro-life or pro-choice, and who’s going to restore our previous good standing with the other nations of the world. I’m not going to mention names either, the party platforms stand for themselves.
I always find it interesting when folks start complaining about corporate taxes, since I’m sure very few of them actually pay corporate taxes. In fact, a recent study showed that two-thirds of American corporations pay no taxes at all. Corporate taxes are a red herring that the likes of Hannity & Limbaugh love to throw out there, just to confuse the issue.
Palin’s acceptance speech as VP running mate to McCain started out a little laissez faire, and boorish. She then turned to words everyone expected her to say: …”a small-town mayor is sort of like a ‘community organizer,’ except that you have actual responsibilities.”
FINALLY she to the bare bones of the crux, said what she and Obama were prepared to do that their competitors were unable to accomplish, and began to kick their lack of character with her and McCain’s productive characters.
Yep, she’s a winner. No wonder she has an 80% approval rating. I’m voting McCain/Palin in 2008.
I guess they do have Trailer Parks in Alaska.
Not to worry, Lisa, you’ll not be invited to the Park.
Do wave when you’re driving by.
/big smiling wave{happy McCain & Palin sayin’ HI! in the Alaska trailer park}
Absolutely incredible speech by Palin last night!! (and with no cry babies in the audience )
I can see now why McCain choose her. That speech certainly clinched my vote, I don’t even need to hear McCain speak, although it should be great as well.
I look forward to all the put-downs that are soon to follow from all the libs. Like a cartoon I can see the smoke coming out of their ears after the knockout punch Palin gave last night.
(looks like Lisa has started you guys off with her lame trailer park remark) LOL
My assessment of Palin’s speech:
Long on insults and short on substance
Nothing about the economy (no recognition of the extreme burden of the current national economic downturn on a majority of Americans, let alone the poor, whose numbers are increasing.) Nothing substantive about jobs (no suggestions regarding how a McCain-Palin administration proposes to “save” American jobs, except to reduce taxes to those least likely to increase pay-rolls.)Nothing about healthcare (no concern for the millions of individuals and families in America without any health care insurance as well as countless others plainly under-insured. )
I saw it as an insistent, biting diatribe, and more than a little nasty and divisive. She seemed to pander to small-minded prejudice (see note below).
While she clearly is tough, with a lot of courage to perform well under the crushing pressure and scrutiny she faced this last week, in this speech she appeared to have no ethos (credibility or moral authority) or logos (logic and reason); but a lot of pathos (appeal to emotion). She effectivley reinforced the support of the who already agreed with her and McCain (the proverbial choir), but without the other two rhetorical skills I doubt she had much, if any, effect on the congregaton (Independents and undecided voters).
In contrast Obama innately understands all three of these elements (ethos, logos & pathos), which is why he did not criticize anyone in his 2004 speech at the democractic convention. He knew that folks listening to the speach of an obscure state senator would say, “who the h*ll does he think he is?” I suspect Ms. Palin, who up until a week ago was an obscure state Governor, will get some of this sort of reaction.
From the New Republic:
” … She, along with other speakers last night (like Guliani) attempted to demonize the left as “elitists”, but were really just pandering to widely-held prejudice. The U.S. is a strange country because being educated, intelligent, and rational are not considered virtues by a huge slice of the population but rather the worst kind of vices. Why? Well, there are entire books devoted to the topic, but a decade+ of right-wing propaganda from Rush Limbaugh & Co. has convinced a huge part of the country that those who govern via “hunches” are superior to those who govern wisely.
Like Palin asked last night, what exactly has Obama”governed”? What exactly are Obama’s “accomplishments”? He’s all talk and no action. She was “nasty & divisive”? It seemed to me she stood up to all the criticism the liberal media threw at her for the past week and threw it right back into their faces and obviously that has hurt your feelings. Thats ashame.
Obama wants to raise taxes across the board, I say no thanks! Liberals say, “but there are so many poor people in our country”….BOOHOO!! I say educate yourself and get a better job instead of expecting handouts from your government!
Palin stood up there and gave a better speech than Obama ever could, and she’s only running for VP. lol
Well when McSame loses the election Palin and family can star in their own Reality Show. Wait til all the dirty secrets come out. I gave up on the possiblity of Palin killing a moose with her bare hands but waited for her to tell us what her and McCain’s plans were to help the nation but as usual they don’t have one other than to drill and lower taxes.
I just saw this and found it very interesting (and telling!). Two conservative commentators on MSNBC — after they’re off the air — say what they really think about McCains’ veep choice. One is Peggy Noonan (republican speechwriter) and the other John Murphy (McCain’s former campaign director). Check this out!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDBW0SbDxPo&feature=related
Well said 007, I think that with all of the scrutiny and attacks that she and her family have gone through within the last week she showed that she is not going to hide in the corner and hope that it all passes by or through smoke and mirror tactics try to lead you away from the issue. She did throw alot of the attack at her right back in a very successfull manner.
Her daughter and family should be off limits. The one thing that I have a great deal of respect for Obama about is his stance that family should be off limits. It is to bad that followers of Obama can’t follow that lead. She calls it as it is and of course that is going to make Obama backers nervous. She is showing me that she will stand up and fight back like a true leader should with both word and action. I say well done Sarah Palin!!!!
She also has an 85% approval rating in the state that she is Governing which also speaks volumes about her ability to lead. McCain/Palin, you have my vote.
Some of you really have no shame at this very cynical, “hail mary” pick by your party. There were so many other well-qualified women McCain could (and should) have chosen if he wanted a woman on his ticket (Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson, for one!). The selection of Palin is an insult to women everywhere (and if you can’t figure out why … !!!)
I am so looking forward to November when Americans stand up and say “NO! ” to more of the same.
No McCain, No Palin, No Way, No How. Our wonderful country cannot afford more of this .
Ditto Porter! You’re exactly right in saying Palin is making Obama supporters nervous. It’s really quite amusing to see them scurry around and try to discredit her with anything they can find! That right there proves how nervous they are. LOL Instead of answering 007’s question of “what has Obama ever accomplished”? They’d rather search youtube for ridiculous video clips. I’m LMAO right now!
Aside from his dramatic tear jerking speeches what has Obama really done? The fact is Palin has accomplished so much more than Obama has, and she’s only running for veep! Good point 007.
LOL Guest_House aka 007 LOL. You are so good at that LOL thingy. Your brialliance is shining through.
Nope, not a bit nervous, but looks like you are when all you can think to say is LMAO. No critical analysis about your candidate and no thoughtful responses — only cheerleading!
AND BTW, you’re not so good at sock puppeting yourself and patting yourself on the back. But have at it if you think you’re fooling anyone.
How disappointing, that so many people still believe Obama will raise “taxes across the board”, when the truth is your taxes will probably go down (depending on your tax bracket.) Guest_007, do you make over $250K? If not, don’t believe the Republican lies. Go to any non-partisan analysis of the two candidates’ proposals & you’ll see I’m right. Please, don’t take my word for it. Check it out yourself.
Palin is a perfect choice for the Republicans. I hope she stays in the race. Once her hypocrisy is exposed, (Bridge to Nowhere, earmarks, abuse of power) the Obama campaign will have a filed day with her. Biden will blow her out of the water during their debate. I’ll be enjoying it immensely!
The majority of the American public agree with the Democrats on social issues. They also agree with our withdrawal from Iraq, and most agree our country is on the wrong track. McCain/Palin is just more of the same, so the only recourse they have is to attack personalities, not issues. McSame? McLame? McBlame? They all apply.
007, I guess we both can’t LOL about how funny you libs are with trying to discredit Palin. Please don’t “LOL” anymore bond, it seems to hurt the libs feelings.
They’re really grasping for straws now!
Ditto to GH, lest I be accused of puppeting from the puppet master herself. Just admit it folks, Palin knocked it out of the park last night. It’s ok to admit defeat, we’ll all understand.
Look out … the ditto head with MPD has arrived (again). Or maybe s/he just turned around?
Comment # 144 by Guest_House “Ditto Porter!”
Comment # 148 by Guest_007 “Ditto to GH”
Ya gotta love ‘em …
I thought Governor Palin acquitted herself very well last night. One blog put it succinctly as follows:
—————————————-
I expect that a lot of people on both sides of the aisle were surprised that Palin didn’t run out on stage dressed like Ellie May Clampett, chomping on a wad of tobacco and talking like Roseann Barr. Instead, she gave a successful political speech in the style of a female political icon like Ann Richards (if she had a Fargo accent.) She was confident and poised and she is obviously not going to embarrass the GOP with amateur, provincial incompetence. I don’t think anyone’s as sure she’ll be dumped from the ticket tomorrow morning as they were today.
But the bottom line is that while she may not sink this ticket (at least immediately) she can’t save it either. They’ll get out their base, which until now was a questionable proposition. But that won’t be enough. Their base has shrunk. They have to win over a chunk of independents and I just don’t know if they can successfully separate themselves from the disaster of the past eight years, even if Maverick decides to move the White House to Point Barrow.
They are Republicans. Both of them. And that should be enough to sink them if the Democrats actually run against them.
————————————————
Of course, her speech was written by one of Bush’s speechwriters and was actually drafted for another but she presented it well. And as you might expect it was chucky jam full of false and misleading information. Click my name if you care to know.
Now their quoting other bloggers? Wonder what’s next?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYyt4nyaq64
“Sarah Pale In Comparison”
I just clicked on Sisyphus’s name and read what was posted about Sarah Palin. Interesting reading, but what it caused me to think about was the fact that Obama belonged to a church for 20 years and when this church was discovered to have a very racial background against whites and was mainly based on contention, Obama turned his back on it. Is that what he will do with the consititution and the American People when things globally get a bit hot?
That’s really sad Porter, that you think a man sworn to uphold the constitution, seeking to be the leader of the free world and reinstate America’s credibility in it, who has been campaigning and pouring his soul out for nearly two years that you would idly speculate upon his lack of fidelity, loyalty and honor to this country, for what again? I’m guessing that you believe the McCain’s service is a factor contributing to his qualifications to be president but that Kerry’s service to this country was self motivated and his accomplishments fraudulent.
After the example set last night, I’m sure that many of the most partisan on the right are emboldened to speak out and again repeat the mass of disinformation begun in the email smear campaign against Obama last spring. Its an axiomatic sign of desperation that when you have no facts to support your position, one goes negative with baseless accusations. I’m grateful that Obama has forbidden his supporters from attacking McCain’s service or Palin’s family, if for nothing else, that at least half the debate will be substantive, and that honor can be exemplified.
Obama campaign manager David Plouffe has blasted the lies that came from the repulican convention last night with this response:
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.
Let’s clarify something for them right now.
Community organizing is how ordinary people respond to out-of-touch politicians and their failed policies.
And it’s no surprise that, after eight years of George Bush, millions of people have found that by coming together in their local communities they can change the course of history. That promise is what our campaign has been about from the beginning.
Throughout our history, ordinary people have made good on America’s promise by organizing for change from the bottom up. Community organizing is the foundation of the civil rights movement, the women’s suffrage movement, labor rights, and the 40-hour workweek. And it’s happening today in church basements and community centers and living rooms across America.
Meanwhile, we still haven’t gotten a single idea during the entire Republican convention about the economy and how to lift a middle class so harmed by the Bush-McCain policies.
It’s now clear that John McCain’s campaign has decided that desperate lies and personal attacks — on Barack Obama and on you — are the only way they can earn a third term for the Bush policies that McCain has supported more than 90 percent of the time.
…..you need to take a look at last month’s Chicago magazine; see how the people in Chicago who were “helped” by Obama (or is that, who “helped” Obama; i.e., the precinct captain who gave him his first entree into politics) feel about him now. Much like the “Reverend” Jermiah Wright, many feel thrown under the bus. Just like his grandma, who he referred to famously as a “typical white person” by referencing her supposed bigotry.
I’m still waiting to hear about Obama’s accomplishments. I suppose its because he has none? Interesting how the liberals complain about our “cheerleading” when that’s all they’ve been doing with Obama (the 2nd coming) for the past year. thats typical though, they can cheer for their candidate, but we cant cheer for ours.
For me there are some very good reasons why she (Palin) should not be elected (to any significant public office at all); She doesn’t believe in any human responsibility for global warming in spite of the scientific evidence, she doesn’t believe in stem cell research in spite of the scientific evidence, she apparently doesn’t believe in evolution in spite of the scientific evidence, and she is indifferent to the endangered species act in spite of the scientific evidence. In short, she doesn’t seem to believe in science.
This is the 21st century, not the Dark Ages. Instead of worrying so much about her qualifications, people should spend more time thinking about her disqualifications. She and McCain certainly do represent another four years of born again ignorance.
That McCain would have picked such a person to be Vice-President (and possibly President) reveals not only his terribly bad judgment, but also his apparent contempt for the future of our nation.
Obama supports affordable health care for everyone, and while it’s not the universal/single-payer system some would suggest, it’s definitely in line with the majority of the American public.
Obama wants abortion in this country to be safe, legal, & rare, which again is in line with what we Americans want for the women in our lives.
Obama will lead our country out of this terrible mess called the Iraq war, and most Americans support his judgment in this foreign policy debacle.
Obama will propose incentives to grow our green economy, through a well thought out plan which incorporates all aspects of energy production, including nuclear (and he knows how to pronounce that word, too!), and he has even said he will consider other options like drilling off-shore in a reach out to “the other side of the aisle.” This commitment will inspire thousands and create a mulitude of new jobs.
Of course, that’s not what you folks supporting McCain/Palin want to hear, or discuss. You’d rather examine & rehash what his preacher said, or question his patriotism. Sad, really.
Religion and politics. I’m not convinced either of them make good public forum comment material unless:
a) The commenters police themselves and stop it with the snotty comments about each other’s intelligence and belief systems and instead discuss the issues without being disrepectful,
b) The moderators step in and enforce the rules when comments are over the line.
Neither of which have happened on this site since Joe Vandal sold out and certain regular commenters stepped in as moderators for Joe Eagle.
So, IdahoFallsToday, this is my final comment (my dismay has been brewing for awhile.) Thanks for the last year, it’s been a real learning experience.
Right on, Sisyphus.
No one ever changes their mind from snark or snotty comments. That stuff doesn’t even play well with the folks who are serious about advancing their side of politics, either.
By this time last election, there were a lot of politicians who were sure they had built a permanent majority. Most of ‘em were swept under the rug 2 years ago, including the most of the snarky ones.
I thought Sarah played very well to the Repub base, who are decidedly unenthusiastic in this convention- this is the quietest Repbulican convention I’ve ever seen, and Palin fired them up. Attacks on the other party are expected in conventions, but more importantly, everyone is curious about Palin- until last night, she was a blank slate outside of Alaska.
She acquitted herself very well. She was very tense- at the end of each sentence, she pressed her lips tightly togehter so she would be sure to stop, but that’s understandable; I can’t think of anyone who wouldn’t be tense knowing they are going to be scrutinized closely by 20 million people.
Her speech went back to basic Repub principles, and didn’t have any details at all, but she did her job; she brung it on and appealed to the base. I’m not certain at all that she swayed enough independents and undecided voters to do the trick, but none of us will really know until it’s much closer to the election.
McCain hasn’t exhibited very much of his old fire this time around. He’ll have to give a real rip-snorter of a speech to change folk’s minds, I think, and it will be interesting to see if he still has the stuff.
I’m still all Obama, but I’m glad the election is now framed. None of you will get any partisan comments from me for a while- I expect that the Repubs will get a bounce from Palin, just as the Dems got after their convention, but only time will tell if either bounce sticks. This campaign has gone on forever on both sides, so I don’t expect the typical October surprise to show up this time around except for some possible Palin discoveries.
I think it’s important to remember that we’re all going to vote for President. Either way, we’re stuck with the VP, and whoever is elected Pres will determine how important the VP’s job will be in the new administration. The biggest difference will be in the future; if McCain loses, Palin may be just an afterthought in history, but Biden’s long career will be more likely to stick around in memory.
One interesting thing to me- Mitt Romney fell real flat. As far as the party’s rising stars, Palin sure took Mitt’s place. If she loses and goes back to running Alaska, she will be a much stronger Republican presence in 2012, and I wouldn’t be surprised if she made a run for Pres on her own.
The kids (or other new voters), minorities and women are going to be the key this time around, and next time, they’ll be an even greater force unless the Great Divide becomes bridged over the next 4 years.
Comment # 161 by boomer – Terrific post. Thank You.
Comment # 160 by Nemesis – I am troubled that Nemesis is leaving. He/she provided much needed rationality and thoughtful consideration in this forum. Nemesis, you will be missed. Live Long & Prosper!
Seems like a lot of the oldies and goodies have had enough.
“Beam me up Scotty!”
Take care Nemesis. I hope you can come back to Earth after some cooling off. While we have not always agreed, I have appreciated your civility and ability to be open. That is in short supply on both sides.
Amazing what seems to sway some Republicans!
You’re all getting duped again.
Have you not forgot about the last eight years?
“America… just a nation of two hundred million used car salesmen with all the money we need to buy guns and no qualms about killing anybody else in the world who tries to make us uncomfortable”.
Hunter S. Thompson
Love the Star Trek references btw!
What amazes me is how many of the liberal posters on this site, won’t acknowledge the actual candidate, but only that they’re “Republican”. And thats what seems to me is what so many Dems so dead set against. Not what Palin & McCain have to offer or what they’ve done in the past during their careers, but the fact they have an R next to their names. To me that’s the sad thing.
I actually know a couple of Democrats and an Independent who changed their minds after seeing Palin speak and hearing what McCain had to say last night, who are now thinking about voting Republican. Not sure if they actually will or not, but at least they’re weighing their options and not voting blindly. Many diehard liberal democrats need to stop living in the past and bringing up the past 8 years. That’s history. We can’t bring it back. McCain and Palin will be a whole new administration with completely new ideas and values. Look at the candidates and their actual accomplishments instead of whether or not their a Democrat or Republican. The candidates on the Republican side have accomplished much more during their careers in office than the Democrat candidates have. And personally that’s what I look for in a candidate, whether Democrat, Republican OR Independent. Who will be the best person for the job, not someone who talks a good game and shows no past accomplishments.
I know Mccain did his level best to frame the debate last night to adopt the “change” theme, but I thought he lacked specifics the goals to be achieved andon how those were to be accomplished which is ironic since Republicans demanded that from Obama. McCain’s clearly running against Bush who was mentioned maybe three times in three days at the “Republican” convention. I’m very confused how you expect Americans to ignore the past eight years Captain. It is quite appropiate to evaluate the credibility of the candidates and its kinda silly for you to expect the American people to ignore their record although I can certanly see why you’d want to.
And I’m confused as to what McCain Palin is offering other than more of the same. And after Palin’s speech, devoted mostly to a partisan attack, I can’t believe you ‘d expect Democrats to ignore party. You do recall the Santayana adage that those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it? You’ll not find Democrats embracing ignorance as our salvation. And certainly Democrats have good cause for reminding the voters who brought us to this sorry state of affairs, particularly since Democrats’ patriotism was questioned and their integrity was impugned by the likes of Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly, and Coulter. Indeed the Idaho Republican Party sought and obtained these folks as speakers at their banquets. Understandably people don’t take well to being labelled traitors, and they tend to remember who did it. I also find it very ironic that you ask us to ignore the past 8 years then you ask that we look at the candidates’ record. Please I encourage you to do the same.
Boomer, Nemesis everyone needs a cooling off period once in awhile. And I know the struggle you face in addressing these issues when the tide in your area seems a deep shade of crimson. But if not now when? Your silence will only lead to regret. As my name implies, I’m an eternal optimist. It would not please the founding fathers for your voices to be silenced. You’re smart, informed, and respected.
One other thing Kirk, Palin’s highly partisan attack influenced no Democrats to vote for her, I can assure you. We know very little about her. I’ll be curious to see for what she stands and her vision for the country.
And the crowd is on its feet as McCain hits it out of the park. WOW!! What a speech. I think he did a great job and am very confident where this country will be heading when McCain and Palin are voted in.
Thanks, Sisyphus…
But I’m just coolin’ my jets for a while.
The last night of each convention told the tale much better than my meager powers of persuasion ever could- one ended in a stadium with 75,000 people in it, and real fireworks shot into the sky. The other ended in a hall 2/3 full with a fake fireworks display on a screen. That danged stadium held more people than everyone In Idaho Falls. That hall audience would only fill the Auditorium and the parking lot.
As long as a church, family traditions, and there are people who seek favor from the local majority, everything will stay just as it is.
As long as folks would rather be more content with their philosopy than a raise in their salary, or a better life for their kids, everything will stay just as it is.
When young guys like Captn Kirk say “That’s all in the past. Forget it” without realizing that the consequences of the past carry on far longer than the events that created them, everything will stay just as it is.
Until the folks in Idaho Falls realize that their vote will decide if Idaho gains admiration, indifference, or disgrace from who they elect, everything will stay just as it is.
Until folks here understand that the only way our government works is through a healty two-party system, everything will stay just as it is.
If you stay vertical and suckin’ wind long enough, you learn things change. What was once good yesterday might not be good today. As long as that lesson is unlearned, everything will stay just as it is, until events run us all over.
If people were as smart as cattle, they would know when they’re grazing in nothing but dirt and go looking for something better. If there is a fence in the way, cattle have enough sense to jump the fence. Until people realize they as smarter than cattle, everything will stay just as it is.
Carry on Sisyphus. I’m glad you still have the wind left to run some more laps. I’m content to let all this go. I’m content to sit back watch the cattle all run around in the dirt for a while longer, and I want to see if any of them have the sense, or the courage, to jump the fence that borders the greener pasture.
As a small town mayor, Palin tried to have certain books she deemed offensive removed from the city library. When the librarian refused, she attempted to have her fired but was thwarted by a citizen’s petition drive to retain her. Freedom of the press was preserved from the abusive powers of an autocratic polyanna intent on cleaning out the vile literature from a small town library.
I shudder to think of the Supreme Court nominees that she and McCain would endorse, especially after McCain said he would pick justices in the mold of Roberts and Alito. Forget separation of church and state…we’ll have Fundamentalist Christians calling the shots again. Even in Falwell’s absence there should be no shortage of rubes willing to cloak themselves in that mantle. We have no trouble killing Taliban Fundamentalists who are intent on ruling Afganistan and the Middle East through forced compliance with the Koran, yet the right wing of this country seems only too eager to acquiesce our rights to their Christian counterpart.
Hoping for Armageddon seems to occupy the hearts and minds of not only Christian fundamentalist zealots but Muslim stalwarts hoping for the return of their Messiah. IMO, that leads otherwise decent people to abandon hope of changing things for the better when the perceived world destruction is so inevitable and so close at hand. I have seen nothing to suggest that McCain and Palin think otherwise and that frightens me..
McCain and Palin truly lost me when they said they would have no problem teaching Creationism alongside Evolution in our schools. That smacks too much of Bush’s comment that, “The jury was still out (regarding evolution”). This country can ill afford to waste any more years in support of a George W. Bush, science/logic-free, agenda.
p.s. I have mostly given up posting here but I would be remiss were I not to express disappointment in Nemesis’ departure. She is truly one of the main reasons I take the time to visit this site. Happy trails, Nemesis…I’d still like to buy you–OK, you and your husband–a drink. You have always been a breath of fresh air here.
There you go again Meso.
The Charge: Palin opposes the teaching of evolution, and would mandate the teaching of creationism in the state’s public schools.
The Facts: Palin said during her 2006 gubernatorial campaign that she would not push the state Board of Education to add creation-based alternatives to the state’s required curriculum, or look for creationism advocates when she appointed board members. She has kept this pledge, according to the Associated Press.
Palin has spoken in favor of classroom discussions of creationism, in some cases. “I don’t think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn’t have to be part of the curriculum,” Palin told the Anchorage Daily News in a 2006 interview.
See: ‘Creation science’ enters the race; Palin is only candidate to suggest it should be discussed in schools. By Tom Kizzia, Anchorage Daily News, 27 October 2006)
She wasn’t stuffing any agenda down anyone’s throat and she never removed one book from the library. Perhaps it would be helpful to read Alaska newsources rather than liberal blogs from places like San Fransisco and Boston with all their ridiculous content. Can anyone imagine the stupidity of some of these blogs that demand she submit Trig to a DNA test to prove it was her child? These attempts to pile on with baseless attacks are going to backfire. The National Enquirer will soon be out of business.
I just read where Cindy McCain spent around $313,000 for her opening night outfit at the RNC. I realize that the lady is very wealthy, but it still seemed too excessive and obscene to me when the economy is in such poor shape. Laura Bush spent just under $4000. Quite a difference.
So what if she spent the money. It is her money to spend as she sees fit. In fact, one could make the counter argument that by spending that amount of money, it actually helps the economy rather than stifling it.
BTW-where did you read this stuff from? I would like to know so I can go check out the other “hard journalism” stories being done. Thanks.
I read it on Yahoo News on “Cindy McCain Sets Tone for GOP Fashion”.
Interesting point Bundy and actually I think you parse that rather well. Up until the time you make sweeping generalizations about liberals and blogs based upon a couple bad acts. Ironically if you click my name it will take you to a liberal blog that also addresses your point albeit regarding emails rather than blog posts.
I think you and I can agree that confidence and blind devotion are no substitute for sekpticism and critical analysis.
If McCain’s choice had been a MALE governor from Alaska, had been a MALE mayor, had been a MALE reformer, MALE corruption cleaner-upper, MALE politically-rising-superstar from humble roots, I wonder how this would have played out differently upon the national stage. My guess is that the attacks on him wouldn’t have been nearly as vitriolic.
I think the choice of Sarah is brilliant! In fact I think I’ll have a T-shirt made that reads
“Obama and Biden PALIN comparison”
Sisyphus, I know you are trying to promote your blog on 43rd State Blues….but this “click on my name” routine is a bit old.
I know, I know, I will get slammed for saying that, but just imagine if I had a blog on Michelle Malkin’s website and suggested everyone click on “my name” so I would get more hits on a conservative blogsite.
BTW: Cindy McCain’s dress cost 3,000 NOT 300,000
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/politics/2008/09/cindy-mccains-300000-outfit.html
..read carefully: and, yes, she had expensive, jewelry on. How much did Michelle Obama’s dress, jewelry, etc., cost? See, the point is, no one knows because it would be rude, irrelevant, racist, etc., to ask such a question of an Obama!
I’m not pimping my blog or anyone elses easterner. I specifically use that mechanism to quickly link you to what I had indicated, which, in that case, was to a post on the blog Hullabaloo, which concisely addresses Bundy’s argument on the way some liberal blogs analyze Palin. If you’d clicked on my name you’d have known that. Instead you just lept to a conclusion which I must say discloses more than a little about you. In fact it looks like you’ve never clicked my name when I suggested it. Its a common practice.
For future reference anytime I ask you to click my name its to cite to something directly relelvant. (comment #174) Otherwise it’ll take you to the place I blog regularly which is 43sb. (this comment) which I do solely for proper identification purposes since there are other Sisyphii in the blogosphere. I don’t know my html very well so I use that instead. And I rarely link to liberal blogs since it would look biased if I did. Mostly I like to use generally accepted sources depending on the point being made. But that link was in rebuttal to Bundy’s reference to liberal blogs so it was relevant.
Oh and I think the comment about Cindy’s dress had to do with whether the McCains feel middle class pain or whether they are out of touch. Personally, I think Palin’s selection will take much of the sting out of that contention.
Not even an appology for the $297,000 misinformation blunder Sisyphus? Thank you Easterner for the clarification. I for one am going to take that as an intentional, inflamatory, on purpose, misleading bit of information towards the McCain campaigne. Although you try to dismiss it with a lame excuse as to whether or not the McCains can feel middle class pain, and then you try another subtle inflamatory remark about Sarah Palin and her selection. How obviously transparent at an attempt to lead people through mis-information. But then again, I am getting used to that kind of tactic from the Obama/Biden campaigne.
Again, thanks Easterner for the correct information.
I might have missed this somewhere, but I can’t find anywhere where it was said that Cindy McCain’s dress cost $300,000, what I see is that her outfit cost $300,000. BIG difference.
Directly from the chatbox:
” I just read where Cindy McCain spent over $300,000 for her opening night outfit at the RNC. That is several year’s of my salary.”
Let’s not be coy about the word “outfit”; rarely, if ever, would I expect a dollar amount for an “outfit” to include my wedding ring, watch and the earrings I wear every day. . . . .but nice smoke and mirrors.
Sucks when you get busted. Take your lumps and move on. It happens to all of us at times. We see something on the internet and believe it before checking out it’s accuracy. I mean, if it can happen to Dan Rather it can happen to anybody.
Keep commenting Idaho native. I enjoy your posts.
Whoa Porter, I didn’t even bring up the Cindy McCain dress. I was just trying to steer the dialogue back to a meaningful discussion. And I made no such inflammatory suggestion about Palin. I sincerely believe that Palin being on the ticket will take the wind out the sails on the criticism that McCains are out of touch. So why would I apologize, again?
Wow Porter, I don’t think I’m the one viewing things in a hyperpartisan manner.
On a related Palin note, have you all read how “US Weekly” is trying desperately to maintain subscribers after a bunch cancelled because of the attacks on Palin?
Here is the text of the letter that apparently is being sent to subscribers who cancelled:
From: US Weekly USWcustserv@cdsfulfillment.com
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 11:17:57 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: cancel subscription
To: xxx
Thank you for contacting US Weekly.
We are sorry you are upset over the Governor Palin cover. We do not want to lose you as a subscriber over one article in one issue. In an effort to keep you as a subscriber, we will add five FREE issues to your subscription. Please let us know if you would like us to extend your current subscription rather than canceling our publication.
Thank you,
US Weekly
Cari
I think what is maddening is the contrast between the attack on Palin and the love-fest with the Obamas….
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/business/media/08usweekly.html?ref=politics
I don’t read “Us Weekly” anyway but I will surely not ever do so now.
My appology to you Sisyphus, it wasn’t you that brought that up about Cindy McCain’s dress it was Idaho Native in post #171. He stated that it was $313,000. My sincerest apology to you.
I am not partisan at all when it comes to the presidential campaign of the United States. I am 100% for McCain/Palin and it amazes me that people cannot see through the smoke and mirrors that the Obama/Biden campaign is throwing out there.
It is interesting that Obama is addressing issues directed towards Sarah Palin instead of his opponent John McCain. Obama and his camp must be extremely nervous. Can anyone else see the panic in Obama’s eyes lately when he is being interviewed and being called on the carpet about some of the Rumors and other mis-information he is pushing.
I hope that more eyes are opened to the fact that there is no way Obama and Biden can deliver on all of their promises. It reminds me of a Jr. High School election when some of the most ridiculous promises are made by those who are running for class president and other school offices. All the rumors that they continue to spread about Palin are only making her look better and better as they are being proven to be rumors by the media and other investigative sources.
Palin has lied, over & over again. Isn’t there some kind of rule against that in the Bible?
yes, it is unfortunate for the GOP that they didn’t get a v.p. who always lays it out honestly, like “Honest Joe Biden”. . . tee hee. . . Neil Kissock’s speeches and law school plagiarism aside, interesting how Biden has flip-flopped on the stem-cell issue. . . .shouldn’t he at least update his website????
I don’t know what Palin has lied about, anyway. . ..
You don’t know what PALIN HAS LIED ABOUT?
Hah!!! It’s been all over the news. But then I must keep in mind that your source is Faux News, easterner.
Palin keeps saying over and over again that she said “no thanks” on the bridge to nowhere. Blatently untrue. She was unquestionably for the bridge before she was against it. She took the $223 million dollars for the bridge and spent it on other pork barrel projects in her state.
BTW, she didn’t sell her “private jet” on eBAy. She sold it at a loss through an aviation broker.
And then there are her lies about the chef she supposedly “fired” and her silly comments about Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
She goes after Obama about earmarks, then as it turns out, she hired a lobbyist to get earmarks for her small town ($27 million for her town of 7,700 people). This is a woman who is a complete “business as usual” politician. This isn’t wrong details, it’s lying to embelish herself. Pretty soom she’ll be claiming she discovered gold in the Yukon in the 1800’s.
“I fired the chef” “I sold the jet on eBay”, “I stopped the bridge to no where” … um … yeah … right!
Palin’s LIES and GAFFES:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhgH19Jeu5s&feature=related
hmmm, when did I say I rely on Fox? this is the second time I’ve been accused of such on this site today. .. .
But, like I said, it is truly unfortunate the GOP couldn’t get “honest Joe” Biden….with his long history of truth-telling; his eye job looks fabuolous, BTW…..
ps
I am ROFL….you accuse me of getting my info from Fox News, and your source on all the significant lies Palin has told is. . . . . . YOUTUBE?
ha haha ha ha ha
NOPE.
You’re wrong .. again … easterner.
Maybe if you clicked the link you’d see it was MSNBC.
You’re a scream, easterner.
It’s entertaining to watch you shoot yourself in the foot.
ROFLMAO
It’s kinda obvious you get your news from sources like Faux News, since you seem to be unaware of Palin & McCain’s lies. They (and their eeevil spawn) are the only news network that hasn’t covered the issue in detail.
hey anonymous, #187…why when I click your link do I get directed to youtube?
oh, that’s right: cause it is a youtube link! !!!!!!
priceless. . . .great source of reporting, that youtube. . . I can also click on photos of Britney Spears’ navel at the same time!!!
LOL
what issue? are we still talking about Biden’s honesty?
Are you in grade school or something? Do you need a school teacher to tell you to play nice in the sandbox?
ooh said:
It’s kinda obvious you get your news from sources like Faux News, since you seem to be unaware of Palin & McCain’s lies. They (and their eeevil spawn) are the only news network that hasn’t covered the issue in detail.
Couldn’t a few words be changed and get similar results?
It’s kinda obvious you get your news from sources like MSNBC News, since you seem to be unaware of Biden & Obama’s lies. They (and their eeevil spawn) are the only news network that hasn’t covered the issue in detail.
The point is that name calling is no better than the gutter politics being practiced by both parties. You can’t demand better of pols when you practice the same. Focus less on the source of news and what is said. Ideas, good and bad, aren’t unique to Fox News anymore than they are to MSNBC. It is pretty easy to hammer Olberman or Hannity. What is harder to do (and takes more effort) is to listen to both, and other sources to get the real picture. So, keep right on saying that they are liars (and point your finger) and make yourself feel good, but know that many of your countrymen are looking deeper than such a criticism that is often displayed by children playing in that sandbox.
Well said Bundy! Thank you.
Comment #192: easterner, you are astounding.. Truly. No one else on these boards seems to have such a unique ability to talk out both sides of their mouth while keeping a straight face! This statement in #192 is inane at best, and insane at worst.
” …hey anonymous, #187…why when I click your link do I get directed to youtube? oh, that’s right: cause it is a youtube link! !!!!!!”
You then go on to mock me for using YouTube as a source, even though I explained it was an MSNC news clip that happened to be posted on YouTube. And you, easterner, have used YouTube as a source in this very thread!!! In comment #57 you provided a YouTube link as a source for a negative point you want to make about Obama. Is your logic that when easterner uses YouTube as a source it’s OK; however, if anyone with whom you don’t agree uses YouTube as a source we get to enjoy your mockery and derision?
Do you even realize, easterner, that all sorts of things get posted to YouTube (e.g., clips from all the major networks, MSNBC, CNN, even al jeezera and, yes, photos of Brittney’s navel). Some is it’s crap. Yes. Some of it is from well-respected and well-know sources. That is the case for the link I posted – a news clip from MSNBC. It does’t take a rocket scientist to figure that out. Plus, if you really wanted to know if what I posted was correct it’s easy enough to find news stories about it on the web sites of all the major news sources. But, it certainly appears that you weren’t interest learning anything. You were only interested in being nasty, mean and sarcastic.
easterner, you have claimed over and over again that you are NOT nasty, sarcastic or ugly to other people on ift. I give you comment #192 as exhibit A. You have verbally spanked other folks, and accused them of being nasty and not following rules. You cry “foul”. You get up in arms and make demands. Yet, what about your own behavior? Does that not matter to you at all?
You seem like a rather intelligent person, easterner. And you could use that to get people to think about and consider issues from another perspective. If you truly want people to listen to and consider your arguments –rather than dismissing you out of hand—perhaps you could start by being a little kinder and a teensy bit less aggressive. As they say “you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.” Any of us can go back and look at your record and form an opinion of how well you play with others in the sandbox. And we do look at your record. The regulars here are a rather intelligent lot. And what you’ve written speaks for itself.
Now, let’s get back to the issues and have some good, clean, honest, and thought provoking debate. Pretty Please?
sorry anonymous, you lost me: your initial criticism makes no sense unless you didn’t post a link to youtube;
sure I have used youtube; but I didn’t do it as a response to you using Fox and calling it “Faux”!!
I don’t think you are even keeping track of what you are upset about: you read me the riot act for using Fox as a source (which I did not, BTW) and relied on something from youtube to show me the error of my ways…..wherever it orginated, your link was to youtube and your criticism of me (in that post, anyway) was that I was relying on biased or otherwise flawed information. . .
comment 187: you stated: “But then I must keep in mind that your source is Faux News, easterner. ”
you then stated: “Palin’s LIES and GAFFES:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhgH19Jeu5s&feature=related”
honestly, do you really fail to see the irony in comment #187?
nicely said, Bundy, BTW. . . . .
OMG easterner– I did post a link to youtube (which was an MSNBC news clip) and you thought it was hyterically funny that I did so (and you mocked me), though you have posted links to youtube to support your own positions.
You said: “sure I have used youtube; but I didn’t do it as a response to you using Fox and calling it “Faux”!!”
Huh? I never read you the riot act on Fox news. You are confused.
THIS IS NOT HARD easterner! HOW CAN YOU POSSIBLY NOT GET IT? I KNOW YOU ARE SMARTER THAN THAT. And playing dumb does not suit you and is dishonest.
You don’t want to even attempt to play nice and you continue to deny the undeniable. Ah well, I give up on you. It’s like arguing with a drunk — it just p*sses off the drunk (because they are incapable on being logical in their current state) and you get nowhere. You are not worth my time and energy. I’ll let your comments and record speak for themselves. And I, like many others, will simply skip over any comments you post.
Well, that was really well spoken Anonymous. Kudos for you. Please do skip over easterner’s posts. That way we won’t be subjected to you posting baloney trying to bait a fight. Post #187 clearly mocked easterner for using “Faux News” when that was not the case. Your posts suggest a similar debating tactic used by another poster here named after a sandwich. So unless “anonymous” in 187 is not “anonymous” in 199 then it is you that are confused (and perhaps drunk). Cheers to you either way. You have suceeded in making the thread about you rather than McCain and Palin.
Morose that there hasn’t been another terrorist attack on American soil for seven long years, liberals were ecstatic when Hurricane Gustav was headed toward New Orleans during the Republican National Convention last week. The networks gave the hurricane plenty of breaking-news coverage — but unfortunately it was Hurricane Katrina from 2005 they were covering.
On Keith Olbermann’s Aug. 29 show on MSNBC, Michael Moore said the possibility of a Category 3 hurricane hitting the United States “is proof that there is a God in heaven.” Olbermann responded: “A supremely good point.”
Actually, Olbermann said that a few minutes later to some other idiotic point Moore had made, but that’s how Moore would have edited the interview for one of his “documentaries,” so I will, too. I would only add that Michael Moore’s morbid obesity is proof that there is a Buddha.
Hurricane Gustav came and went without a hitch. What a difference a Republican governor makes!
As many have pointed out, the reason elected officials tend to neglect infrastructure projects, like reinforcing levees in New Orleans and bridges in Minneapolis, is that there’s no glory when a bridge doesn’t collapse. There are no round-the-clock news specials when the levees hold. You can’t even name an overpass retrofitting project after yourself — it just looks too silly. But everyone’s taxes go up to pay for the reinforcements.
Preventing another terrorist attack is like that. There is no media coverage when another 9/11 doesn’t happen. We can thank God that President George Bush didn’t care about doing the safe thing for himself; he cared about keeping Americans safe. And he has, for seven years.
If Bush’s only concern were about his approval ratings, like a certain impeached president I could name, he would not have fought for the Patriot Act and the war in Iraq. He would not have resisted the howling ninnies demanding that we withdraw from Iraq, year after year. By liberals’ own standard, Bush’s war on terrorism has been a smashing, unimaginable success.
A year after the 9/11 attack, The New York Times’ Frank Rich was carping about Bush’s national security plans, saying we could judge Bush’s war on terror by whether there was a major al-Qaida attack in 2003, which — according to Rich — would have been on al-Qaida’s normal schedule.
Rich wrote: “Since major al-Qaida attacks are planned well in advance and have historically been separated by intervals of 12 to 24 months, we will find out how much we’ve been distracted soon enough.” (“Never Forget What?” New York Times, Sept. 14, 2002.)
There wasn’t a major al-Qaida attack in 2003. Nor in 2004, 2005, 2006 or 2007. Manifestly, liberals thought there would be: They announced a standard of success that they expected Bush to fail.
As Bush has said, we have to be right 100 percent of the time, the terrorists only have to be right one time. Bush has been right 100 percent of the time for seven years — so much so that Americans have completely forgotten about the threat of Islamic terrorism.
For his thanks, President Bush has been the target of almost unimaginable calumnies — the sort of invective liberals usually reserve for seniors who don’t separate their recyclables properly. Compared to liberals’ anger at Bush, there has always been something vaguely impersonal about their “anger” toward the terrorists.
By my count, roughly one in four books in print in the world at this very moment have the words “Bush” and “Lie” in their title. Barnes & Noble has been forced to add an “I Hate Bush” section. I don’t believe there are as many anti-Hitler books.
Despite the fact that Hitler brought “change,” promoted clean, energy-efficient mass transit by making the trains run on time, supported abortion for the non-master races, vastly expanded the power of the national government and was uniformly adored by college students and their professors, I gather that liberals don’t like Hitler because they’re constantly comparing him to Bush.
The ferocity of the left’s attacks on Bush even scared many of his conservative allies into turning on him over the war in Iraq.
George Bush is Gary Cooper in the classic western “High Noon.” The sheriff is about to leave office when a marauding gang is coming to town. He could leave, but he waits to face the killers as all his friends and all the townspeople, who supported him during his years of keeping them safe, slowly abandon him. In the end, he walks alone to meet the killers, because someone has to.
That’s Bush. Name one other person in Washington who would be willing to stand alone if he had to, because someone had to.
OK, there is one, but she’s not in Washington yet. Appropriately, at the end of “High Noon,” Cooper is surrounded by the last two highwaymen when, suddenly, his wife (Grace Kelly) appears out of nowhere and blows away one of the killers! The aging sheriff is saved by a beautiful, gun-toting woman.
COPYRIGHT 2008 ANN COULTER
Is it me or is some of the arguing going on here sounding vaguely familiar? Posts strongly remind me of the personal debates going on this past end of May, mid-June and a week or so in July. Anyone else think the arguing going on between certain posters is happening again under new names? Do they even realize it? Same tone, same back and forth, similar wording, it’s got to be two women because I can’t imagine a man staying in and cat-fighting like this. Wait, some men do jump in, I take it back. But all my life I only see women argue like this, to the end! Review the last week of posts on this thread, plus a few below in the months mentioned for comparison.
http://www.idahofallstoday.com/2007/06/01/how-would-you-change-idahofallzcom/
http://www.idahofallstoday.com/2008/07/24/obamas-appearance-in-europe/#comment-25070
http://www.idahofallstoday.com/2006/03/21/find-sex-offenders-in-your-neighborhood/
The lesson here (let’s face it), some personalities aren’t meant to “jive” no matter what user name or sock puppet of the day is being used. Personal attacks and arguing ensue no matter what. Maybe it would help all of these threads if the vaguely named users (guest, anon) picked a name and stuck to it, and avoided responding at all to the triggers because it’s only turned negative and personal. Because of your personalities, you won’t solve it here or convince each other you’re “right”.
Ditto.
Bundy, I give what I get. Why should I be respectful to someone who offers disrespect to me?
And as far as my news sources go, I get them from everywhere. I don’t watch much on the tube, since I prefer to read my news. I do listen to some radio, just to get a feel for what’s the topic of the day. Yes, I get progressive talk, but I also listen to Hannity & Medved and (when I can stomach him) Savage.
Can you say the same? Have you ever listened to someone like Thom Hatrmann, once of the most reasonable & educated radio hosts airing today?
Your bullying doesn’t work, Bundy.
Why I’m voting Republican:
http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/
By, the way the Grand Opening of the Democractic Headquarters is this Friday.
http://www.bonnevilledemocrats.org/Events/Event01.php
#200, 201, 202, ditto…….
have a great day, all!
easterner, you neglected to ditto #203 LOL
thanks, anonymous:
ditto, #203. . . .
#202 — Now here’s a sexist statement if I ever saw one:
“………..it’s got to be two women because I can’t imagine a man staying in and cat-fighting like this …..
Oh really? You haven’t been watching much between the two campaigns I guess. You just alienated the women on this board. Perhaps that’s why you’re not brave enough to use your real name.
This is a case of a sock puppeter accusing others of sock puppeting. Go figure!
There’s a case of the pot calling the kettle black. #209 Funny how you’re not “brave enough” to use your real name either. This board is set up so all can remain anonymous if one chooses. Now THATS a news flash for you!
I couldn’t agree more news flash for u. However, there’s a big difference between the post by “is it me” and the post by “anonymous”. Can you figure out what it is?
Ahhhh confucious say I see I see! Good point Anon.
Too funny…
#1. I alienated ALL of the women on this board? I’m sure females here are thrilled YOU have chosen to speak for every one of them. How do you know I’m not one myself? It’s got nothing to do with sexism, take a poll of 1000 men and women and ask which sex is better able to “shake it off” and which sex “nags and whines” to the bitter end. Are guys out there secretly agreeing?
#2. My choice of a user name for this particular post is not a big deal. I am a pretty balanced poster except when crap like this goes on between others and it sends good, longtime users away. Which of the 1001 “anonymous” are you? And your former user name? Have you ever been temporarily banned from this site? It’s OK, act confused and innocent now. You still carpet bomb everything. Take a break. There’s something called internet addiction, and excessive angry posts every day to the same few sites are a sure sign of someone who needs a few hobbies. At IFZ, they pretty much all come back and read if not post again.
#3. My prediction came true, one of the the worst offenders was the first to respond quickly, strongly and attack. Bingo.
That’s all you’ll hear from me. Anyone want to talk about Obama or McCain now?
I see the drama continues…….dond dond daaaaaaaaa
#213 “is it me” … your post indicts you better than I ever could.
OMG!
After watching the Charlie Gibson interview with Palin I’m truly frightened about the prospects of Palin being a heart attack away from the presidency.
Amongst lunatic statements on her foreign policy experience:
- She’s been to Canada. Well Sarah so have I and I’m not an expert.
- You can see Russia from Alaska. Well Sarah I can see the moon outside but that doesn’t make me an astronaut.
And don’t even get me started on how she sounded like a loonie bible thumper.
Anonymous #216. I didn’t see the interview. Can you point me in a direction so I can read/see it? I’ve had to read your post several times, and keep hoping that I am going to see “Just Kidding” in there somewhere. I keep wanting to say “Uh uh, no way, no how.” Please tell me it isn’t so.
BTW….great comments #200 & 201!! (thumbs down & all) haha!!
oops!
(notice the “haha” as opposed to an LOL or smiley, just for you boomerang!)
gotta love IFT~!
Have a great wknd everyone
Read the transcript of the interview instead of throwing out a few words that seemingly “scare you”. I am scared of you if this is the type of analysis that you are going to use.
The Palin interview with Charlie Gibson was downright embarrassing. I really expected her to perhaps get tripped up on a couple questions. But it was worse than that –. her answers were simply dismal. It was so apparent that she was trying to insert rehearsed lines into her answers. And because of this her answers were, at times, totally incoherent.
She was at turns clueless (especially about national security), evasive, visibly irritated, defensive, condescending (“Charlie” much?) and did I mention evasive? Hint to Ms. Palin: when viewers can see that you’re shooting daggers out of your eyes, you may not come off as all that likeable.
She flunked the test. Fail. But the fact that McCain picked someone so unready and unqualified, so lightweight doesn’t make me feel like gloating at all. It really makes me sad for what this country has become.
The question we must all ask ourselves after this interview is “what I am doing to elect Obama/Biden and is it enough?” I know I did and the answer was: not nearly enough.
mmm…interesting….I just read ABC News’ review of the interview, which indicated she has strong, thought-out positions on the issues, including energy independence (especially since her home state is at the epicenter of the same) and the war on terror, as well as the ermerging conflict in Georgia.
the “I can see Russia” comment? what she really said is that she has had experience dealing with Russia, as it is quite literally a neighbor of the state she governs. . . .I think basic geography proves that as a valid point. . . .
I wonder what “review” of the interview #220 and #216 saw?
Actor Matt Damon speaks out on the Republicans’ choice of hockey-mom Sarah Palin for VP. Damon compares her rise to a ‘really bad Disney movie’ and says it’s crazy that this woman could become Pres…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anxkrm9uEJk
….yeah, I should rely on Matt Damon to make my election choices for me…
I probably should also listen when Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carrey tell me not to vaccinate my children. . ..
http://scienceline.org/2008/04/03/expert-advice-on-autism-from-jenny-mccarthy-and-jim-carrey/
always nice to have the experts weigh in!
Who is Matt Damon and why would his oppinion matter? He is an over paid actor that has as much of a background in politics as most of us here.
Did anyone else feel that Charlie Gibson was a bit combative. I wonder if he will be as badgering when he interviews Biden? I am kind of tired of being told what to think or feel by the media. I listened to the responses and didn’t need to be told how to take them by NBC. I think she did a good job and her interview has not changed my mind about how I feel about the two separate campaigns.
Oooooohhhh Matt Damon. I’m convinced now! Dont you just love when actors get involved in politics like they even have a clue of whats going on in the real world?
Just one month ago she said she didn’t even know what the job entailed and now she’s providing her fitness for it? Geographic proximity as an attribute for foreign policy experience is really a joke. I’m surprised she is still touting it. She is ridiculed for it in the blogs that I’ll be surprised if its not done in the debates. But really the scary part was when she didn’t know what the Bush doctrine was. Probably the single biggest foreign policy shift in decades and she was a deer in headlights.
He said, she said. Depending on what blog you read, you get an interpretation of what she said being dismal, or just fine.
Watch Nightline tonight (Ch. 8)at 10:30 or 11:00? to see for yourself.
__________________
I would love to see Obama answer the same questions.
The only part of the interview that I felt she flubbed a bit was the Israeli answer about not second guessing them on self-defense involving Iran. A better answer would have been, to encourage Israel not to attack and give touger sanctions a chance to work first. Otherwise, it seems to me that she has dealt with more foreign officials from Russia and Canada in energy dealings and fishing treaty disputes than Obama. So that portion of foreign policy experience is definitely a deficit for Obama.
Sis…it was the Moose in the headlights. I’m sure there are a few troops in the Striker Bde that realize she painted a target on their back for every RPG Toting A$$wipe in Iraq looking for her son, which won’t be hard since the Striker Bde is the only unit unit driving Striker vehicles around the streets. Talk about putting her political career ahead of her family.
Its the National Enquirer so take this all with a huge grain of salt. But they were dead on about John Edwards so I can’t dismiss this entirely at that start as I would have pre Edwards.
They are reporting a few stories in upcoming issues including one about an alleged affair Palin had. Another concerns her son who just went into the military. According to the story it was one of those go to jail or military options as the story reports he was a drug dealer and major lawbreaker. It also has some bad things to say about her pregnant daughter’s antics. And there are implications that Palin used her position to keep her kids out of trouble with the law.
Isn’t that one of the perks of being a small town, family values oriented, morally superior mayor?
So what if they paid an informant about Edwards?
That has no bearing on Palin.
Recall these are the same guys that claim Elvis is alive. I am getting a vision of a white polyester suit and white disco boots again…but you just keep on believing brother! Buh, bye……………
Great comment Buntster!
I said take it with a grain of salt. But also recall everyone used the exact same arguments about Elvis, Bigfoot, and aliens to discount the Edwards affair story the Enquirer was running months ahead of the rest of the media. I even discounted the story because it was the Enquirer. And all those who pooh poohed it now have eggs on their faces because the Enquirer was right.
And lets recall another family values republican female who ran on a campaign of moral integrity, right here in Idaho in fact. Helen Chenoweth’s whole campaign back in 1992 amounted to “Larry LaRocco had an affair” so vote for me. Only as it turned out this pillar of morality was the other woman in an affair herself. Or another family values republican, also from Idaho, who once proclaimed that Bill Clinton was a “nasty, nasty man” for his affair. Too bad Mr Craig couldn’t stay out of bathrooms. I discount nothing anymore when it comes to politicians infidelities. Or how about Steve Symms who was widely known to be a womanizer? We could write a book just on Idaho republicans.
I read where Bigfoot..(er, sorry, Sasquatch is probably more p.c.), . . . .gave birth to Elvis’ love child on Mars while clubbing with Britney Spears, in that very same issue of the Enquirer!!!!
So it must be true!!!
Probably like the whole “fired the trooper married to her sister” controversy; notice no one mentions that “scandal” anymore since it turns out that the truth was, the guy had anger-management issues, including the um, tasering of his 12-year-old stepson!, which led to his dismissal and no one was fired in retaliation for his warranted dismissal.
McCain is firmly ahead in the last Gallup Poll….sounds like there is some desperation in the Obama camp. . . .hence the smears….
wow, I just saw the video of McCain’s appearance on “The View”; amazing. . . . . clearly, he was being baited by the “ladies” on the show. . . and yet he came away strong and sure and just great. even those who didn’t agree with his convictions (ie, he received boos for saying he thought Roe V. Wade was a bad decision) applauded him at other moments.
Kudos to him for wading into that malestrom voluntarily and showing himself to be a class act.
Excellent Blog post about Palin …
The Sarah Myth
http://www.literarymama.com/oped/
I am convinced more now than ever, If you like Palin you think she did wonderful, if you don’t there is nothing she can do to make you like her. It is the same with Obama/Biden. I think she brought out some wonderful points, but you could tell she is new to this large scale political battle. I am not ready to condemn her for that. I absolutely believe that the integrity she possesses is more than what Obama and Biden can produce between the both of them. I don’t think she is perfect, I am sure she has made mistakes and poor choices that she regrets and has done what she can to make right. I believe that the kind of leadership skills, her belief in God, her values and morals is what this country needs now more than a socialist leader.
“McCain is firmly ahead in the last Gallup Poll….sounds like there is some desperation in the Obama camp. . . .hence the smears….”–there are no smears emenating from the Obama camp easterner.
Indeed the smearing and negativity is coming directly from the desperation of the McCain camp eager to keep the public focused on anything but the state of the country after eight years of Republican rule. They seem to be truth challenged, going bigtime negative and using lies to accomplish their nefarious goals.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH0xzsogzAk
McCain has actually issued an ad that falsely accuse Obama of supporting sex education for kindergartners when the legislation was to help kindergartners avoid sexual predators.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYQAv2HnuCQ
And with regard to troopergate there is a legislative ethics investigation on whether Palin inappropriately used the power of her office. The bipartisan committee is controlled by Republicans and just voted to subpoena 13 individuals including Todd Palin on that question. Actually the trooper is a sideshow to the investigation but right wing disinformation sites parrot the talking point that he’s a bad guy to divert away from the real question on whether Palin abused her power. And don’t you think its a little fishy for a Governor to poke her nose into a personnel matter way below her pay grade. Especially when it involves a family member. McCain has a fleet of attorneys trying to derail the investigation until after the election. In fact, the more I see the more she reminds me of Bush.
I might add, that I don’t really think that the separation of church and state is a good think. Especially when this Country was founded on the belief that in God we Trust. I believe that we should still trust in God in every aspect of our lives, especially now when our country is is such trouble.
#239 – Porter said:
” … I don’t really think that the separation of church and state is a good thing. Especially when this Country was founded on the belief that in God we Trust. I believe that we should still trust in God in every aspect of our lives, especially now when our country is is such trouble.”
Yes, but whose God, Porter? Are you going to mandate that everyone believe in your Christian God (I don’t know if you’re Christian, this is simply an example).
I am a separationist, and I strongly believe that separation of church and state is a very good thing. This separatist belief is one shared by the vast majority of legal and historical scholars who have studied the issus. The Constitution places religion almost wholly outside the reach of government. In particular, the Constitution delegates no power to government over religious affairs, and the First Amendment explicitly prohibits the government from establishing or controlling religion. The effect of this arrangement is to leave Americans free to worship, believe, and support religion as they see fit. Separation deprives government of its ability to coerce adherence to religion, or to compel the support of religion against an individual’s will.
Think about Afghanistan when you thing about no separation of church and state. The Taliban control everything and religious choices are non-existent under that type of system. Women, in particular, have no voice.
No Porter the country was founded on the first amendment. I appreciate and respect your faith and your strong beliefs as I do the strong beliefs of other faiths, and those who believe with equal fervor that there is no god. I am very grateful that the country was a haven where people could escape the religious wars that permeated the planet where refugees could practice feely and openly without fear of reprisal. I am also very grateful that our forefathers recognized that a major source of the violence was when politics became embroiled in the illogical and unsolvable disagreements surrounding religious matters and forbid congress from passing any law respecting the establishment of religion. It was one of the wisest acts ever made by man in establishing government. You might even say it was divinely inspired.
But I’m frightened every time one of our leaders indicates God is on our side in Iraq or that its part of God’s plan. Mostly because by framing it in those terms, it embroils us in very religious based conflict the founding fathers sought to avoid.
And odd that you would pick that phrase “in God we trust”, the one that is on most coins. That wasn’t added until the 1950s during the McCarthy era to distinguish us from the godless communists. It was just a propaganda tool.
WT(heck) does in God We Trust Have To Do With Palin?
Her comment made at church was to pray for the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan that their mission would hopefully be part of God’s plan. She was not stating that it was God’s plan that we were in Iraq and Afghanistan. There is a big difference but too many liberal bloggers take the easy route and criticize before thinking about what was said and understanding the same.
This same mentality took place with allegations of censorship of books, creationism being mandated in schools and other items. My observation of this is that it reminds me of the little boy who cried wolf. At some point, legitimate criticism will be drowned out because people will tune it out and dismiss it as sour grapes when, in fact, they should be paying attention to what is said.
Well said Sisyphus, and thank you for the respect that you you offer. I don’t see that often here.
I do believe that there have been many times that leaders have hidden behind the phrases that reference God to gain favor with the people that they wish to lead. It is nothing more than taking Gods name in vain.
I would like to add something to Bundy’s statement. At the very end of his statement he said, “they should be paying attention to what is said.” I would simply like to add that most times a persons action will speak louder than what they are saying. I don’t mean to be disagreeable here, because that is where our focus should be, but we need to include actions also
Anonymous kind of put me in my place. I don’t like the fact that God is being left out of the major decisions in life and for our Country. I certalinly could have and should have said it a bit better. I do like the responses that have come about though. What great stuff. This is way better than arguing. I think this is what this site was made for, to air our differences in oppinions and not bash each others ideas. Thanks all.
Right you are Bundy. That was a digression that Porter and I had. And Porter I don’t think God is left out. Most of our leaders have very strong beliefs as well. They don’t leave those at the door when they do their jobs.
And Bundy who is misconstruing who? It is undisputed that Palin inquired of the librarian on the prospect of banning books and raises legitimate concerns on her views of the first amendment. And whether you know it or not, many observers of US foreign policy, both inside and outside the middle east, decry everytime the religious overtones are used to describe our activities in the middle east. It leads to a faulty polarizing conclusion that the US is in a war against all Muslims. In the world of diplomacy its a reckless comment. Too many conservative commentators think an issue is settled by singling out a few overreaching pundits and showing where they mischaracterized the debate. Sure those few may have but it doesn’t mean the debate is over.
Hi sisyphus,
I would like to see the source for the “undisputed” claim about banning books:
What I know is this: a list was circualting and was even posted on the Obama site !!! , of books supposedly banned by Sarah Palin; problem is, some of those books weren’t even printed yet in the year she allegedly sought to have them banned!
Also, the list wassimply a cut and paste of a list of “books that have been banned” somewhere at some time….NOT by Sarah palin.
The Anchorage newspaper also indicated, in an article on the topic, that no books were banned and that this “scandlal” came about as a result of Palin having a general discussion with a libararian about how to handle censorship issues and that was that.
http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/story/515512.html
take note of the last two paragraphs. . . .
so, if it is “undisputed” that Palin banned or sought to ban books, can you please list your source??
Good comments East! We all know that sometimes people will blindly believe whatever they read. This is the problem with the libs on this site, all they care about is digging up dirt on Palin and posting it on this site whether its true or not, instead of discussing whats really important. But I can understand, it’s because their worried and scared because she’s such a strong woman and is exactly what this country needs. They also know Obama isn’t looking as good as he was a month ago in the polls..
Okay, I have something of major substance that I wanted to share with all my liberal and conservative friends. This link is from the Citizens Against Government Waste ( non-partisan group). It represents numerous votes and gives a ranking for 2007 and lifetime with this group keeping tallies.
The higher the percentage, the more favorable to the taxpayer. This is good stuff. It clearly uses these Senators own votes to show who they really are.
Obama: 2007 rating-ten percent (10%). Lifetime 18%.
Biden: 2007 rating-0%. Lifetime 22%.
McCain: 2007 rating-100%. Lifetime 88%.
The link will spell out what votes were used to calculate 2007 ratings. This is the substance that we have been waiting for. Additionally, many of the votes are on Amendments and earmarks and not just bills–this means, one can’t claim that they voted for the bill just to get what they wanted while having to swallow another portion of the bill that was objectionable. It doesn’t get much clearer than this! If we want to see the difference between tax and spenders vs. fiscal responsibility it’s not more clear who is who.
http://councilfor.cagw.org/site/DocServer/2007_Senate_Ratings_Final.pdf?docID=3242
On a lighter note did anyone catch the SNL parody of Sarah Palin and Hilary Clinton. Tina Fey did a near perfect Palin and had me rolling on the floor laughing when she started posing during one of Hilary’s rantings. I’m sure the Palintbots will call the whole thing trash but keep in mind the real Sarah Palin has stated she thought it was funny.
It was hilarious! I didn’t think it was trash, that’s what sketch comedy is all about. I thought Tina Fey did an awesome job.
Do you deliberately misconstrue what I wrote easterner? I wrote: “It is undisputed that Palin inquired of the librarian on the prospect of banning books”–you cite to just a source. Nobody disputes that Palin asked the question. A candidate that seeks to ban library books is concerning to me.
But please return the favor on this ostensible list, provided by some commenter somewhere. I’m shocked, SHOCKED, I tell you, that something written on the internet is not well sourced. /end of sarcasm. I never said that books were banned. I said she looked into it. As Guest House noted some people want to believe whatever they think they read. Y’all ought to be looking in a mirror.
“all they care about is digging up dirt on Palin and posting it on this site whether its true or not,”–This is rather passive aggresive isn’t it? its just not true in my case Guest House. Please demonstrate otherwise.
Bundy, that link seems to be busted. I’ve never heard of that entity. I had heard of Source Watch however. They raise some concerns about the entity of which you speak. Can you ressurect the page to which you were citing?
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Citizens_Against_Government_Waste
As does this one.
http://www.oreillynet.com/xml/blog/2005/09/you_know_citizens_against_gove.html
Citing a 501(c )(3) usually gives rise to an agenda. Gotta be careful. Oh and I notice you omit Palin from that assessment. Go google Palin and earmarks.
Yeah Tina figured out it was the role of a lifetime and she was going to grab it, especially since she was already compared to her. No matter what happens in this election, Palin will likely be on the scene for a while guaranteeing lots of camera time for Tina. I thought the skit was hilarious.
I agree with other comments, very funny skit by Tina Fey.
Sisyphus said: “Do you deliberately misconstrue what I wrote easterner?”
Yes, Sisyphus, easterner does have a nasty habit of misconstruing what others write if he/she doesn’t agree. There are examples of this everywere. I’ve taken to ignoring anything he/she wrties for precisely this reason.
And what was the point of your comment guest? (other than putting down another poster which happens to be rule 3)
Looks like a poster looking to start a catfight again. They come back under many names. I agree, #253 was completely unnecessary. Perhaps people can allow the two having an issue discuss/duke it out? No need to jump on the criticism bandwagon.
Hi Sisyphus….
still not sure what you are driving at; I did cite several sources for the info I posted…but if you are in need of more, I am happy to oblige:
http://ala8.ala.org/ala/oif/bannedbooksweek/challengedbanned/challengedbanned.htm
http://www.librarian.net/stax/2366/sarah-palin-vp-nominee/
and yes, I did read what you wrote: and I disagree that it is “undisputed” (your words, not mine) that Sarah Palin discussed “banning” books with the librarian. That simply is not what happened.
HAGD all………..
Hi “Guest” or whoever you truly are
here is what you wrote:
“Yes, Sisyphus, easterner does have a nasty habit of misconstruing what others write if he/she doesn’t agree. There are examples of this everywere”
can you please point out one example? of true “misconstruction” not “disagreement” ?
or use your real screen name so we know the strenth of your convictions????
thanks!
More often than not, the ones who complain about people coming back under different names are usually the ones who do it the most. Nobody is starting a catfight but you guest me.
Stick around as long as the rest of us, the exact same bantering, identical accusations and language, etc. keeps on between a few posters – easterner and another one who keeps changing her (or his) name. It’s gotten pretty old. Pphone – you’re new so you’ll see in about 6 months what I mean. Your comment #254 directed at Guest insulting easterner is really no different than mine. Sorry, I call it as I see it.
Funny how political discussions bring out the worst in people. Why is that?
It’s got nothing to do with political discussions at all. It has to do with one poster who likes to rag on Easterner every chance they get.
Exactly, you see what I was trying to say. It’s getting tiring for the rest of us to read all the time. “Same old song and dance” to quote one of my favorite bands.
Guest Me and Persephone………thank you.
Not a problem. But can I give you some friendly feedback? The poster who likes to nag you makes a lot of accusations about your intentions, or what you do or don’t say. You always come back and say “give me an example”. That request rarely seems to get answered and the ensuing discussion only progresses into more “tit for tat”. Maybe it wouldn’t go so far if you ignored the comment and said “whatever”. Then keep going with whatever you need to say. I think whoever she/he is likes to get a rise out of you. You know – like the annoying pest in an office, completely ignore them and they find someone else to fight with, because the inner need fight and argue in this person is strong.
So easterner, it still seems you’re trying to strawman this argument, so I’ll type real slow.
I said–”Palin inquired of the librarian on the prospect of banning books”.
You state that is false by citing to this article which provides in relevant part:
“In December 1996, Emmons [the librarian] told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her — starting before she was sworn in — about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose.
Emmons told the Frontiersman she flatly refused to consider any kind of censorship. Emmons, now Mary Ellen Baker, is on vacation from her current job in Fairbanks and did not return e-mail or telephone messages left for her Wednesday.
When the matter came up for the second time in October 1996, during a City Council meeting, Anne Kilkenny, a Wasilla housewife who often attends council meetings, was there.
Like many Alaskans, Kilkenny calls the governor by her first name.
“Sarah said to Mary Ellen, ‘What would your response be if I asked you to remove some books from the collection?” Kilkenny said.
“I was shocked. Mary Ellen sat up straight and said something along the line of, ‘The books in the Wasilla Library collection were selected on the basis of national selection criteria for libraries of this size, and I would absolutely resist all efforts to ban books.’”
——————————-
You seem to think I’m arguing that Palin banned books. There is no evidence of that. And I never said that. But she looked into it. Palin has not disputed this account, that I’m aware of. And I think that’s relevant in evaluating a candidate for any office on whether they harbor a desire to prevent the public from accessing information.
Sarah Palin – “Jerry Falwell with a pretty face.”
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/09/15/bess/index.html
thanks again, Guest Me………..your advice is great ………I will stop rising to the baiting….
Oh poor little victim easterner. Call the waaaaambulance. Such a meek and mild little soul geting beat up by the big bad bully
Did someone let a child into the thread? One who forgot to read the community comment guidelines? E – ignore the bait. The maturity oozing from that post astounds me. No… wait, it doesn’t at all.
Yeah. Anyway I remember something about Palin?
I’m a little concerned over Palin’s environmental stances. She’d gut Alaska, that is true. Probably Idaho, too.
I’m not saying we need Gore but her stances are mighty extreme.
RE 268 guestme
mabe you should take your own advice in 263????
Re-269.
I know what you mean. Since being elected governor, the air is terrible, the vegetation is shriveling up, the fish are being killed off, polar bears are now extinct, the caribou are on their last legs, and it doesn’t snow up there anymore due to man made global warming.
Man, Al Gore should run for Alaska governor and clean up that awful state that is totally in disaray. Thanks for cluing us all in on how Palin has become an environmental wrecking ball. Man those Alaskans must be pretty stupid to have voted for her. And with job approval ratings in the 80th percentile those dufus Alaskans are more than stupid, they are truly morons.
wow.
So now Arianna Huffington, et al, has resorted to picking on Sarah Palin’s hair!!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/users/profile/texrednface?action=comments&display=news&sort=newest
And to promoting a website “allegedly” written by two grandmas (wink, nudge) who call Palin a “b*tch” and suggest she shove a pipeline somewhere indelicate…
http://wordpress.com/tag/margaret-and-helen/
very classy…
ahh, desperation! how it emanates from the Obama Nation!!!!!
I’m a Republican and have previously voted that way. But for this election, the pick of Palin was the last straw for me. The most important factor in the pick for VP is for them to be ready to be President. This is much more important since McCain is 72 years old. In fact, that is the primary JOB of the VP – to be ready to be President at any time. I’m sorry, but given Palin’s few interviews after her initial blockbuster speech, it is obvious McCain made a political gamble rather than what is important for the counry. I may not agree with Joe Biden on many things, but it’s hard to argue he’s not qualified.
As Colin Powell (another Republican who has EARNED credibility and respect) said it much better below. And anyone who says Powell’s pick was based on race hasn’t educated themsevles on the facts of his record, and who he has supported in the past. Powell is someone who has made mistakes, but he has always tried to put country first. Besides, he’s not the only retired General with this opinion. I’m very troubled by what my party has degenerated to. I used to love McCain but I’m very troubled by his decisions and who he chooses to listen to in how to run his campaign.
From Colin Powell on “Meet The Press”:
“In the case of Mr. McCain, I found that he was a little unsure as to deal with the economic problems that we were having and almost every day there was a different approach to the problem. And that concerned me, sensing that he didn’t have a complete grasp of the economic problems that we had. And I was also concerned at the selection of Governor Palin. She’s a very distinguished woman, and she’s to be admired; but at the same time, now that we have had a chance to watch her for some seven weeks, I don’t believe she’s ready to be president of the United States, which is the job of the vice president. And so that raised some question in my mind as to the judgment that Senator McCain made.”
http://www.clipsandcomment.com/2008/10/19/transcript-colin-powell-on-meet-the-press-endorses-barack-obama-october-19/
Yeah, instll more government and raise our taxes….Obama’s the right choice! NOT!
I’d rather have sexy Sarah Palin as President over Obama anyday.
Bundy for President!!
Sarah Palin today misstated the vice president’s job for at least the second time. When asked by a school kid what the VP does, she responded that the VP is in charge of the senate. Not quite, the VP makes tiebreaker votes and that is it. This follows Palin saying she was not sure what the VP does.
When are the Republicans going to admit this is not their strong year and stop bashing fellow Americans as traitors? I heard months of whining on conservative talk radio about how much you conservatives hated McCain, but now you are glorifying him like JC second coming. Pahlease!
easterner as usual you are so off the mark as to be laughable. Who is desperate? it certainly isn’t the Obamam camp …….. LOL
Comment #277
Sorry Guest, As designated by the Constitution of the United States, the vice president also serves as the President of the Senate. So in a way the VP is in charge of the Senate.
Herb, read up on exactly what that phrase means, constitutionally & according to Robert’s Rules of Order. It’s a ceremonial post, only.
The VP can preside over the Senate and break tie votes. Why dwell on it? We are talking about wardrobes and bs like this and ignoring the obvious (with the help of the media).
Taxes, energy policy, Israel policy, and expansion of government are all serious issues that deserve more attention and support than petty issues painted here.
BTW-who wants me to run for President? If you give me $300 million I can avoid public financing like Obama did……..
Why dwell on it? Because she is, once again, very wrong and her ignorance is showing. This needs to be highlighted to the American people who will be making a very important choice in just over a week. The fact that this very incompetent and ignorant/opportunistic woman could be a heartbeat away from the presidency is fightening indeed!
New stories are breaking right now that Talking Diva Yukon Barbie has gone rogue from the McCain camp in retaliation for what she feels was a botched roll out. Yep, Sarah its McCain’s fault you couldn’t answer coherently in your first two major interviews. Its McCain’s fault you were found guilty of ethics violations.
Thank you John McCain for picking this airhead Diva as you’ve guaranteed Obama a victory. And please, please, oh please republicans pick the Diva for your candidate in 2012 so we can have eight years of Obama.
Slightly paraphrased scene from Oh! Borother! Where Art Thou?
Advisor 1: Looks like we’re gonna get a spankin’.
Advisor 2: Oh, my yes. Big ol’ spankin’.
Advisor 1: Seems like folks like that reform he’s got, Pappy…
Advisor 1: Oh, my. Yes, indeed. Folks is going for that reform…
Young McDaniel: Hey, Pappy- we should get us some of that reform!
(Pappy slaps his kid with his hat)
Pappy McDaniel: You dumb sumb@#%! Reform! How we gonna reform
ourselves?
so “not surprised” and “anonymous”……..
your ‘name calling’ only adds credence to my argument; only when people get desperate do they name call, or for goodness sake, pick on someone’s hairstyle!! Imagine, just a moment, if someone was daring to question what Michelle Obama spent on clothes (interesting that the mainstream media hasn’t even tallied her “expenses”….hmmmm) or how she styles her hair??? you would be calling us all “racists”….
I’m not resorting to vicious name-calling; you two are. I think that lays it out pretty clearly.
easterner …. where’s the name calling? Oh ya, there is none. I have a right to my opinion (based on this woman’s performance, or shall I say lack thereof) about her (lack of) competence & (lack of) intelligence.
And, the thing is, anything Michelle Obama spent on clothes came out of her own pocket and not from the campaign (somehow I don’t think campaign donors would be terribly happy that $150K of their donations were spent on hair, makeup and designer clothing from the likes of Saks Fifth Avenue). It also leaves a sour taste after this woman has tried so hard to portray herself as a populist good ole gal. Sorry, but you can’t have it both ways. And it’s really quite funny that Palin herself has been the person most guilty of keeping the talk about her wardrobe, hair and makeup expenditures in the news cycle (her and Elizabeth Hassleback). Did you see her talking about her earrings yesterday in the stump speech?
I was listening this morning to a call in radio show for native Americans. A native Alaskan called in to the show and said she would be voting for Obama — she said Palin’s talks out both sides of her mouth. She’s not ‘real’ and she ‘doesn’t have a heart’. I think she hit the nail on the head. Palin does seem to have selfish, blind ambition, though …. I’ll give her that.
Geez, even her handers are now calling her a ‘diva’ and making the claim she’s ‘going rogue’. I’ll admit she rallied the right wing base, but other than that she’s been a drag on the ticket. Some fine judgement there on McCain’s part.
Somehow I think several posters here will be buying Boomer an milkshake after 11/4.
um, here is the “name calling”: “incompetent and ignorant/opportunistic woman”
are you denying that you wrote this????
so, just so we are clear, you are saying that the Obamas have spent NO contributions of any kind on travel, clothing or any other election expenses???
where is your source for that? I would really like to read about that…..
easterner, you have the burden of proof if you’re claiming that the Obama’s used campaign money for personal expenditures. It’s already been proven that RNC money was used on Palin’s hair, makeup and wardrobe.
One of McCain’s advisors is now claiming Palin a “whack job” in addition to being a “diva”. Seems like the wing nuts are doing just fine with their own name calling!
BTW “ignorant” and “unintelligent” are an assessment of her performance as evidenced in her interviews, stump speeches, etc. Label it name calling if you will. The McCain campaign is calling Obama a “socialist” and a “redistributionist” based on nothing — now that’s name calling!
Holy deflection, Batman!! Ha ha ha…let’s see, I didn’t say anything about the Obama’s spenidng, YOU did…so if there is a “burden of proof” in a chat room or on a blog, I guess he who alleged it has the burden….
YOU wrote this: “anything Michelle Obama spent on clothes came out of her own pocket and not from the campaign “; if you can’t back it up, maybe you should have prefaced it by saying, “In my opinion. . . ” or something. Just a tip.
Yes, calling someone ignorant and opportunisitc is , in fact, name calling. Sorry to burst your bubble.
You are a piece of work indeed easternerrrr! Oops, there I go calling you a name …. LOL
You said “you are saying that the Obamas have spent NO contributions of any kind on travel, clothing or any other election expenses.”
Hate to burst your bubble little e, but nope, I certainly did NOT say that. I made no such statement about campaign money not being used by the Obama campaign for travel or other election expenses. Those are perfectly legitimate expenditure for either campaign. I did state that clothing $ for Michelle came from her own pocket. (Nice try, though, attempting to lump it all together and muddy the waters … you’ve learned well from Faux news, young grasshopper!).
And since you feel the need to give me tips and hints, I’ll return the favor. Perhaps you might consider using your noggin for something other than a hat rack? Don’t you think if the Obama’s had indeed used campaign $$ for personal expenditures (like hair, makeup and clothing — as Palin did) it would be the news story of the week?!? The RNC has people working full time to dig up exactly those sorts of things (as does the DNC). So may I be so bold as to suggest that they haven’t reported it because it isn’t there? Before you get your panties in a wad and start twitching, think about it.
Wow, this is going to be a great thread. I hope everyone will keep the debate up in an appropriate manner and this won’t turn into a name calling session.And i love to read this article.
Not surprised….
I see you still didn’t read what I wrote: this is what you wrote: ” clothing $ for Michelle came from her own pocket ” twice now, in fact…….
once again: can you give us a source for that info, or is it merely uyour opinion?
your deflection is great reading, but can you answer the question? thanks!
oh, BTW: you also wrote:
“Don’t you think if the Obama’s had indeed used campaign $$ for personal expenditures (like hair, makeup and clothing — as Palin did) it would be the news story of the week?!?”
The answer: of course not! Exactly my point!!! The mainstream(liberal) media seems to relish printing details of Cindy McCain’s jewelry, Palin’s hairdo (seriously!), tanning bed, etc….yet we hear no mention of anything Michelle Obama wears or buys, ever…..come on, that would be racist or mean-spirited, right???
this is the double standard at work. . . so, thanks for helping me prove my original point. . . .
I think Obama, unfortunately, will probably win on November 4th, despite his inexperience and his flip-flopping on important issues (when are you going to end the war Barry? 6 months/ 8 months/ oh, wait, now you are going to “further evaluate” the situation?) as well as his stated desire to instill a socialist agenda at the federal level. . . . .
I do however, stand by my convicion that the reason he may win is that the media has favored he and his wife all along, starting with their disparate treatment of Hilary, while being completely ridiculous in their pursuit of anyting trivial about McCain/Palin. . .
ah well, 4 years of an increasingly dysfunctional congress and Obama’s broken promises ought to assure a Republican shoo-in in the next Congressinal election, and in 2012……….
have a good day, all………..
Be happy to as soon as you admit you tried to put words in my mounth. If I’m great at deflecting, then you’re super astute as sidesteping and avoiding and the sneakiness factor. How about cleaning up your own act before critisizing someone else?
But, if you have to have the last word, then go for it. Peace.
do the libturds really have nothing better to talk about then what Sarah Palin is wearing? really, who cares? why not discuss real issues? the fact is obamas tax plan may help those making 20k a year but are going to kill small businesses like mine. i’ll be lucky to still be in business this time next year if obama gets elected. and there are small businesses all across this nation that are going to suffer as well. the american dream will instantly turn into the american nightmare. yea! go obama!
i didn’t like working for myself anyway.
sigh.
“n.s”, clearly you are trying to start a fight rather than have a discussion;
several posts ago, I did write this: “so, just so we are clear, you are saying that the Obamas have spent NO contributions of any kind on travel, clothing or any other election : ”
I was asking you to clairfy your psoition, which you did; I uvderstand that wasn’t what you meant; in fact, you clarified further by by stating that “anything Michelle Obama spent on clothes came out of her own pocket and not from the campaign “. As we both agreed that was what you meant, I asked for a source for that info.
For whatever reason, you are trying to turn this into me putting words in your mouth; I’ve explained myself fully;
now, please, can you give me your source for the “fact” that Obama’s wife spent NO campaign contributions on her clothing?
thanks!
Regarding #293
OH MY GOODNESS! You are deluded indeed, little e.
Liberal media? Owned by Rupert Murdoch (mostly) LOL … yeah, right! I love how you regurgitate the talking points on Faux news (the news source that has made such a valiant attempt to “dumb down” Americans). Perhaps you should get out a little more and expand your horizons a bit.
Nope, not trying to start a fight. These are serious issues and this is a serious discussion of different ideological views. Very serious. Way more serious than discussing Palin’s wardrobe and who paid for what.
When Obama wins on Tuesday it will be because Americans are sick and tired of the old, worn out Bush policies and don’t want four more years of the same. Our country can’t afford it. Obama will be inheriting one hell of a mess, created by YOUR party. Yes, the dems have had the majority in Congress for 2 years … so go ahead and try to throw that back. Bush started with a surplus and ran our economy into the ground — with the highest deficits ever; started a war on false pretenses (a war McCain thinks is justified, even after all the proof of no WMDs) and with no provocation from Iraq (and all the while abysmally ignoring the place where Bin Ladin actually is); and enriched his buddies (the war profiteers, Haliburton, et. al.). This war costs us, the American taxpayers, $10 billion per month, not to mention the human cost to our soldiers and Iraqi civilians. Shall I go on? These are facts! Source? factcheck.org (a nonpartisan site)!
Seriously, I grew up in a very conservative home, back before the religious right neo-cons took over the party and ran it off the tracks. It’s stunning to me that you can throw mud at Obama and smear him on what you think “might” happen sometime in the future while completely ignoring the serious and catastrophic mistakes that have actually happened while your party had the wheel. McCain rode shotgun while Bush ran our economy over a cliff and now McCain wants to take the wheel and step on the gas. On Tuesday I certainly hope Americans are smart enough to rise up and say “NO THANKS!” I have fatith that we are!!!
You say ” …. as well as his stated desire to instill a socialist agenda at the federal level. . . . . “. Since you’re so adamant about sources, where’s your source for that? Oh yes, Joe the Plumber, I forgot! A really credible guy who now thinks he’s an expert on foreign policy, claiming “if Obama wins it’s the death of Israel”. Even the right wing pundits are now admitting that trying to paint Obama as a socialist was a pretty silly strategy and one that has backfired.
McCain has run a campaign of fear (especially since he started losing favor) and you’ve jumped on board. Your party line, among others, is “liberals are tax and spend” (ummmm, Clinton left a surplus and Bush is leaving a HUGE deficit and has expanded government more than any other President EVER!). Then you (not you personally, but your party) continue to spread the propaganda that taxes will go up for the middle class under Obama. That’s priceless — just too bad it’s a flat out lie. You want a source on that? I’ll be happy to get you one later, since I have to get to work now.
Your last paragraph is a real hoot! If I turn it around, this is exactly what HAS ACTUALLY happened:
“8 years of an increasingly dysfunctional legislature and Bush’s broken promises has assured a Dem shoo-in in the 2008 election.”
You have a great day, too, little e. Seriously.
I just love how condesending people like not surprised are. It really shows what kind of person they are. (or aren’t) It’s sad because I’ve busted my ass to make a better life for myself and my family, and I’ll now have to pay the price for that. I’m sorry that you’re middle class NP, that’s your choice and maybe you just don’t aspire to do much with your life, but I shouldn’t have to pay out the ass in taxes just because I make more money than you. Typical Democrat BS!
OH, the assumptions Anon (#298)! I, too, own my own business and make a mighty fine living and work hard to provide for my family. Plus, I actually have an e-d-u-c-a-t-i-o-n paid for by (guess who) ME. So I aspire to “do something with my life” quite well, thank you very much!
Talk about condescending! LOL
And I won’t apologize about caring about the welfare of my fellow Americans. I really don’t mind paying more in taxes to assist those who are less fortunate. Perhaps I’m just not so greedy as you?
And, BTW, my retirement accounts were hit super hard because your party was asleep at the wheel. It’s possible I lost more in the stock market the last few weeks than you’ll ever make. So stop your whining already … and your ridiculous assumptions. You don’t know me and I don;t know you.
Whatever not surprised. If you REALLY knew what you were talking about, you wouldn’t be smiling about it and you certainly wouldn’t be voting Obama/Biden into office. You lost more in the stock market in the last few weeks than I’ll ever make? Thanks for the laugh!! Now I know your full of sH!$!
Have a great day
OMG! Now there’s some good logic, ANON. And you know I’m full of sH!S! because you know me so well? LOL
Like my Daddy always said, “there’s no use in arguing with a drunk or an idiot!”. Very good advice, me thinks. And my Daddy was a card-carrying Republican and one terrific man, whom I miss with all my heart.
No need to wish me a great day. I’m already having one! You really tickled my funny bone and gave me a good laugh.
NS,
diatribe galore, but still no answer to my question.
I have played fair and tried to discusss this issue with you, and all you have done is insult me and my beliefs. All I asked for was a source re: your “fact” about Michelle Obama buying all of her clothing out of her own pcoket and not utilizing any campaign funds for the same. .
Still waiting. Tells me all I need to know about that “fact”.
Anonymous, you got it exactly right in #298…..
It’s not my job nor am I obligated to help “those less fortunate”. And I shouldn’t have to pay more taxes because of it. Too bad your Daddy didn’t give you any REAL advice. That’s a real shame. May he rest in peace.(although he’s probably turning over in his grave)
OMG, just heard that Barry funded an informercial about himself, using campaing contributions, to the tune of 3 million dollars???
and people are really raising an issue of Palin (allegedly) spending 150k??? total??
yowza. . . .I am so glad this smug self-delusion will only last a few more days
Easterner, unfortunately our conversation has degraded into recriminations and divisiveness. I would like to propose something new: that we listen to one another and try to understand another point of view. I propose the following rules of engagement:
- be polite (drop the sarcasm)
- ask questions
- provide reasoned analysis
- see if we can’t learn something from the other
With these rules in mind, I am very curious as to why (in your opinion) an Obama infomercial, funded with campaign contributions, is an inappropriate use of funds?
I am also curious about why you would use the word “alleged” when the RNC has acknowledged the money was spent from their coffers, and Palin has also acknowledge she is wearing the clothing and that it will be donated to charity when the election is over? Doesn’t “alleged” mean it hasn’t been proven or admitted to?
I seriously want to have a reasonable discussion with you and I look forward to learning something new and/or something that perhaps I haven’t previously considered.
Best Regards and kind wishes for a beautiful day.
Why is this kerfuffle about the wardrobe even going on?
As far as I’ve read, the Republicans were more upset about the money spent than the Democrats… a lot of Repubs thought the money would have been better spent if it had gone to either the Presidential race or to down ticket races. But the whole thing, from either party, ain’t no part of nothing when it comes to the real issues of this election. If the RNC wants to dress Palin up, so what? No laws were broken.
$150k isn’t even a drop in the bucket to the amount of money that’s been spent on both sides. This is just a no-account tempest in a teapot, and certainly nothing to raise your blood pressure over.
Boomer, good point as usual;
I am however, curious about whether ‘Obama wardrobe money’ has ever been discussed by the Main stream media because I do think there has been a great deal of bias against the Republicans in the media….although I must admit, Hilary bore the brunt of this bias when she was still in the race…..
I do think it is irresponsible of the media to not present both sides of the story; again, if someone made fun of Michelle Obam’s hairstyle, it would immediately be criticized as being Racist…yet calling Sarah Palin names, criticizing her clothing and hairstyle is okay, why??
addendum ot the 3 million Barry spent on his infomercial last night: apparenlty one of the women bemoaning how poor she is now because of the evil repubs, and how she can’t afford milk…..was wearing a full set of acrylic nails…
interesting
Barry also failed to mention and show these peoples garages and homes. Wonder how many cars they had in their garages, how many tv sets they had and whether they had cable or satellite, how many cell phones, crackberries, Ipods, Playstation games and other “toys” they had. Typical Democratic fear mongering was all that commercial was about last night. Vote for the Messiah and he’ll make everything all better. He’ll tax the rich because they don’t deserve to have more money than the milk maid with fake fingernails who has to cut back her weekly spending for her chubby kids snacks.
easterner, I see you’ve chosen to ignore my olive branch in #305. I really am interested in your answers to the questions I posed. I think we’ll all have a much better experience here if we stop being nasty and divisive and start listening to each other.
Boomer, I think you’re right on about the wardrobe– it is a tempest in a teapot, and it was a lot about the Republicans being upset. David Gergen said he was really surprised when it continued to be in news cycle after news cycle what with everything else that is really serious going on.
Also, I am wondering about your thoughts on how the Bradley effect may influence the final outcome of the race.
Cheers!
My post poofed, I’m pretty upset. No more lead in, no more basis for my choice. Screw it. Somebody needs to upgrade the version of WP on this site and actually work to get some of the kinks out.
I’m writing a candidate in, and I think the rest of US should follow suit. Both of the front-runners suck, and at least if only 1/4 of the voters out there put one or the other on their ballot, the one that makes it into the white house will be able to spend a good long time thinking about how America sees him…and maybe make some changes to their attack plan for the country.
Chances are that won’t happen, but it would be nice. The last thing we need is more government control.
Good point Marcus but what people don’t seem to understand is that not only will your “write in” vote not matter, peoples votes won’t matter. (to a certain extent) Mainly because the election is not being decided by popular vote. It’s being decided by the electoral college made up of 538 representatives. The candidate that wins the most votes in the state wins the support of all of that state’s electors. Candidates can fail to get the most votes in the nationwide popular vote in a presidential election and still win that election. This occurred in 1876, 1888 and 2000. Critics argue the Electoral College is inherently undemocratic and gives certain swing states disproportionate clout in selecting the President and Vice President. (wikipedia)
The National Archives counts over 700 attempts at reforming the Electoral College, and none has yet succeeded. A constitutional amendment requires supermajorities from both the U.S. Senate and the legislatures of the states—a provision that has the same problems of disproportionality as the Electoral College itself. Unfortunately, it is precisely the states that benefit from the Electoral College that have enough clout to quash attempts at reforming it. (Jon Bruner)
Untiil we instill a popular vote for President, nothing is ever going to change.
Dang… just made a long reply and the chat blew it out.
Hi, Easterner..
We are talking about 8 people here- the candidates and their spouses. What they spend (or others spend on their behalf) for their personals shouldn’t make a lick of difference to anyone. It all works out eventually, due to campaign finance laws. All this junk always comes up because it’s easy to latch onto, and none of it amounts to doodley-squat.
Don’t waste your vote, Marcus.
America likes the 2 party system, and though there have been many 3rd parties over the centuries, very few have succeeded, and none has lasted very long even when they did.. The only 3rd party to ever get their Presidential candidates into office was the Whigs, and they collapsed when the new Republican party develope a platform that was more progressive and up with the times.
While the major parties have come and gone and changed, this is a defining election for us, for the rest of the world, and for how this country will be led into the second decade of the 21st century. Hold your nose, Marcus, and vote for the major candidate who comes closest to your deepest beliefs. I voted for a 3rd party once, and regretted it as soon as I did it… the guy came and went in the blink of an eye.
Hi, Not Surprised…
Heck- what do I know? I’m just a semi-retired guy who looks around. The Bradley effect is very old, and all I have for opinions are my own.
What I see everywhere is young folks (young meaning 40 down) who have fallen in love and married other young folks of all races. You name the racial combination and you can see it, right here in Idaho Falls as much as anywhere else. Martin Luther King’s statement where he “dreamed of a day when a person is judged not by the color of his skin but the content of his character” is quietly coming to pass.
And that’s fine by me. I once had my life saved by a black shipmate, and I’ve loved the guy like my brother ever since.
I’m not throwing my vote away, I’m voting for a candidate that makes more sense than either Obama or McCain and walking out of the polling place with a clear conscience. Whether he’ll be around in the future or not is something else entirely – he’s got the right ideas now and I need to stick with that.
I am (and have been) aware that the electoral college is in charge of the “real” vote. I’m going to essentially leave a penny tip, and that’s fine with me.
If I don’t leave a tip, maybe I just forgot…if I leave a penny, you know damn well that your service isn’t up to par.
you know there was some dumb arse over on city data, name of jk, claiming to be from Oregon and then Pocatello and then Sacremento. several posters called her out on her blatent lies. this same person tried to make the argument that factcheck.org couldn’t be taken seriously because they were funded by Annenberg Foundation, who, the poster claimed, was home to both Obama and Ayers. It was a kick to watch jk get roundly spanked and set straight by folks who know a whole lot more than she, and clued her in about the Annenbergs. poor research, poor analysis and poor judgement. just goes to show some people don’t “know” quite so much as they think they do. lol
The Hoagies are baaaaa-cccckkkkkk….just in time for Halloween!!!!
I don’t read CityData since I found out that if any of the the million moderators don’t like your opinion, they delete it and then lock you out. . . great for discussion!!!!!
But, why are you here, exactly? CityData isn’t an issue here, on this post; maybe you could start a thread for those who want to parciticipate in CityData??
Just a suggestion . . . . .Happy Halloween!
Not Surprised,
Hello and thank you for your willingness to engage in real discussion; I do want to continue our discussion about the mmainstream media; to that end, I am hoping I can get the source for the fact that Michelle Obama only pays out of pocket for all of her clothing. . .I am curious if the media has put her (or Joe Biden, fro that matter) under the same microscope Sarah Palin lives under.
Thanks . . . .only 4 full days to go! I can’t believe the election is almost here!!
easterner aka anonalog, jane kay, babs — why do you think that post had anything to do with you?
if the samwiches are back I say welcome!
too funny……………..
It is freakin hilarious! I’ll take a 5 dollar footlong! Hold the cheese please.
Here you go Bootstrap with no cheese. ENJOY!
psssst …. you might want to have a “tester” take the first bite …… just in case
Let’s stop pretending this race is as close as national polling suggests. The truth is McCain is essentially tied or trailing in every swing state that matters — and too close for comfort in several states, such as Indiana and Montana, that the GOP usually wins pretty easily in presidential races. On top of that, voters seem very inclined to elect Democrats in general this election — and very sick of the Bush years.
McCain could easily lose in an electoral landslide. That is the private view of Democrats and Republicans alike.
McCain’s pick shows he is not pretending. Politicians, even “mavericks” like McCain, play it safe when they think they are winning — or see an easy path to winning. They roll the dice only when they know that the risks of conventionality are greater than the risks of boldness.
The problem is too many people vote with their emotions instead of who & what each candidate represents and past experience. If Obama wins today it will be only because liberal democrats are voting for the democratic candidate and truly not who the best person for the job is. Sad but true. This is why I’ve been an Independant since day one. Over the years I’ve voted Democratic, Republican and I’ve written in candidates. If more people would leave emotion out of it and vote with their heads, this country would be in much better shape.
Bob, the same thing could be said if McCain wins. After all, he was a POW. What type of emotion does that invoke? I also have voted all over the spectrum, but I just could not bring myself to vote for McCain, and it wasn’t an emotional vote for me. It sounds to me like people are already starting to make excuses for the way the election is going to go.
I don’t think anyone is making excuses; I think some are pointing out the obviouss; Obama will probably win because he is young, good-looking and talks a good game…..and is also a weathervane that will swing whichever way the polls indicate…….
I don’t think this is any different from what some of us have been saying all along; losts of folks are voting for style over substance…..makes for a fun, sexy election night, but a scary four years….
Good luck everyone!
Good points both Bob & Easterner.
Have a great election night everyone! I’ll be relaxing in front of the fireplace watching movies myself.
Let the cards fall where they may.
This has been a fascinating discussion. What we have covered here is the entire arc of Sarah Palin’s sudden appearance on the national scene, all 6 weeks of it.
Nobody even knew of her until the first of September, and in only 6 weeks, she defined the core base of the Republican party. The election results are very clear- by a 2 to 1 margin, voters turned away from everything the Republicans tried to sell. Palin energized the pary base very effectively, and what all other folks saw when the base got fired up was not a pretty sight.
Tonight was evidence of how far the Republicans as a party have fallen in the eyes of the American citizens. Voters simply didn’t buy the fear, the hypocracy and the ruinious decisions that have brought the country to this election.
Republicans as a party gave the country nothing but reasons to vote AGAINST Obama. They never offered reasons why voters should vote FOR McCain.
America is built on aspirations, optimism, and hope. Hope for us, for our children, and for our children’s children. We are a brave people, and the politics of fear never works for long. Our nation has noble principles of equality, and we have finally proved up. We finally showed ourselves, and the whole world, that any person can rise to the top, no matter what color, sex, religon, or heritage they have. We finally lived up to One Nation Indivisible.
I hope the Republicans will be able to come to the realization that they must return to their best principles of limited government, self-reliance, and fiscal responsibility. They must learn that we are ALL Real Americans. We are ALL Real Patriots. We are ALL hard working. We are ALL willing to take on any challenge from any corner of the planet. We are ALL equal, and there is no best part of us that lies only within one party.
Neither party can claim any of these things as being solely theirs alone. To do so is a betrayal to America, and every belief that created this unique nation.
We want what is best for all of us, not just some of us. We have to that re-affirm the knowledge we are all Americans first, Idahoans second, and Democrats or Republicans third.
As a long standing Democrat, I understand my Republican friend’s fears. Obama is as scary for you as Sarah Palin was for me. But everyone knows that our powerful engine is busted and must be rebuilt. Americans decided tonight who is going to be the head mechanic, and he knows his job.
Starting soon, there are going to be big changes happening, but I’m not afraid. If Obama, a black guy with a Muslim name who came out of nowhere, can rise up, coming out of nowhere on the run, and prevail in the longest series of tests we have ever presented to a candidate, we just got the right guy for the job.
I knew he was the guy since last February, and I never had a doubt since then that he would win. I never felt that way before, and I expect I never will again. Obama was my first and only choice. How many of you can say that?
I am like everyone- I don’t know how he’s going to do it. All I have is the unwavering hope and faith that he will.
And I’m damned glad I got to be a witness in a season when we finally got the best we could get. This is a moment that only comes once a century.
I think Sarah Palin will do far more for McCain’s campaign than Joe Biden is doing for Obama’s. This is so much fun to watch!
Boomer,
great post; very well-written; I agree with a lot of what you said, but I am sitll in an “emporer’s new clothes” moment: can you tell em exactly what Obama’s policy platforms are? He has changed his mind so much on hte tthreee biggies: troop wothedrawl, taxes and healthcare, that I honestly don’t know what his positions are…..or, more importantly, what those positions will be after 1/21…….for those who suggest I am simply a sore loser, scroll through these posts and you will see I have been asking the same questions since Obama overtook Hillary……
Yes, I recocnize the historic significance of the first half-black president and agree that it is an indicator of how far we, as a country , have come….I just wish there was a little more substance there……..
Boomer, well wow! What a post. There’s really nothing to add as you have done a beautiful job!
easterner, I really don’t know what to say to you. Seriously. Information on Obama’s policies are easy enough to find. Please don’t expect people on this forum to educate you on those. They’re available if you’re really interested in learning — though I suspect you are not. In all sincerity, I’m sad to say my experience of you is that you simply want to set up a straw man so you can knock it down. I respect that you are passionate about your politics/beliefs. Personally, I find it an exercise in futility to attempt to have any sort of meaningful, thoughtful discussion with you. So I choose not to.
uh…hairstyles6……….do you know the election is over? there is no mccain/palin campaign anylonger . She did so good for mccain , that obama is now president.
Is this the level of intelligence of the republican supporters?
judging by the time of your post, what were you watching? obama had become president by about 10 pm or so nov 4th.
Oh Boomer I’m so touched by your words! (yeah right)
You should be scared about what Obama will do with our national security, healthcare, social security, higher taxes and more government. Heaven help us all! We’re going to need it! This election just proved how ignorant the American public really is. Go hit the buffet Libtards, you’ve won this round but we’ll be back.
Mavericks forever — If only you could be so gracious as McCain was in his speech last night. He demonstrated a lot of dignity in defeat.
Are you serious? McCain only did that because he’s required to. Just as every other candidate throughout history has done. I could give Obama congrats as well but it wouldn’t be from the heart so whats the point. All I can do now is hold on for the ride while Obama runs this country into the ground and try again in 2012.
Come back and talk to me in 2 years and lets see where we’re at with Obama and his socialist society, higer taxes, more government, less national security, small business after small business going under, etc etc..
But what do I know, obviously I’m in the minority here because I didnt vote for Barack the second coming Obama.
“McCain only did that because he’s required to. Just as every other candidate throughout history has done.”
You only got the second part of that correct. He and every other losing candidate is not REQUIRED to do anything, let alone be gracious in defeat. They all do it for dignity and respect, for themselves, for their families, for their parties, and for their country.
The true rednecks are the ones you will hear complaining and crying about this clear Obama win and being entirely ungracious. You will read them here, on other local blogs, and on local talk radio shows. Respond to them when they whine about this election.
Republicans needs to hunker down and figure out what went wrong. I say they lost their way, they sold out their core principles for a “win at all cost” mentality. They figured the end justified the means, and they should be ashamed of what they have given up of themselves in the process.
The Republican party no longer represents conservatives. It should split up. One party for the far-right wing/hard-core conservatives, the kind who believe abortion-clinic bombers are heroes. A separate party for the social conservatives, the kinds of people who are closer to independent than Republican. The remaining conservatives would filter into the Libertarian and Constitution parties.
Then you will have four major conservative parties and will do much better to advance a true conservative agenda than the Republicrat party.
Or blame the liberal media, the socialists, the minorities, Clinton, and everyone else but yourselves. Accountability was one of the conservative values left by the wayside long ago, right?
Another point, it does not help to accuse fellow Americans of being terrorist or traitors just because they are left of your viewpoint. There is a big difference, and conservatives demonstrated clearly their lack of tact when they tried that dirty trick.
Nice post Boomer! Although I’m a little hesitant on Obama’s ability to run this country effectively, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and look forward to seeing how things turn out the next 4 years. I have hope for the future and our country as things really can’t get much worse. (well, maybe thay can, but I’m trying to be optimistic here)
And whoever is passing out the milkshakes….I’l take chocolate!
Hi, Easterner…
You wrote:
Boomer,
“great post; very well-written; I agree with a lot of what you said, but I am sitll in an “emporer’s new clothes” moment: can you tell em exactly what Obama’s policy platforms are? He has changed his mind so much on hte tthreee biggies: troop wothedrawl, taxes and healthcare, that I honestly don’t know what his positions are…..or, more importantly, what those positions will be after 1/21…….for those who suggest I am simply a sore loser, scroll through these posts and you will see I have been asking the same questions since Obama overtook Hillary……
Yes, I recocnize the historic significance of the first half-black president and agree that it is an indicator of how far we, as a country , have come….I just wish there was a little more substance there……..”
______________________________________
First, thank you very much for your kind comments. They’re much appreciated.
As to the 3 points you asked me to address. My reply is all taken from his speeches and knowledge of his history:
The troop withdrawals: Obama was against the Iraq war from the beginning. When it began, he was still in the Illinois Senate, and spoke out against it from that Senate’s floor.
When he was elected to the U.S. Senate, he voted against all the bills that supported continuing the war. But he never voted against body armor appropriations, or anything else that was intended to protect the troops or help their mission in any way.
As a big part of his platform, he announced at the very first that he would withdraw the troops as fast as safely possible. He never announced an specific date as to when the troop withdrawal would begin, but did say they would be out within the first 18 months of his term, and has never wavered from that statement.
At the time he first declared this position, Bush had no withdrawal plans whatsoever. 6 weeks ago, Bush finally created a withdrawal program of his own that is close to Obama’s plan.
His tax program is entirely centered on giving cuts to the middle class. Bush took away the tax bracket which taxed the ultra-rich more than the merely rich and middle class, and Obama is going to return to the same taxes the ultra rich paid before Bush was elected. For the rest of us who take home less than $200,000 a year, our taxes will go down.
For those who own small businesses- those that have 100 or fewer employees, the business owner will not be taxed on what his company makes, only what the owner actually takes home.
The business itself can net much more money- say over a million dollars a year- but it will be taxed at the current rate, or less. Obama has a provision for very small and start-up businesses that taxes them at a lower rate than larger ones. This means that Joe the Plumber, as a one-man business that’s brand new, will pay lower taxes on both his business and his personal income than what he would currently pay under Bush’s taxes.
Obama is intent on making health care affordable for ever citizen. He wants self-employed, those who have no health insurance, and those who are working at jobs that don’t provide health insurance covered. To accomplish this, he plans to use all the money- $10 billion a month- that is currently being used for the Iraq war as a base funding source. He plans to add to this with the same cuts McCain favored by eliminating all the programs that cost a lot but deliver very little in return. He will use this money to set up an interest accumulating fund that is very similar to the MedicAid and Social Security programs.
He has never changed any of these plans from the very beginning. The opposition tried to make these claims, but they didn’t stick, because he never wavered an inch from any of them. To believe otherwise is taking a bite from the poisoned apple.
If it makes you more comfortable with Obama to call him half-black, that’s fine with me, but that is a vaguely racist term. Why not call him half-white? Or mulatto? Or simply just call him a black man, or an African-American. Those are the terms he uses to describe himself.
As a Viet Nam era vet who is currenty not medically insured and living on a limited income as a semi-retired person, I will make out much better under Obama than I would have with any McCain’s plans. I will pay less in taxes than Bush has dinged me, and I will see a war that I opposed from the beginning come to a reasonably quick end.
If John McCain had made any proposals that reasonably achieved all of these in a better fashion, I would have voted for him. I have always voted for the man, not the party.
Hi, Mavericks Forever…
McCain and Obama didn’t like each other personally, but both knew full well the importance and future consequences of this election.
They both knew that one had to lose and one had to win. As opponents, they respected each other. They treated each other courteously most of the time out of respect to themselves, and to the office they were seeking.
That’s more than you seem capable of doing. I could call you a Pubtard, or a Rethug- insults some liberals toss out as freely and randomly as you do, but I won’t. My blessed mother told me never to call an idiot an idiot to his face, so I’ll refrain because I don’t want to hurt your feelings.
I hope you receive the benefits you’ll get in full measure from this election, but I don’t expect you will ever appreciate them. Grace and courtesy does not abide in you, and I’ll bet you’re a real fun guy to hang around with.
hi Boomer,
again, great comments, but I disagree with your opinion about the troop withdrawl: first, it is a bit misleading to suggest that he “opposed the war” as he wasn’t in a position to vote for or against it: he wasn’t in the Senate yet at the time our Congress enacted a resolution of war on Iraq
.moreover, he has, in fact, wavered significantly from his early insistence that he would “end the war immediately” (on his website); later last summer, he announced he would end the war in 16 months, then at a later press conference the same day (after, apparently, checking his blackberry and realizing that some where questioning his stance change):
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/obama-open-to-refine-iraq-withdrawal-timeline/
he announced he might possibly withdraw all troops by 16 months then “refined” his position further by saying that he actually needed to go to Iraq and talk to military leaders…and now he has said he will do what they tell him to do , that he would be a “poor Commander in Chief if he didn’t listen” to the military strategists in Iraq….
this is too important an issue for him to be so swayed by public opinion.
I guess time will tell if his intial “immediate” or even his later “16 month” withdrawal actually occurs.
I also disagree with the troop withdrawl timeline. The reason we went to war with Iraq is no longer the issue. The fact that we’re there now and occupying their country is the problem and withdrawing all of our troops and leaving this country in a fragile war-torn state is just unacceptable in my opinion. We bombed this country’s infrastructure back to the stone age and it’s now our obligation to help them get back on their feet no matter how long it takes. We promised to liberate them and we promised to rebuild or at least help rebuild their country. (and we have yet to scratch the surface of the the rebuilding process) We’re going to need troops there for however long it takes to make this happen. And we haven’t even discussed the terrorist issue within Iraq & Afganistan. (let alone Iran) 16 months is not a realistic timeline in my opinion.
I honestly don’t think Obama is has what it takes to keep our country safe. All I can do is hope and pray he does the right thing. He’s got a tough road ahead of him and now that he’s our President, I’ll do my best to support him & our country. Thanks for your comments Boomer, I enjoy hearing & pondering your point of view.
LMAO
Anyone who thinks Palin was a good choice needs to watch this clip from Foxnews. With the election over the McCain staffers are dishing on what a (bad word for a female) she was and how stupid she was. She thought Africa was a country, not a continent, and didn’t know what NAFTA was or who was involved. May she please go back to Alaska and never come back.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsvZ6eJT1ZQ
The election is over and you’re still bad mouthing Palin. Thats old news, get some new material anonymous. Biden made just as many stupid comments as Palin did, move on already
Hi, CR67…
Of course you don’t think Obama has what it takes to make this country safe. You would never in your life vote for him, and you just pay lip service to the election by saying you’ll support him. You won’t.
Iraq can be rebuilt by aid. That’s what we did with Germany and Japn after WWII. The Iraquis can defend themselves now; if anything, their new army is more disciplined and professional after 20 months of US training than when it was under Saddam. Saddam handed out officer commissions like candy to those who kissed up to him, and few were fit to be military leaders.
The Iraqui government has to stand or fall on it’s own. The longer our troops are there, the more artificial and dependent their government becomes. This is how it happened in Viet Nam; we propped up that government for 10 years, and it fell apart as soon as we finally just gave up and moved out.
Meanwhile, our reservists would face a 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, tour of duty. How long do you think the Guard and Reserves will take that? Not long. My neighbor across the street has a son-in-law who did 3 tours, and that was enough. His daughter was born while he was there, and was almost 5 by the time they got to know each other.
Are you ready to enlist CR67?
Hi, Easterner…
I didn’t expect you would agree. You asked, so I responded.
All this would be moot now if Bush had done the right thing. There has been no worthy reason why the troops are still occupying now. They could have been withdrawn at least 22 months ago. Bush treats our fine young military like they were poker chips, not human beings.
Thanks for the reply Boomer. I guess I expected a little more.
No I didn’t vote for Obama, but that doesn’t mean I can’t or won’t try to support him now that he’s in office. After all, I want whats best for my family, myself & my country. I could care less if you think it’s “lip service” or not, I won’t loose any sleep over your opinion of me or my views. I was merely offering up my opinion just as you have done. And just because Obama won the election doesn’t make your opinion any more or less valid than mine. I’m not here to win a popularity contest, just to discuss the issues. I do apologize though, I often forget that you have all the answers.
According to Americanthinker.com, Obama is willfully deceiving you and I when he says no one making under 250K a year will see an increase in their taxes. By letting the Bush tax cuts of 2001 & 2003 lapse, tax rates for everyone will rise. (but he failed to mention that didn’t he)
What about Obama raising the capital gains tax from 15 to 20 percent? The point is, you don’t have to make 250K to be affected by Obamas “tax plan”.
What about the payroll tax under Obama’s “tax plan which will impact all those who earn between 94 to 250K?
Or do issues like this not bother you since you don’t make enough to be impacted by it? Everyone will be impacted because S!@T runs downhill.
Here’s a comment you made in post 337:
“He has never changed any of these plans from the very beginning. The opposition tried to make these claims, but they didn’t stick, because he never wavered an inch from any of them. To believe otherwise is taking a bite from the poisoned apple.”
than how do you explain this: “when challenged to explain how he (Obama) could eliminate the inflation adjusted cap on Social Security AND not raise taxes on Americans earning under $250,000, Senator Obama suggested on his website that he “might” create a “donut” — an exemption from this payroll tax for wages between $94,700 and $250,000. But that donut would mean he couldn’t raise anywhere near that $1 trillion dollars for Social Security. When this was pointed out, Senator Obama’s “donut plan” was quietly removed from his website.
He “never wavered” huh? Interesting. Believe it or not, there are other issues he “wavered” on, but perhaps you can review your own homework since you have all the answers.
Obamas severe lack of experience is what worrys me. I can only hope that he’ll appoint some capable people to aid him during his term as President.
Hi, Easterner…
Aw, come on. Admit it. You’re being dragged kicking and screaming into 4 years you will never agree with or admit to when you become more prosperous.
I knew when I replied that you would do your usual bait and hook. I was just waiting to see it, because I know you can’t help yourself.
Go ahead and vent your spleen- it will change nothing whatsoever.
Time will tell. That half-black man has a coherent policy, which is more than can be said for the last 8 years.
A little advice- consider moving to Madison County. It was the only county in the Intemountain West that showed an increase in Republican voters. You’ll be in agreeable company up there.
um, Boomer? that wasn’t me in 345…….you already addressed me two posts earlier and I have added nothing since….
I am not sure where you feel I vented my spleen?
Hi, Easterner…
I apologize. My comments were directed to CR67’s post #345.
Sorry for the mistake, and I’ll be more careful next time.
My usual “bait & hooK” huh? Not sure what you mean there but alrighty then…..
& this my friends is why I don’t like and don’t usually debate politics. Usually one person (aka boomer) is always right and if you don’t agree with their point of view watch out. Nobody elses opinions or viewpoints matter.
and for the record….I made no comment about the color of Obamas skin. I could care less if he’s black, white, purple or mauve.
Have a great day!
It was easterner who referred to Obama as “half-black” and that is somewhat of a racial slur.
Obama is half black (mulatto if you will), and in my opinion his skin color doesn’t matter a bit. People are stating that this is groundbreaking, historical even (from a time-line of 43 prior white presidents it is)…but overall I have to disagree. I’ve been able to enjoy non-taboo interaction with Blacks, Hispanics, Asians my entire life — the rights have always been there. I do understand this having some impact on the older generations though, so I won’t dwell on it. Just my $0.02.
I disagree with just about every word that comes out of Obama’s mouth, but I have to trust that we’ll make it through his (hopefully) one term. I’d be in the same boat if McCain made it, but I’d feel just a tad bit more secure.
I’ll probably never be happy with anybody in office – the issues that sit close to me are never addressed in the way that I want them to be. The only solution is for me to run.
Someday.
In the end, I’m living my life undisturbed a majority of the time. Can’t complain about that.
Hey Marcus,
A lot of us really want you to write a post of your own about the whole issue of self-reliance and responsibility…what you wrote in chat the other night was wonderful; about creating your own opportunities and building your own relationships, without having the government do it for you. It transcended the political debates and you made some great points…
Just a thought….
I don’t write/rant well with a clean slate.
LOL yeah, I enjoyed that too. C’mon Marcus, we need a new “non political candidate” topic!
I agree with comment 351, well said. My sentiments exactly. I also wasn’t a big fan of McCains, he just happened to be my personal choice over Obama. Deosnt make me nay less of a person than those of you that voted Obama. We all put our pants on one leg at a time, get up and go to work each day and do our best to provide for ourselves and our familys. We all want change no matter what party affiliation. We’ll just have to see how it turns out and hope for the best.