neodemon278

well mostly it was just a poor joke ......that didn't work out all too well

CarbonXe

iTrader: (1)

So to recap the last 45 years, we've been screwed.

senseiturtle

1) The fact that one website does not have recorded data for the newest member of a national candidate does not reflect a shortcoming on the part of the candidate. Palin has been in the spotlight for some-odd 10 days. Her ideas, and ideals, will come out shortly.

Please note what I said about misinformation. It's easiest to attack someone when your target audience knows very little about them. Daily Kos couldn't get away with this bull____ with someone more "nationally established."

2) "Trooper-gate" is a crock. Well-documented evidence shows that the state trooper she wanted to fire tazed a 10-year old... and I'm willing to bet you'll never hear that side of the story.

3) "Can't run a family, how can she run a country?" - Please... this stab could be used against Hilary Clinton, who couldn't make her husband happy... so would she make the country happy? It's just loaded with illogical arguments, and should have no bearing in a fact-driven debate. Reality = her daughter got pregnant, and she's helping to manage it the best she can. This was her daughter's "mistake," not hers.

4) For CarbonXE --- The difference between McCain and Obama lies in the fact that Obama has run on that single word "change" from day one. He claims to represent "a new type of politican," one who "is outside the norm," and who "will bring new, fresh ideas to government." Unfortunately, the proof is in the pudding, and Obama has offered nothing of the sort. In fact, his voting record indicates nothing but a hard-line leftist approach, and nothing more.

McCain on the other hand, has never postured himself to represent change. He runs on the notion that his policies are right... which, of course, is any basic political stance.

5) Palin has more experience than Obama. She had been in an elected position for 5 years prior to Obama's running for state senate, and in addition, she's actually served in the executive branches. People tend to overlook the fact that she was governor of a state only slightly smaller than Delaware, in terms of population. Though I'll concede the point she does not have the little bit of NATIONAL experience that Obama has, she has more experience directly relating to her future position. More "quality" experience, per se.

What Palin represents, though, is the "average working mom," which appeals to a conservative base that is largely comprised of "average working people." Like Obama tries to represent change, Palin directly appeals to those people working 9-5 in the heartland of America. People who go to church, own guns, and live paycheck-to-paycheck. I think she's going to solidify the Republican base. I'm happy to have her on the ticket... I think she adds youth and vigor to John McCain, in a similar fashion that Biden adds experience and temperance to a firey Obama.

------------- A few general points before my turn is up -------

I think there are a few misconceptions about the "average republican" that may need clearing up.

As we all know, the "image" of the Democratic party is tainted by radical leftists. These guys would rule you by force, not perhaps directly, but through taxation. Banning unhealthy behaviours (Smoking bans), banning unhealthy foods (ex. trans fats), inordinately tight environmental restrictions, limit your free speech (unless you agree), increasing governmental taxes to discourage use of products and behaviours, and outright legislation are some of the hallmarks and in-promptu examples.

Is every Democrat like that? Absolutley not.

The image of the Republican party on the other hand, is tainted by the bible beaters. Some of the extremists on this end would force religion on you, attempt to make ethical decisions for you, cut out nearly all social programs ("survival of the fittest only"), run wild with excessive corporate expansions, ban alcohol and drug use, and spread their own ideals on other nations by military force.

Is every Republican like that? In spite of what you're told, no.

----

The trick to figuring out your policiticans these days, is educating yourself about not only the information you obtain, but the source of that information. Two examples I'd like to bring in...

Fox News. Nothing brings out more spite from "liberals" than mentioning that network. This is partially due to it's wild success, but mainly due to the conservative viewpoint held by a majority of the commentators. Objectively, the reporting is "on par" with other news networks. In contrast, MSNBC has, in a similar fashion, tried desperately to align itself with an extreme anti-Bush, pro-Obama standpoint that is evident in every single article they publish. Using either one of these news sources as your only source will subject you to subtle bias, changing you over time.

Example two : Bloggers. Bloggers nowadays can get away with just about anything, including libel. The Daily Kos being a huge example. Every single day, there's a new user-submitted article that directly attacks conservatives with usually direct falsehoods and exaggerations, without even a hint of objectivism. The problem lies in that... one, in this type of environment, it doesn't matter what you say, just that you say it. I could state that "Obama has one ********," and the rumors might spread so quickly that it instantly becomes the thought majority, regardless of validity. There are plenty of extreme right-wing blogs, yet they're much more disseminated and don't carry the weight of the Daily Kos.

My point is... what you "hear" may not be the truth. When any source spreads a lie, rumor, conjecture, or fallacious argument as truth... the damage is already done.

neodemon278

yep that petty much sums it up...........

CarbonXe

iTrader: (1)

Were you watching last night? Did you miss all the 'change' BS everyone was throwing around?

I know they're not. I would have gladly voted for Mike Huckabee or Ron Paul.

CDogbert

I disagree, even though you are technically right. Palin was the elected mayor of a town of about 5,000 people while Obama was teaching constitutional law with his JD at a law school. I would say being governor of one of the smallest states in the nation and being mayor of a local backwater town < teaching constitutional law and serving in a state senate, but that could just boil down to opinion between you and I.

But the problem is... is that McCain already had the demographic you're referencing locked up. He didn't need to go after the people who go to church, own guns, and live paycheck-to-paycheck; they already liked him. All she's adding is a liability to McCain's campaign because of all the ridiculously bad decisions she's made in the past regarding policies. Notice how we aren't even talking about McCain anymore; we're just talking about Palin. The only thing worse than having everyone hating you is everyone not giving a crap about you.



These sound like exactly the same groups of people, except with different examples. The people you're referencing aren't democrats or republicans, they're idiots. Every party has them. We know.

Fox News and Bloggers are probably the two worst sources of information... ever. Fox News has, repeatedly, been shown to have more bias than any other major news network, and they try to compensate for that with all their "fair and balanced" BS and trying to drill into our heads every five second that they're impartial. And it quite obviously shows, too. Fox and Friends, Bill O'Reilly, Hannity and Colmes... I mean, come on. On the other side of the spectrum, you have the Daily Kos, of course. There really aren't any good places to get information anymore. Lewis Black, when he's performing in Carnegie Hall, does a great spiel on this.

senseiturtle

I did catch some of it... initially I dismissed it as just plain old political rhetoric.

I don't intend to take the position of defending the McCain campaign... Like yourself, I would MUCH rather Ron Paul... or in fact... pretty much any other republican.

------------------------
I figure their intent on using that word is either :

1) Making indirect stabs at Obama, which conventions are usually all about.

or

2) Going on the notion that electing a woman from far outside the Beltway does represent "change" in one way or another, under the premise that she represents more change than Obama does.

-----------------------

McCain has never run on a change platform. He seems to just want to tweak the current system, which is a common platform for a same-party-as-outgoing-president scenario.

With that being said... isn't it easy to run on a Change platform? Pretty much anything other than the current administration would be "change," even if McCain took office. The reality is, he didn't always agree with Bush, particularly on many of the issues that "count."

On the statement that "90% agree with Bush" --- I'd like to propose that nearly every Republican running would fall into that category... with the addition of "most democrats would also likely agree with 60% of Bush's policies." Of course, such a statement would need proof which I cannot present at the moment, but the vast majority of run-of-the-mill politics and proposals are in small funding projects, non-binding resolutions, agreements to congratulate or censure, and other notoriously mundane crap. Such things are frequently cited as reference to back up broad statements, yet don't draw a distinction between the candidates.

For what it's worth... I personally agree with "McCain agrees 90% of Bush's policies." I don't think he was a particularly amazing president, but I think he did a better job than many other politicians could/would have done... and I think he's been a far better leader than Congress. Would I vote for him again? .... well... what other Republicans are running?

And not to "poison the well," but I'm fairly sure I'm about to hear lots of statements about a "poor economy" and "war failure" and several other talking points. I only ask that the future posters do a little research outside the mass media before rattling off talking points. Economies cycle, that's a fact. The war has been in some ways a failure, in some ways a success... (that's opinion). etc. etc.

senseiturtle

I don't think he really had the conservative base locked up. Thing is, he's historically leaned a little more to the left than the true hardcores would like... such has his immigration policy, for example. His associations with Liberman (as a democrat) were unnerving for people on the extreme right wing... who, of course, are a necessary part of a Republican winning an election.

On Palin's policies --- I can't make an objective judgment due to all the misinformation out there. I hope to learn more, sifting out the crap being dished out by attackers and overzealous supporters alike.

Absolutely correct, and if you'll notice, it's a tactic being used by the media. They've done everything possible to turn attention away from McCain at ALL times. During the primaries, you'd swear it was just Obama vs. Hillary. Now, it's all about attacking Palin, and hoping McCain falls into the bowels of irrelevancy.

If anything else, it'll make for an interesting few months. I've got to keep in mind though, no matter what happens... I'll be fine... I've got my guns and my bible

vettereddie

Just hope that you'll still have a house to keep them in. My next door neighbor got forclosed on last week, I'm now having to mow the yard of an unoccupied house.

CarbonXe

iTrader: (1)

I'm glad I'm more than financially stable. Even in this garbage of an economy, I'm making about 3x the amount I need to make to get by, plus I've got a nice chunk on the side and a few thousand in my 401k already. :D Unlike the majority of the youth out there, I'm actually taking advantage of my 401k.

CDogbert

You can't really blame the media for the direction this thread took, though. I mean, once she gave her speech, she's all we've been talking about... and it didn't even start out as attacking her. It's not a media ploy, she's just that controversial.

If you can't trust the "misinformation" now, what makes you think it's going to be any different later? And alright, even assuming that a staggering half of everything we've said about her turns out to be patently false... she's still bat____ crazy because of that other half.

Alright, I'll grant you that he probably gained some support from the far-right... but at what cost? If any one of the insane things we've found about her that you say aren't objective actually turn out to be true, she's doomed the campaign to just the far-far-right nutjobs.

I'm quite interested in the VP debate, and what that's going to do to the McCain/Palin base, too.

CarbonXe

iTrader: (1)

The best part about all this, is that she didn't even write her speech.

coryjames

if mchusain is elected we are screwed end of story when they started chanting drill drill drill i was like fill big oils pocket fill big oils pocket throw out country down the drain get rid of the middle class more cheap labor more union breaking more debt more jobs lost more people joining the ranks of poverty more retarded red necks saying dont take my guns

CDogbert

Amazing what listening to the White House speechwriters will do, right?

I'm looking at you, W.

Metro273

Is it me or is that Sara Palin HOT!...

NorCal76

Boy, I sure am glad that the RNC told me that John McCain was a POW! I never knew that! I am so glad they shoved that down my throat for four consecutive nights! I've said it once and I'll say it again. McCain is not a hero. He was a POW and he is a survivor. Nothing more, nothing less. Before you Conservative Republican butt puppets go all internet tough guy on me, let me repeat myself. I admire and respect his service to this country. I cannot begin to imagine what he went through in Vietnam. I do not doubt his courage or his love for this country.

Take a look at his voting record on Veteran's Issues. He has not done a single thing for them since he returned to this country. Since I know most of you right wingers are not smart enough to know this I'll spell it out for you. There is a difference between a soldier and a veteran. Look it up in a dictionary and while you are there, look up hero too. That protester McCain said was "ground noise and the static". That ground noise and static was a Veteran of both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Do your homework, it is all true.

Now being an Obama supporter I will freely admit that McCain has more experience. The issue with Palin is not whether she has as much, less, better, or worse experience than Obama. The issue is can she step in to be President on January 21st if the 72 year old cancer survivor McCain dies after his inauguration. The clear answer is no way in H-E-Double Hockey Sticks. Insert Palin and/or Pit Bull joke here. Joe Biden is. Before you parrots say that she is a "quick study", realize that if you use that reasoning... Obama is just as qualified to be President.

Another talking point from the RNC is that Obama was never a Mayor, or a Governor. He never operated a business and he never led troops into battle. NEWS FLASH!! Neither has McCain! Never a Mayor. Never a Governor. Never a business owner. Never gave orders to troops, he took them.

If McCain is such a maverick he wouldn't have chosen Palin. He would have gone for Leiberman or Ridge. That would have taken big brass ones, but he did not. Instead he chose a candidate that would energize the Conservative base and possibly steal some Hillary voters that voted for her because she is a woman... not because of her position on the issues.

Republicans... running on fear and ignorance since 1996.

senseiturtle

It is not my responsibility to defend McCain's voting record. I will make a conjecture that he would prefer to disband the Veterans-Affairs based hospitals, due to the sheer atrociousness of the quality of care consistently reported there. It would fit in line with McCain's overall position of "get rid of healthcare socialization."

In addition, I'd like to point out that McCain did consistently vote for increasing benefits to current soldiers, including payraises and the like. Since this directly contradicts his straw-man'd position of "being anti-veteran," I would also like to infer that perhaps these bills on veteran's affairs were loaded-down with unnecessary crap... much like our current war spending bills. Democrats load it down with social projects they want passed, since they know that no Republican would vote against "funding the war."

Of course, I have no proof, and couldn't locate any in the spur of the moment. Then again, it's not my job to defend McCain, so take your issues up with them.

By the way, nice snide remark you've inserted there. That goes a long way towards having honest, open, even-tempered discussion of political issues and our varying opinions on them. Notice though we have disagreed, CarbonXE, CDogbert, and other contributors to our discussion have not resorted to baseless personal attacks. It'd be nice if you'd make an attempt at the same, for the sake of rational discussion.

This is an illogical comparison. We're comparing the experience of the PRIMARY candidate versus the experience of the SECONDARY candidate.

1) McCain is not guaranteed to die in office. Therefore, Palin is not guaranteed to become President.

2) Obama, if he wins, WILL become president. We WILL have an inexperienced leader.

Therefore, while attacking Palin's experience in the general sense may be valid, consider 2 things.

A- Pot calling Kettle black... or if you prefer... Pot calling Kettle "inexperienced."
and
B- It's an exercise in assumptions that she would become president.

True... yet... Obama's never been a Mayor or Governor either. He actually referenced his executive experience as "running his campaign," which of course, doesn't count. What is good for the geese, is good for the gander.

McCain's only responsibility is to do what he feels best for his campaign. He has succeeded in energizing the base, and -may- have succeeded in stealing disgruntled Hillary voters. He was never under any expectation to go for Liberman or Ridge, except perhaps as "wishful thinking" for Democrats, since such a pick would likely divide the party.

For that matter... if Liberman, Ridge, or whoever else would be the best vice president... why'd Obama go with Biden?

"Ad hominem" at it's finest. Doesn't get you anywhere in terms of making a valid argument.

CarbonXe

iTrader: (1)

I have been saying this exact same thing for months. Yet everytime I say it, people look at me like I'm a terrorist.

2006bluetc

I just don't understand how you can't see him as a hero..Let's take politics aside for the time being. We have a man who was serving for his country and he did admit that wanted to fly planes for himself(as in not about the country). So he is carrying out his mission and is shot down. He is then taken prisoner and beat every day over and over. So they over him freedom. While he was in there he realized that he fights and stand up for the U.S.A. So instead of taking his freedom he says to let the other prisoners go first. So right there he is putting other service men first. (not thinking about himself). He would not give in or give up information about his country because he had so much respect for it. After refusing his freedom his beatings and torture became more severe. I just don't understand how he is not considered a hero. I mean he was in prison, still cared more about his country and servicemen than his own life and was willing to die for it. I believe that all of our service men and women in Iraq and across seas fighting for our country should be considered heroes. They are fighting knowing that they my die at anytime, but that is what they are willing to do for our country for is to keep our freedom. That takes some major ***** and a lot of heart IMO.

CDogbert

_______.

I just don't understand how you can see this as relevant to his qualifications to be President. Lots of people are war heroes, but that doesn't make them any more qualified to be President.

I've been thinking; why aren't we comparing Biden v. Palin and McCain v. Obama? Why do we keep doing this asinine Palin v. Obama dance?