McCain on why he chose Sarah Palin

[3-LockBox]

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/009343D7gA2Zc/610x.jpg

She's HOT!!!!!

[Auricauricle]

I dunno, dude, but it looks like he's about to pull a Linda Blair and heave....

[3-LockBox]

I dunno, dude, but it looks like he's about to pull a Linda Blair and heave....Nope...its love

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/02oA2ba0Wl2ba/340x.jpg

You never saw Obama hug Hillary like that...hell, you never saw Bill hug Hillary like that.

[Auricauricle]

Awwwwww...









Looks like he's gonna get those mashed potatoes outta her back pocket!

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I do not think McCain has quite gotten over his drunken sailor days. Interesting choice though, but what he thinks is going to work is probably not.

[3-LockBox]

An act of desperation really...but maybe she'll be a better campaigner than Obama's VP choice. At least McCain's camp made this a whole more intersting.

[thekid]

An act of desperation really...but maybe she'll be a better campaigner than Obama's VP choice. At least McCain's camp made this a whole more intersting.

"Interesting" is usually not a term you want to hear to describe the decision in picking the person who is a heartbeat away from the oval office......... :D

Admittedly Obama's lack of experience has been a source of concern for me, I at least feel comfortable that an experienced foreign policy veteran like Biden is there to bounce ideas off of during troubled times. Does anyone really feel comforatble that if McCain needs to do the same a person who 3 years ago was "Mayor" of a town of less than 8,500 is prepared for that conversation? My HOA has a bigger budget than the town she was Mayor of and I would not feel comforatble with my HOA President being a heartbeat away from the Oval office....... :D

[Auricauricle]

Still trying to decide whether McCain's choice was borne from a need to assert an avant garde agenda or if his running mate represents interests and loyalties of great influence. The next president will have the very formidable agenda of reasserting America's morale ground and getting a budget that has been blown to smithereens back on track. I want to know who stands behind Palin (I hear she's big among Evangelicals--oh, God!--who are quite happy that she decided against the abortion of one of her children), but there must be something more to this lady than a great smile and legs that would make Anne Archer jealous....

[thekid]

Still trying to decide whether McCain's choice was borne from a need to assert an avant garde agenda or if his running mate represents interests and loyalties of great influence. The next president will have the very formidable agenda of reasserting America's morale ground and getting a budget that has been blown to smithereens back on track. I want to know who stands behind Palin (I here she's big among Evangelicals--oh, God!--who are quite happy that she decided against the abortion of one of her children), but there must be something more to this lady than a great smile and legs that would make Anne Archer jealous....

Well they keep saying she came to power because she took a stand on rampant corruption and fought the "old boys network" in Alaska. Of course the part she does not really discuss in her speeches is that the corruption and "old boys network" she took on was her own Republican party. My guess is this "maverick" approach (as if fighting blatant corruption requires you to be a maverick) appealed somewhat to McCain along with the fact she fills in the gaps on many of the issues that the conservatives find missing in him.

I do not know Alaska or Alaskan politics but considering Stevenson just won a primary in a landslide despite his near certain conviction tells me it is probably a very Republican state. If that is the case she has never really been involved in a tough campaign where the body shotys are coming from the other party. It will be interesting to see how she holds up once the attack dogs are let loose.

[bobsticks]

To present a counterpoint: I think it's a brilliant move.

Recognising that, more than any other, this election will be decided by "undecideds" she speaks to a lot of hopefuls. She speaks to left-leaning fenales that think Obama is a shyster and feminists that want nothing more than to see any woman in high office.

For a lot of folks her relative "inexperience", or at least in dealings of this size and complexity, means little. She'sgonna be viewed as an outsider..which is good. Obama is taking a fair amount of heat for campaigning on "Change" and then moving immediately to the left with an ancient party hack. Palin already has the advantage of not having been proven to be a liar and an idiot on the public stage.

For "da boyz"...I mean, c'mon...she's a hunter and fisher, and she's got legs that go all the way to the floor.

Alot of people are gonna vote for the bottom of this ticket.

[Auricauricle]

Are you sure we're not confusing brilliance with inscrutability?

[bobsticks]

Are you sure we're not confusing brilliance with inscrutability?

Wait and watch.

[3-LockBox]

What the hell has my thread turned into?

I make a superficial comment about her looks and you guys pile on a buncha politics!

Yer lucky its too late to delete the post ;)

[Auricauricle]

Hey, you opened the door....We'll shut it when we're ready to leave!



BTW: Where's the beer? I'm parched....:biggrin5:

[thekid]

Here is a little someting on this topic I posted on the "other" site to lighten the topic a bit..

I think everyone needs to put the Kool-Aid down for a second and look at the bright side of this possible future VP....

For example.........

Here's a future exchange between Palin and the Russian President at a State Dinner

Palin: "Aren't you going to eat your Elk Mr. President?? Its fresh, I just shot it this morning".
Russian President: Pushes plate away but gains new respect for America now that he knows VP hunts her own dinner.
Palin: Using her experience as former Head of State of Alaska (which borders Russia doncha ya know...) and a mother of 5 refuses to take no for an answer and pushes plate back in front of President.
"Here Mr.President let me cut that up for you. Now don't forget to eat those vegetables either. My husband grew them in our garden."
Russian President: Seeing that he has been bested (As well as being told he can't leave the table until he cleans his plate) leaves State dinner and immediately signs over oil rights in Russia to Haliburton thus solving America's dependence on foreign oil.

Panning for Gold in newly installed sluice on the White House lawn replaces T-Ball games as source of enjoyment for kids invited to White House.

Hockey is officially recognized as "America's Game" by order of the President and ratings for the Stanley Cup playoffs quickly surpass those of the World Series and Super Bowl combined.

Brief war with Canada ensues after President declares hockey is "America's Game". War ends when VP Palin leads a crack corp of the Alaska National Guard "Penquin Division" (she served as their Commander in Chief while governor doncha know) in a bold daylight raid taking Moose Jaw and securing the vital Saskatchawan corriedor thus opening it up so new episodes of "Ice Truckers" can be shown.

"Most Dangerous Catch" becomes number one rated TV show after VP Palin's husband (he's a licensed commercial fisherman doncha know) becomes one of the Captains in the fleet.

Battleship Wisconsin is brought out of mothballs and converted to commercial fishing vessel. New Captain Palin brings in record hauls using the new "Chinook" cruise missles.

School systems around the country immediately improve quality of education as future politicians learn that being involved in local PTA is key to their future political ambitions.

Enjoy........... :D

[Auricauricle]

Yer jus' not right, Kid...!

[GMichael]

What the hell has my thread turned into?

I make a superficial comment about her looks and you guys pile on a buncha politics!

Yer lucky its too late to delete the post ;)

I'd have to kick her out of my bed,

[dean_martin]

can't vouch for the authenticity of this photo, but it's goin' around:

[Hyfi]

I think this choice is right up there with the running mate Ross Perot made where during the VP debate when asked a question he replied "wait a sec till I turn my hearing aid back on".

What I would like to know is how is this person going to lead the country when she can't even lead her own family. Yeah families are supposed to be off limits but if she can't keep her own daughter from getting pregnant while still in high school...translates to Family Values, how is she going to lead the rest of us?

Secondly, she just had a newborn baby with Downs Syndrome just a few short months ago. How will she focus on leading the country while taking care of a disabled child? Shouldn't that child come first? I know if it was my child I would not be passing it off on nannies and baby sitters.

Sorry but if all of McCain's negative campaigning didn't do it, this move put the last nail in the coffin.

She sure isn't bad on the eyes but this country needs a bit more than war and eye candy, which is what we would get if McCain gets elected.

[Auricauricle]

Okay...She drinks, she dribbles....Does she dribble when she drinks....?

[Auricauricle]

I hear there's an illegitimate son somewhere....

[GMichael]

And a crazy .........

[bobsticks]

What I would like to know is how is this person going to lead the country when she can't even lead her own family. Yeah families are supposed to be off limits but if she can't keep her own daughter from getting pregnant while still in high school...translates to Family Values, how is she going to lead the rest of us?

That would be exactly the kind of argument that's going to get someone in trouble in a debate. Outside of the suburbs there's a nation of Grandmas getting a chance to relive firsthand motherhood because of this country's illigetimacy epidemic. I'm not saying it's right or that you're not entitled to your opinion but the potential repercussions of saying it in a debate are harsh. I still think this election is going to be decided by the fringes. Comments like this could charge up the feminists, unwed mothers and a host of other disenfranchised voting blocs that otherwise might have gone for Obama.

I think it's interesting that we expect not only our politicians but everyone our politicians have ever come in contact with to live in a bubble. In my experience, I've only ever been truly capable at controlling someone with economic coercion or physical threat. I'm trying to remember, in an historical context, the last time one group of citizens was successful at preventing another group from ****ing.

I wonder how long it will be until the daughter is criticized for keeping the baby and getting married.

[Auricauricle]

I don't think that anyone expects politicians to be beyond reproach or have unassailable pasts, but I do think that we can expect a history of good judgment and honor.

Unfortunately, when the target is teflon-coated or the vulnerabilities aren't very damaging, folks may look for cheap shots below the knees, looking for peripheral targets.

Call it collateral damage.

This latest salvo regarding the daughter is repugnant, but if it sways enough people to be led off target, then like any smelly red herring, it might lead them to the desired path.

Let's see how indignantly Obama responds to this.

[bobsticks]

Let's see how indignantly Obama responds to this.

Glass houses methinks

[Auricauricle]

Yeah....something tells me that the lady may protest too much....

[Hyfi]

That would be exactly the kind of argument that's going to get someone in trouble in a debate. Outside of the suburbs there's a nation of Grandmas getting a chance to relive firsthand motherhood because of this country's illigetimacy epidemic. I'm not saying it's right or that you're not entitled to your opinion but the potential repercussions of saying it in a debate are harsh. I still think this election is going to be decided by the fringes. Comments like this could charge up the feminists, unwed mothers and a host of other disenfranchised voting blocs that otherwise might have gone for Obama.

I think it's interesting that we expect not only our politicians but everyone our politicians have ever come in contact with to live in a bubble. In my experience, I've only ever been truly capable at controlling someone with economic coercion or physical threat. I'm trying to remember, in an historical context, the last time one group of citizens was successful at preventing another group from ****ing.

I wonder how long it will be until the daughter is criticized for keeping the baby and getting married.

I have no problem with unwed mothers. I have a problem with girls still in high school being pregnant. I have a problem with a political party that touts Family Values as their platform election after election yet nominate people who cannot demonstrate it with their personal life. I surely don't want people running the country that can't even get their children to use birth control if they are going to have sex before they are prepared to have babies.

The thing that changes this election a bit is that we now have two candidates that are of an age I and many others can actually relate to. McCain being all but dead already has no young children to worry about so they can't get him in trouble. Biden has a large family but I have not heard that they have caused him any embarrassment as of yet. Oboma has a few young children that won't get the full attention they need from their parents either.

I am all for younger candidates so it's a shame that children's well being will have to be somewhat sacrificed in order to go down that road. It sure will be interesting, that's for sure.

[3-LockBox]

That would be exactly the kind of argument that's going to get someone in trouble in a debate. Outside of the suburbs there's a nation of Grandmas getting a chance to relive firsthand motherhood because of this country's illigetimacy epidemic. I'm not saying it's right or that you're not entitled to your opinion but the potential repercussions of saying it in a debate are harsh. I still think this election is going to be decided by the fringes. Comments like this could charge up the feminists, unwed mothers and a host of other disenfranchised voting blocs that otherwise might have gone for Obama.

Core values change. Its no longer illigetimate to have a child out of wedlock, just like it is no longer a big deal to 'live together'. It ain't even really all that big a deal to get abortions or be a deadbeat dad, but it is still in very very bad taste to not want to take care of other peoples' kids.

Its gonna be very tricky trying to dig up dirt on either candidate without being accused of racism, sexism, ageism, elistism, etc etc. Its still like trying to figure out which eye you want poked out. Some people already have a bad eye anyway.

[bobsticks]

... It ain't even really all that big a deal to get abortions or be a deadbeat dad, but it is still in very very bad taste to not want to take care of other peoples' kids...


Man, ain't that the truth.

[Rich-n-Texas]

I have no problem with unwed mothers. I have a problem with girls still in high school being pregnant.
Walk into any inner-city high school and see how many buns-in-the-oven you see. What are you doing to prevent this? It's easy to talk the talk right? From what I've read so far Hyfi either you don't have children or you're very rich and send your kids to an expensive private school where there are no middle - lower class influences.

I have a problem with a political party that touts Family Values as their platform election after election yet nominate people who cannot demonstrate it with their personal life. I surely don't want people running the country that can't even get their children to use birth control if they are going to have sex before they are prepared to have babies.
I haven't heard any of the current candidates talking about Family Values, but then again I haven't been paying very close attention yet. I think the Family Values idea pretty much died with Slick Willie Clinton, don't you? All this righteous speak from you in no way reflects the reality of the real world, which is again why I think you have no kids of your own. I don't either but I do see what's going on in this country where teenage pregnancy is concerned, and it has no roots in Democrat or Republican politics.

The thing that changes this election a bit is that we now have two candidates that are of an age I and many others can actually relate to. McCain being all but dead already has no young children to worry about so they can't get him in trouble.
So only kids at some pre-determined age are the troublemakers? And you relate to someone who's "all but dead already"? All due respect dude, but you're presenting a very narrow-minded case against the Republican candidate in my opinion.

Biden has a large family but I have not heard that they have caused him any embarrassment as of yet. Oboma has a few young children that won't get the full attention they need from their parents either.
Point being?

I am all for younger candidates so it's a shame that children's well being will have to be somewhat sacrificed in order to go down that road. It sure will be interesting, that's for sure.
Well, you've certainly made your views known. Unfortunately many many people don't share it. Oh and BTW, where did you get the idea that the Vice President leads the country? :nono:

[Ajani]

I think there are enough legitimate questions to be asked about Sarah Palin as a VP choice, that no-one should need to resort to attacking her about her teenage daughter's pregnancy...

The MAIN problem with choosing her, is that it significantly weakens/destroys McCain's arguement about the need for experience. No matter how often people claim that "oh, she's not running for president", the fact remains that if McCain drops dead or becomes incapacitated at any time during his presidency, she will become the President... And given his age and cancer history, that is a real possibility... I really think that McCain should have gone for a more experienced Republican VP pick, so that he could continue to attack Obama on that issue...

Also, while the Obama camp has made the point that the issue of judgement is more important than experience (since you can always surround yourself with experienced advisors and VPs - Biden for example)... Palin is put at a major disadvantage by being introduced into the game so late... Obama has had 1.5 years to campaign and show his judgement on the national/international stage... Palin will have just 2 months... so basically, no time to prove to the public that she has great judgement and is not just being used as a cheap ploy to generate shock value and maybe steal a few female voters from Obama/Biden.

[Hyfi]

Walk into any inner-city high school and see how many buns-in-the-oven you see. What are you doing to prevent this? It's easy to talk the talk right? From what I've read so far Hyfi either you don't have children or you're very rich and send your kids to an expensive private school where there are no middle - lower class influences.

I haven't heard any of the current candidates talking about Family Values, but then again I haven't been paying very close attention yet. I think the Family Values idea pretty much died with Slick Willie Clinton, don't you? All this righteous speak from you in no way reflects the reality of the real world, which is again why I think you have no kids of your own. I don't either but I do see what's going on in this country where teenage pregnancy is concerned, and it has no roots in Democrat or Republican politics.

So only kids at some pre-determined age are the troublemakers? And you relate to someone who's "all but dead already"? All due respect dude, but you're presenting a very narrow-minded case against the Republican candidate in my opinion.

Point being?

Well, you've certainly made your views known. Unfortunately many many people don't share it. Oh and BTW, where did you get the idea that the Vice President leads the country? :nono:

I usually don't get involved in political discussion due to my narrow minded view that others including 99% of candidates running for any office do not share. I will most likely refrain in the future.

Just because there are many pregnant high school girls does not make it acceptable or right. It just shows that people don't spend enough quality time with their children. But, in most cases there is only one parent and that is a whole other rant I could go into.

No I don't have children but I know how I would have dealt with them had I had the chance. There is such a thing called communication and education.

Bush ran his whole first campaign on Family Values if you recall and McCain is just a Bush jr-jr and will be 4 more years of the same war mongering attitudes. If you can't demonstrate control of a family, how will you demonstrate control of a whole country?

Sounds to me like your an angry Republican. It's all just a big game anyway since others call all the real shots no matter who is the Pres or Vice. Pretty much a puppet figure elected out of a bogus election process that does not reflect reality. The counting should be one person one vote and majority of popular votes wins. Isn't that what Democracy should mean.

Maybe if the politicians spent more time worrying about what goes on in this country it would all look a bit different to me but when all they seem to worry about is Israel, something is way wrong.

OK, I'm outa this one and for the record, I'll be voting for None Of The Above.

[Free Citizen]

I have no problem with unwed mothers. I have a problem with girls still in high school being pregnant. I have a problem with a political party that touts Family Values as their platform election after election yet nominate people who cannot demonstrate it with their personal life. I surely don't want people running the country that can't even get their children to use birth control if they are going to have sex before they are prepared to have babies.

The thing that changes this election a bit is that we now have two candidates that are of an age I and many others can actually relate to. McCain being all but dead already has no young children to worry about so they can't get him in trouble. Biden has a large family but I have not heard that they have caused him any embarrassment as of yet. Oboma has a few young children that won't get the full attention they need from their parents either.

I am all for younger candidates so it's a shame that children's well being will have to be somewhat sacrificed in order to go down that road. It sure will be interesting, that's for sure.

Hi, new here and already into politics. Why do you say "that children's well being will have to be somewhat sacrificed in order to go down that road"? The children's haven't got a full time parent? The spouse will take an executive position in the White House? It is interesting that teenage pregnancy is rife in the US (I'm not American). I think this problem has nothing to do with politics. It is due to social values and weaknesses in the schooling system. The way I see it, the following causes could be responsible for this;

1. Peer Pressure. Americans seem to have strange moral values where it is acceptable for teenagers to be sexually active. Do American parents say to their teenage children, it is okay to have sex but please use contraceptives? In many other countries (mine is based on the British system) Co-ed schooling only exist in Primary school (that is equivalent to US grade 1 through 6 and College or A-levels. That means in Secondary schools (grade 7 through 11). it is either girls school or boys school. It is taught that at this age, children are not sufficiently mature enough to study together. Sexual curiosity gets the better of them and distracts them from their studies. But that doesn't mean they don't mix at all. They sometime cross paths through extra-curricula activities. When they go to A-levels or College their are already 18 and that is a legal age in most countries.

2. Lack of Parental Guidance. It is naive to say that teenage pregnancy don't happen in countries outside of the US. But they occur relatively less. In fact it is a rarity to learn of teenage pregnancy. Children getting pregnant tend to come from broken homes where parents are divorced or parents are both working and do not closely supervise their children. More often than not, these children grow up through hired servants that come and go.

3. Different Moral Standards. IMHO Americans tend to be more tolerant to social failures. Perhaps the thinking is that no one is perfect and people are bound to make mistakes. To forgive is divine. It is only that the level of tolerance in this aspect is higher than most other nations.

From what I perceive, children getting pregnant is not a desirable trait in the US yet the American society lack the resolve to overcome the problem.

[Feanor]

...

This latest salvo regarding the daughter is repugnant, but if it sways enough people to be led off target, then like any smelly red herring, it might lead them to the desired path.

...

The Republican Party is all about red herrings. How otherwise would a party ever win office whose real agenda is to foster the ultra rich and huge corporations? Read (http://www.amazon.com/Whats-Matter-Kansas-Conservatives-America/dp/080507774X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1220461327&sr=1-1)What's the Matter with Kansas? by Thomas Frank (http://www.amazon.com/Whats-Matter-Kansas-Conservatives-America/dp/080507774X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1220461327&sr=1-1).

The matters of abortion, gay marriage, premarital sex, etc., "family values", "free enterprise", American (as opposed human) values are all promoted solely to cloak the the true intention of the Republican agenda-setters. These issue are periferal and ultimately of minor importance. Bill Clinton said (as alleged), "It's the Economy, stupid!". So true, and Obama would be well advised to stick to that insight.

Sarah Palin inexperienced? That, coupled with the naive values she's supposed to hold, will make her so much the easier for the real Republican agenda-setters to control.

[Rich-n-Texas]

The Republican Party is all about red herrings. How otherwise would a party ever win office whose real agenda is to foster the ultra rich and huge corporations? Read (http://www.amazon.com/Whats-Matter-Kansas-Conservatives-America/dp/080507774X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1220461327&sr=1-1)What's the Matter with Kansas? by Thomas Frank (http://www.amazon.com/Whats-Matter-Kansas-Conservatives-America/dp/080507774X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1220461327&sr=1-1).

The matters of abortion, gay marriage, premarital sex, etc., "family values", "free enterprise", American (as opposed human) values are all promoted solely to cloak the the true intention of the Republican agenda-setters. These issue are periferal and ultimately of minor importance. Bill Cliton said (as alleged), "It's the Economy, stupid!". So true, and Obama would be well advised to stick to that insight.

Sarah Palin inexperienced? That, coupled with the naive values she's supposed to hold, will make her so much the easier for the real Republican agenda-setters to control.
You sound like an angry Democrat. Oh wait, you don't live in the US. My bad. :rolleyes:

[Rich-n-Texas]

I usually don't get involved in political discussion due to my narrow minded view that others including 99% of candidates running for any office do not share. I will most likely refrain in the future.
I try not to either until I read some of the idiot posts that crop up here (not necessarily from you Hifi).


Just because there are many pregnant high school girls does not make it acceptable or right. It just shows that people don't spend enough quality time with their children. But, in most cases there is only one parent and that is a whole other rant I could go into.
I agree. Like I said, this problem has nothing to do with politics, although there are plenty of Left Wing radicals here who will sacrifice looking like idiots in order to show others where they align with their party's politics.

No I don't have children but I know how I would have dealt with them had I had the chance. There is such a thing called communication and education.
"Best laid plans" dude. There's a fine line between discipline and independance for kids. You certainly don't want your kids to hate you; and teenagers will curse you up and down if you try to restrict them, so the parent needs to know where that line is. I'm sure it's a tough job for a parent. One that I don't envy.

Bush ran his whole first campaign on Family Values if you recall and McCain is just a Bush jr-jr and will be 4 more years of the same war mongering attitudes. After Clinton's escapades with Monica, seems a very good campaign strategy to me. And how quickly some forget 9/11, but remember every detail about events their party wants to complain about.

If you can't demonstrate control of a family, how will you demonstrate control of a whole country?
Again, the VP doesn't control the "whole country".

Sounds to me like your an angry Republican.
Not really. Maybe just an AR.com member with the balls to counter some of the lunacy he reads from foreigners and liberals who b!tch & complain but, as history shows, offer no viable solutions.

It's all just a big game anyway since others call all the real shots no matter who is the Pres or Vice. Pretty much a puppet figure elected out of a bogus election process that does not reflect reality. The counting should be one person one vote and majority of popular votes wins. Isn't that what Democracy should mean.
:lol: No no, it's all George Bush's fault. He alone and no one else! :rolleyes:


Maybe if the politicians spent more time worrying about what goes on in this country it would all look a bit different to me but when all they seem to worry about is Israel, something is way wrong.
You think that's ALL they worry about?

OK, I'm outa this one and for the record, I'll be voting for None Of The Above.
Seems like the best solution for you, but I think Sir T would blame you for being "part of the problem"

[Hyfi]

After Clinton's escapades with Monica, seems a very good campaign strategy to me. And how quickly some forget 9/11, but remember every detail about events their party wants to complain about.


Yeah I remember 9/11. I remember how Bush helped all of his cronies and Bin Laden's family members get out of the US on a private plane hours after it happened. I remember how we had enough info on the plot and the people carrying it out to have stopped them well before they pulled it off. I remember how Bush was going to hunt Osama down....how's that going? Osama Bin Forgotten.

Again, maybe if we did not give Israel all our money and attention, the nice religious folks over there in the middle east wouldn't hate us so much and want us all dead. Aside from Israel, the US government has a bad habit of telling everyone that they should do it our way, just like they are mostly based on Christianity where the belief is Christianity is the ONLY right religion and everyone else is just wrong. It's no wonder the rest of the world hates us.

I'm going to London in 3 weeks. It's going to be interesting to see what questions I get asked and how I get treated.

[Rich-n-Texas]

You sound like an angry Democrat too Hifi.

[bobsticks]

Thank you, and there it is...the entire Sticks Forign Policy platform in a nutshell...

How's about we stop trying to export moral absolutism across the globe when we practice moral relativism at home.

On my limited time on the internet I've discovered that you can often tell which folks have a job dealing with people from their posting.

[Feanor]

You sound like an angry Democrat. Oh wait, you don't live in the US. My bad. :rolleyes:

I'm an impartial foreign observer whose only interest is an objective understanding of the situation in the U.S.

And if I say I'm objective, its true. How is it not? I don't pay US tax; my son won't be sent to Iraq. I'll be retire in a bit over a year, so I wouldn't care if my job was shipped to China or India even if I did live down there.

But the fact is that the large majority of Americans are being screwed over by the Repulican power brokers and most of them are too stupid to realized it. Incidentally, the situation here in Canada isn't much better: right-wing forces are managing to dupe Canadian voters in a very similar manner.

[Feanor]

...

Again, maybe if we did not give Israel all our money and attention, the nice religious folks over there in the middle east wouldn't hate us so much and want us all dead. Aside from Israel, the US government has a bad habit of telling everyone that they should do it our way, ...

The mindless, uncritical support for Israel contrary to the broader interests of the US illustrates how small but powerful interest groups, such as AIPAC (http://www.aipac.org/), have a testicle-crushing grip on American politicians of all parties.

[thekid]

Well I agree with Aj and Feanor on some of this.

The GOP has at its base groups led by people like James Dobson, Gary Bauer etc who have excoriated Democrats for supporting programs such as sex education and a science based curriculum. ( Flame thread alert- Is it the science that produces the sound from speakers or is it created..... :D ) They believe Democrats are godless and amoral and that the GOP had a monopoly relegion and morality. The problem as has been pointed is that the candidates they support rarely walk the walk. Divorces, corruption, teen pregnancy and yes even homosexuality are just as much a part of people who make up the GOP as it is the Democrats but when the Democrats start to mention the hypocrisy of the situation WWIII erupts. To my friends on the right if the shoe was on the other foot and the Democratic candidate had a similar situation, Do you think that Dobson,Hannity and Rush would be sitting on the sidelines applauding an un-wed mothers parents??? They have raised money and got ratings for years talking about the moral decay of America

You do however have to applaud Palin for at least sticking to her principals on being pro-life. My issues with her have more to do with her apparent hypocrisy on economic issues. Does anyone here think it is normal for a town of 9,000 to hire a lobbyist (a former Chief of Staff to Ted Stevens- who will all know brings home the bacon) to represent their interests in D.C? That small burg has recieved more than 26 million in Federal funds in the last couple of years which seems highly disproportionate to its size. To me it is another example of a party that talks about small government and wasteful spending but when they get the keys to the treasure house manage to plunder just as well as the pirates they claim to be protecting us from in the first place.

On a somewhat related topic as I watch the party reps and spin doctors earn their paychecks I was hoping someone can answer a few questions;

When the GOP says we are "winning" the war in Iraq could someone please provide me the answers;

Who are we fighting and where will the Peace Treaty be signed once victory has been declared? (My left friends please-Insert "Mission Accomplished joke of your choice here) Also please note the USS Missouri is I believe unavailable at this point.

Once we have "won" in Iraq please explain how this affects the real "War on Terrorism" given that 11 of the 15 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, the 9/11 attacks were planned by an Egyptian and the training and final authorization for the 9/11 attacks came from a Saudi based in Afghanistan?

I say these things because I am tired of hearing about "victory" or listening to people who are labeling others as defeatists or "cut and runners". The "War on Terrorism" is real and it is as we have seen deadly serious. It is as much an idealogical struggle as a military one and it will not end with a treaty or climatic battle. It will have been "won" when bombs stop going off in crowded markets and people can live their lives in complete freedom without the fear of their neighbor or their government spying on them, imprisoning them or killing them based on their beliefs or ethnic background.

The two parties should not be reducing the war to slogans and 30-second sound bites because at the end of the day there are real men and women putting their lives on the line every day and IMO it cheapens their service when we treat them like a ball in some sort of twisted playground game.

Ahhh now I feel better............. :D

[Auricauricle]

A rather quick reply:

You ask, "Who are we fighting and where will the Peace Treaty be signed once victory has been declared? (My left friends please-Insert "Mission Accomplished joke of your choice here) Also please note the USS Missouri is I believe unavailable at this point".

If we can agree that a war is an act of aggression by one nation to use force as a means to gain assets or influence over another nation, the United States has been at war in one tie or another throughout its comparatively short existence. The war in progress is one that has been fought, in some fashion or other for much longer than the bombing of the World Trade Center…perhaps going back as far as the Crusades, if not further. Perhaps it is a sticky point, but if wars are fueled by ideology, the foment of antipathy towards the west by the east and the east towards the west has only been made more comprehensible by the discovery of that black, slimy liquid that has enticed, bedazzled and made fools of us all. In brokering for our share of the resource, we have made deals with devils and have turned a blind eye to transgressions committed in the name of Allah and Jesus, never once taking account of the countless suffering that our rapacious appetite has caused. We have erected puppet regimes to support our stake in the region, by supporting governments and cabals whose agendas never once entered the minds of the American citizenry, who as long as they got that resource and were suckered by the low price of that commodity were blind to the real price that was being paid in terms of human rights and dignity.

This war will never be over in the sense that when it is “all said and done”. The venom that embedded itself into the tissues of our minds and the fabrics of our societies has become systemic. We may divest ourselves of our co-dependent relationship with these countries and loosen our beholden grip to some of the others, but the United States exists to place itself front and center of the world’s stage. Until we step aside and work in the true spirit of democracy and as an peripheral, but integral part of the machinery that propels this planet, we will continue to agitate and irritate our neighbors.

There will be no USS Missouri. It’ll be a rubber stamp, a photo-op and a file.

"Once we have 'won' in Iraq please explain how this affects the real 'War on Terrorism' given that 11 of the 15 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, the 9/11 attacks were planned by an Egyptian and the training and final authorization for the 9/11 attacks came from a Saudi based in Afghanistan?"

The "War on Terrorism" is a farce. "Terrorism" is as much a valid form of warfare as dropping atomic bombs or firebombs on cities of women, children and helpless people have no hope of escaping their terrible blast. Terrorism is not a mad-hatter’s scheme devised by raving lunatics with furtive eyes and a hunch back, but by legitimate governments and their allies who know their targets’ soft-as-genitals vulnerabilities—whether actually resource oriented or symbolic—and are willing to ratchet things up a few notches. Many of the followers of these people are rabid: they are propelled by ideology and unshakable faith and, armed by cross, sickle, menorah or numb-chuck are capable of fighting until the last man is standing. Iraq is not an isolated country, and for countries in the region, the “war” in Iraq is not only affront that offends that poor nation, by many more who would like very much to see the land of Mesopotamia and the Garden of Eden left alone. These alliances are deeply entrenched and the blood that runs through all of them is old, smart and envisions scenes that we can only hope to discern.

"I say these things because I am tired of hearing about "victory" or listening to people who are labeling others as defeatists or "cut and runners". The "War on Terrorism' is real and it is as we have seen deadly serious. It is as much an idealogical struggle as a military one and it will not end with a treaty or climatic battle. It will have been "won" when bombs stop going off in crowded markets and people can live their lives in complete freedom without the fear of their neighbor or their government spying on them, imprisoning them or killing them based on their beliefs or ethnic background".

You bet.

"The two parties should not be reducing the war to slogans and 30-second sound bites because at the end of the day there are real men and women putting their lives on the line every day and IMO it cheapens their service when we treat them like a ball in some sort of twisted playground game".

There is an assumption that folks are incapable of processing more than only an infinitesimal amount of data in their poor heads at a time. Shame on us for not encouraging each other and our children to think, if that be the case. The game of politics in America is a well-choreographed spectacle. Behind the curtains of red, white and blue, beyond the veils of balloons and fireworks, the men and women of government are extraordinary ordinary people whose agendas and schemes are not focused on citizens but an overarching vision of what America is and where she will be 50 years from now. “Politics as usual”: the great scandal mongering, the backbiting and bad behavior is all smoke screen and residue, with human lives as fodder for causes that are determined by men and women of enormous influence and prestige.

As long as we prop up our lawmakers with holier than thou shibboleths and starry-eyed expectations, they will fail us. They need to be held accountable for their actions as we are to ours. This includes sending white-collar criminals and errant politicos to blue-collar prisons and making sure that their children do battle in the wars of their design.

We need to be more proactive as citizens, and hold them accountable in word and deed. This means encouraging dialogs such as this one not only with on-line acquaintances, but also with the man drinking his beer next to you. This is the true art of conversation: open discourse, readily and fearlessly and enthusiastically rendered.

And now, lads, let us take our pikes and storm Washington! There are heads to be gathered and fair maidens to ravish!

[Hyfi]

I've discovered that you can often tell which folks have a job dealing with people from their posting.

Can you guess that about me?

[Hyfi]

Why do you say "that children's well being will have to be somewhat sacrificed in order to go down that road"?
The children's haven't got a full time parent?

From what I perceive, children getting pregnant is not a desirable trait in the US yet the American society lack the resolve to overcome the problem.

Your first 2 questions answers part of your last statement. I noticed you said parent, not parents. Maybe if mom was around a bit more paying attention and talking about it.......and dad talking to the sons. Between disease and unwanted pregnancy, kids should be having the cr@p scared out of them in a way they get it, however that parent decides. But instead we see on the news all too often about girls giving birth in the girls room at school and nobody knew she was pregnant. Hello, anyone home?

[3-LockBox]

Geez, all this political reparte' and not one word about her looks...what has this board become?

Someone went on the tangent about unwed mothers in highschool, and it reminds me of something I hear all the time, about how much smarter the last couple of generations are than I was at the same age. Is it true? Well, I could figure out the cost/benefit analysis of a rubber, and the generations that followed chase parked cars.

[thekid]

Geez, all this political reparte' and not one word about her looks...what has this board become?

Someone went on the tangent about unwed mothers in highschool, and it reminds me of something I hear all the time, about how much smarter the last couple of generations are than I was at the same age. Is it true? Well, I could figure out the cost/benefit analysis of a rubber, and the generations that followed chase parked cars.

Well I will say she has that Tina Fey look down to the tee!
I think we know where NBC will go when they need a stunt double for the moose scene when "30 Rock-The Movie" begins production.

[Hyfi]

Geez, all this political reparte' and not one word about her looks...what has this board become?

Someone went on the tangent about unwed mothers in highschool, and it reminds me of something I hear all the time, about how much smarter the last couple of generations are than I was at the same age. Is it true? Well, I could figure out the cost/benefit analysis of a rubber, and the generations that followed chase parked cars.

Except for the whole Librarian thing she has going on, she is not as hard on the eyes as Hilary. Heck of a bod for 5 children.

Anyway, to get back on track here....I forgot she was going to be on last night so when I got off the PC and turned on the tube, I thought I was watching Leno or something. There was this female comedian doing one liners after another of unjustified tongue in cheek CHEAP SHOTS. I know she didn't write it so some speech writer made her look like a complete ass to me. As usual, most of the Democratic speeches stayed close to on-topic about what they had planned for us while the Republicans spend the majority of their opportunity to get their message out bashing the other guy with half truths.

I'm not so sure that the last generations were any smarter. They were a bit more respectful of life and scared due to religious brainwashing. Hey maybe that brainwashing isn't all that bad? Ummm, there also were a whole lot more two parent families. And I by no means claim that there are no good single parents, I know there are many.

[Auricauricle]

YER GETTIN' OFF FOCUS! Can we storm the ramparts now....?

[Feanor]

...

Anyway, to get back on track here....I forgot she was going to be on last night so when I got off the PC and turned on the tube, I thought I was watching Leno or something. There was this female comedian doing one liners after another of unjustified tongue in cheek CHEAP SHOTS. I know she didn't write it so some speech writer made her look like a complete ass to me. As usual, most of the Democratic speeches stayed close to on-topic about what they had planned for us while the Republicans spend the majority of their opportunity to get their message out bashing the other guy with half truths.
...

It's too bad that politicians personal lives are such a big consideration in U.S. politics. It's much less of a issue in other parts of the world. In France, I'm told, it wouldn't be a big deal if the president has a mistress, or whether his daughter is pregnant out of wedlock. If Clinton is criticized for lying about a blowjob under his desk, let's remember that he lied because he thought the public would make a big deal out of it. Elsewhere nobody would care: no one would be bothered to look for such a failing and if one were discovered, the president would have to lie about it.

Sarah Palin will be sold to the American public like bath soap or breakfast cereal. Her "values" will be sold as a surrogate for the things that really matter. Even if she is true to these values and not a hypocrite, they are irrelevant to the core problems the country faces.

A recent magazine article -- sorry, can remeber which one, might have been Discovery, or even Mcleans a Canadian pub -- the biggest factor Democrat voters looked for in a potential President is judgement, while for Republican voters it's character. IMO, judgement is more important than character, and the latter is certainly no substitute for the former.

What's worse in a sense is what exactly Americans (at least, Republicans) define as character. It seems that character largely means adherence mainly to Old Testament proscriptions or modern interpretations of them. What of Christ's injunction to love peace, the poor, and sinners? Nada. As I've said before, "Christian Right" is an oxymoron. These people are not right (in the sense of just), and not Christian either but rather modern-day Pharisees.

[Rich-n-Texas]

If Clinton is criticized for lying about a blowjob under his desk, let's remember that he lied because he thought the public would make a big deal out of it...
Or maybe because he thought he'd be impeached? :rolleyes:

Ya know what Feanor? Because I think you're just here to antagonize, I'm going to continue in my belief that you're not an idiot. Sound good?

[Ajani]

Or maybe because he thought he'd be impeached? :rolleyes:

Hmmm... I think Impeachment could be viewed as the public making a big deal of it... lol


Ya know what Feanor? Because I think you're just here to antagonize, I'm going to continue in my belief that you're not an idiot. Sound good?

Actually, I strongly suspect that Feanor believes what he says... and to some extent I agree with him...


Anyway, I find the differences between Democrats and Republicans really strange:

Republicans - Favour financial freedom aka small government and fiscal prudence (though Bush/Cheney seem to have ignored that whole fiscal prudence bit for the last 8 years!!!)... For the most part I agree with the Republicans on this issue...

Democrats - Favour personal freedom i.e. Pro-Choice, Gay Rights, etc... etc.. I tend to agree with the Dems on this one...

What I find weird is that I would expect one party to be about freedom and the other about Gov control, not this mixed approach where one is for personal but not financial freedom and the other is for financial but not personal freedom...

[GMichael]

Hmmm... I think Impeachment could be viewed as the public making a big deal of it... lol



Actually, I strongly suspect that Feanor believes what he says... and to some extent I agree with him...


Anyway, I find the differences between Democrats and Republicans really strange:

Republicans - Favour financial freedom aka small government and fiscal prudence (though Bush/Cheney seem to have ignored that whole fiscal prudence bit for the last 8 years!!!)... For the most part I agree with the Republicans on this issue...

Democrats - Favour personal freedom i.e. Pro-Choice, Gay Rights, etc... etc.. I tend to agree with the Dems on this one...

What I find weird is that I would expect one party to be about freedom and the other about Gov control, not this mixed approach where one is for personal but not financial freedom and the other is for financial but not personal freedom...

The way I see it is that both parties are all about making themselves look good so that they can get more money from any businesses, whether they be legal or not. They say what they think the public wants to hear so that they can get in power. Both parties have made it such that any candidate that wants their backing will back that party to all ends. That includes, but is not limited to, putting the other party down at every turn. Some people believe one party's rhetoric over the other and form a deep hatred for the other. Both are equally corrupt.

[Feanor]

...

Republicans - Favour financial freedom aka small government and fiscal prudence (though Bush/Cheney seem to have ignored that whole fiscal prudence bit for the last 8 years!!!)... For the most part I agree with the Republicans on this issue...

...

Neither "small government" nor "fiscal prudence" are particular priorities with Republicans (or right-wingers in general). They talk the talk but they don't walk the walk. Their only real priority is low taxes, (plus low regulation, etc.). The Iraq war has proven this point. ('Scuse me but Dah! That is so painfully obvious.)

[Rich-n-Texas]

Hmmm... I think Impeachment could be viewed as the public making a big deal of it... lol
With a little bit of Congress thrown in for good measure, right?

Actually, I strongly suspect that Feanor believes what he says... and to some extent I agree with him...
Well, to some extent on a few points I agree with him also. Doesn't mean he's not being antagonistic though in the big picture.

Anyway, I find the differences between Democrats and Republicans really strange:

Republicans - Favour financial freedom aka small government and fiscal prudence (though Bush/Cheney seem to have ignored that whole fiscal prudence bit for the last 8 years!!!)... For the most part I agree with the Republicans on this issue...

Democrats - Favour personal freedom i.e. Pro-Choice, Gay Rights, etc... etc.. I tend to agree with the Dems on this one...

What I find weird is that I would expect one party to be about freedom and the other about Gov control, not this mixed approach where one is for personal but not financial freedom and the other is for financial but not personal freedom...
You must be losing your eyesight because your sig sums it all up perfectly.

[O'Shag]

Hi, new here and already into politics. Why do you say "that children's well being will have to be somewhat sacrificed in order to go down that road"? The children's haven't got a full time parent? The spouse will take an executive position in the White House? It is interesting that teenage pregnancy is rife in the US (I'm not American). I think this problem has nothing to do with politics. It is due to social values and weaknesses in the schooling system. The way I see it, the following causes could be responsible for this;

1. Peer Pressure. Americans seem to have strange moral values where it is acceptable for teenagers to be sexually active. Do American parents say to their teenage children, it is okay to have sex but please use contraceptives? In many other countries (mine is based on the British system) Co-ed schooling only exist in Primary school (that is equivalent to US grade 1 through 6 and College or A-levels. That means in Secondary schools (grade 7 through 11). it is either girls school or boys school. It is taught that at this age, children are not sufficiently mature enough to study together. Sexual curiosity gets the better of them and distracts them from their studies. But that doesn't mean they don't mix at all. They sometime cross paths through extra-curricula activities. When they go to A-levels or College their are already 18 and that is a legal age in most countries.

2. Lack of Parental Guidance. It is naive to say that teenage pregnancy don't happen in countries outside of the US. But they occur relatively less. In fact it is a rarity to learn of teenage pregnancy. Children getting pregnant tend to come from broken homes where parents are divorced or parents are both working and do not closely supervise their children. More often than not, these children grow up through hired servants that come and go.

3. Different Moral Standards. IMHO Americans tend to be more tolerant to social failures. Perhaps the thinking is that no one is perfect and people are bound to make mistakes. To forgive is divine. It is only that the level of tolerance in this aspect is higher than most other nations.

From what I perceive, children getting pregnant is not a desirable trait in the US yet the American society lack the resolve to overcome the problem.

Excellent points..... and welcome to the forum by the way

[Auricauricle]

GM: I agree with you on the point made that Reps and Dems are equally culpable. Way I see it, the schisms between the parties are arbitrary. Washington is a large cabal--mebbe a caldron--of very influential people serving themselves...if the citizens get a crumb, well lucky them. Mebbe we ought to just get ride of the whole mess and just elect people by who they are and what they do than by the party they represent....

They're...bastages...ever last stinkin' one of 'em....!

[GMichael]

GM: I agree with you on the point made that Reps and Dems are equally culpable. Way I see it, the schisms between the parties are arbitrary. Washington is a large cabal--mebbe a caldron--of very influential people serving themselves...if the citizens get a crumb, well lucky them. Mebbe we ought to just get ride of the whole mess and just elect people by who they are and what they do than by the party they represent....

They're...bastages...ever last stinkin' one of 'em....!

Oh great. Now I've got to go Google some of the words you used to figure out what you're saying.
:eek6: :eek6:

[Auricauricle]

Ahhhh...Geddovahit!

[O'Shag]

It's too bad that politicians personal lives are such a big consideration in U.S. politics. It's much less of a issue in other parts of the world. In France, I'm told, it wouldn't be a big deal if the president has a mistress, or whether his daughter is pregnant out of wedlock. If Clinton is criticized for lying about a blowjob under his desk,

Its not so much about getting a blowjob under your desk as where and who. If one is the leader of a country and your having this blowjob in the Oval office of the united states, well Its like the Archibishop of Canterbury getting a blowjob behind the Altar at Westminster Abbey.

The Oval office is the heart of the Whitehouse, and Bill Clinton mocked the his office in doing this. Moral leadership? ha, my foot,

I like Barrack Obama, but do feel that he lacks the experience as compared to McCain, which he has wisely addressed in his appointment of Senator Biden. I have been leainig towards McCain, until his ridiculous choice for running mate. His choice of VP, which, given his health and age could very well mean the next President of the most powerful and influential country in a very unstable volatile world, is proposterous. As far as a woman in this office, there are any number of women who could do a MUCH better job than Sarah Palin.

That decision by John McCain has made my mind up to vote for Obama and Biden:10:

[Auricauricle]

Lessee....How am I goin' to compare B. Clinton, who lied about a BJ and Bush and the Gang, who either lied about WMD or failed to confirm their existence, the need to bomb Iraq into the Stone Age, kicked out the Geneva Convention, told the United Nations to kiss his ass, told the Kyoto Accords to funk off, supported a war strategy that advocated a ground policy that experienced military thinkers thought was a joke, and for setting the moral compass of the nation back to 3,000,000 BCE, hmmm.....

But who am I to wave flags and get a hoppity?


Get me a beer!!!

[3-LockBox]

If Clinton is criticized for lying about a blowjob under his desk, let's remember that he lied because he thought the public would make a big deal out of it.


uuuhhhhh.....

gee, I guess I never looked at it that way


:sosp:

[Feanor]

...

I like Barrack Obama, but do feel that he lacks the experience as compared to McCain, which he has wisely addressed in his appointment of Senator Biden. I have been leainig towards McCain, until his ridiculous choice for running mate. His choice of VP, which, given his health and age could very well mean the next President of the most powerful and influential country in a very unstable volatile world, is proposterous. As far as a woman in this office, there are any number of women who could do a MUCH better job than Sarah Palin.

That decision by John McCain has made my mind up to vote for Obama and Biden:10:

... at least, about the ridiculousness of the choice of Sarah Palin for VP. To me it seems like an insult to the intelligence of Americn voters.

[Ajani]

Lessee....How am I goin' to compare B. Clinton, who lied about a BJ and Bush and the Gang, who either lied about WMD or failed to confirm their existence, the need to bomb Iraq into the Stone Age, kicked out the Geneva Convention, told the United Nations to kiss his ass, told the Kyoto Accords to funk off, supported a war strategy that advocated a ground policy that experienced military thinkers thought was a joke, and for setting the moral compass of the nation back to 3,000,000 BCE, hmmm.....

But who am I to wave flags and get a hoppity?


Get me a beer!!!


It's really funny what the public will accept...

Bill Clinton lies about getting a BJ in the oval office and people wanted him impeached and still hate him to this day... George Bush and his gang, lie about weapons of mass destruction and the "link" between Iraq and terrorists in order to settle a grudge with Sadam Hussein, and yet no one seriously tried to impeach Bush... hell, the public even gave the man another 4 years in office...

So its OK for the president to throw away the lives of thousands of American troops and Iraqi citizens and leave America in economic crisis BUT its totally unacceptable for the president to have sexual activity in his office??? Ummm yeah :sosp:

[3-LockBox]

Lessee....How am I goin' to compare B. Clinton, who lied about a BJ and Bush and the Gang, who either lied about WMD or failed to confirm their existence, the need to bomb Iraq into the Stone Age, kicked out the Geneva Convention, told the United Nations to kiss his ass, told the Kyoto Accords to funk off, supported a war strategy that advocated a ground policy that experienced military thinkers thought was a joke, and for setting the moral compass of the nation back to 3,000,000 BCE, hmmm.....

I don't know about the moral compass thing, but you're not wrong about Bush. This why I won'r vote for him. What Clinton did wasn't as egregious as starting a war, but the BJ thing is just the tip of the iceberg for his two terms in office; it just so happens that its funny, so it keeps getting brought up. Both of our last two presidents are great examples of what kind of person wants to run for the office, and what they're willing to do to get there. I won't vote for Obama either.

[Rich-n-Texas]

Okay, it's Friday. Time to stop talking politics and start talking about BEER!

Where's JSE???

[GMichael]

If we drink enough beer, maybe Sarah Palin will start to look hot.

There. I managed to stay on topic.

[Rich-n-Texas]

Take those silly glasses off and Sarah would look hot beer or no beer. And I'll tell ya what else, Cindy McCain ain't bad looking for some one her age (don't know how old she is but nevertheless...) either. :yesnod:

And no BOT for me!

(BOT in this case stands for Back On Topic)

[Hyfi]

Its not so much about getting a blowjob under your desk as where and who. If one is the leader of a country and your having this blowjob in the Oval office of the united states, well Its like the Archibishop of Canterbury getting a blowjob behind the Altar at Westminster Abbey.

Doesn't he already get them from the Alter boys behind the alter?

I'm actually going to Canterbury in three weeks.

[Rich-n-Texas]

Doesn't he already get them from the Alter boys behind the alter?
No. That priveledge is reserved for Catholic priests only.

[Auricauricle]

I'm proud t'say our boys are right 'n' honorable....Ain't that right Jim an' Tammy Fae?

Open the cooler an' get me a col' one....I'm feelin' warmish aroun' this-a-here collar...

[bobsticks]

... at least, about the ridiculousness of the choice of Sarah Palin for VP. To me it seems like an insult to the intelligence of Americn voters.

Why, because she has about as much experience as a Junior Senator? Essentially she is as qualified as the top of the Democratic Party's ticket.

I don't remember anybody bringing "executive" or "legislative experience" up when Ross Perot ran. Oh yeah, he has a penis...and was old...and connected within the existing powerstructure.

Interesting too how some make only slightly more eloquent versions of the ill-received argument P-Diddy espouses up yonder in Rave Recs.

[Rich-n-Texas]

Interesting too how some make only slightly more eloquent versions of the ill-received argument P-Diddy espouses up yonder in Rave Recs.
No no. Dually noted. I'll be there shortly... :ihih:

[Feanor]

Why, because she has about as much experience as a Junior Senator? Essentially she is as qualified as the top of the Democratic Party's ticket.

I don't remember anybody bringing "executive" or "legislative experience" up when Ross Perot ran. Oh yeah, he has a penis...and was old...and connected within the existing powerstructure.

Interesting too how some make only slightly more eloquent versions of the ill-received argument P-Diddy espouses up yonder in Rave Recs.

What can I say? I was originally routing for Hillary.

In any case for me Palin is disqualified by her attitudes, any other criticism is just a bonus. However I dare say that 3 years as a senator is actually better experience for President than a 1.5 years as governor of a minor state.

[thekid]

I will just ask my GOP friends to put the kool-aid and talking points down for just a second and honestly ask yourself if the shoe was on the other foot and someone with her experience were on the Dem ticket if you all would not be howling with laughter.

I will agree that being governor of some states, such as California or New York, could provide the type of experience that is being pushed forward by the GOP spinners. Alaska is not one of those states that I would put in that category. With under 700,000 people it is smaller in size than many congressional districts, is running a budget surplus due to oil revenues (while governors of most states are trying to manage real spending cuts due to unfunded federal mandates and the down economy) and deals with a legislature controlled by her party. Taken as a whole the "executive" experience being touted is a stretch to say the least. Alaska politics and Palin's limited experience in it, is not the forge needed to temper someone to be a heart beat away from the Oval office.

[Auricauricle]

With a constituent base of 10,000,000 penguins, 25,000 walruses and 8500 killer whales; with a platform that promised "a new sled in every igloo"; with public schools given the resources to expand their menus to diversify their menus (salmon on Mondays, Halibut on Tuesdays and Thursdays and Mackerel on Wednesdays and Fridays); and a fresh supply of high-speed pursuit kayaks and breathalyzers supplied and calibrated by Exxon Corp., I'd say that the governors of Alaska have faced much responsibility and the sort of experience that will make their presence in DC well served....:D

[thekid]

With a constituent base of 10,000,000 penguins, 25,000 walruses and 8500 killer whales; with a platform that promised "a new sled in every igloo"; with public schools given the resources to expand their menus to diversify their menus (salmon on Mondays, Halibut on Tuesdays and Thursdays and Mackerel on Wednesdays and Fridays); and a fresh supply of high-speed pursuit kayaks and breathalyzers supplied and calibrated by Exxon Corp., I'd say that the governors of Alaska have faced much responsibility and the sort of experience that will make their presence in DC well served....:D

I stand corrected...... the demands of the office are greater than I was aware of

I noticed you left out polar bears but then I remembered she stated it has always been a lifelong dream of hers to shoot one. I am guessing if elected we can at least count on one photo op of a Abrams tank pursuing a polar bear and two cubs......... :D

[Feanor]

With a constituent base of 10,000,000 penguins, 25,000 walruses and 8500 killer whales; with a platform that promised "a new sled in every igloo"; with public schools given the resources to expand their menus to diversify their menus (salmon on Mondays, Halibut on Tuesdays and Thursdays and Mackerel on Wednesdays and Fridays); and a fresh supply of high-speed pursuit kayaks and breathalyzers supplied and calibrated by Exxon Corp., I'd say that the governors of Alaska have faced much responsibility and the sort of experience that will make their presence in DC well served....:D

There are no penguins in Alaska :nono:

[Auricauricle]

And now you know WHY!!

Thanks. I stand corrected....Hmph. Guess I'll watch some Li'l Rascals and have a cold one.

http://www.farnorthscience.com/2007/06/10/news-from-alaska/penguins-north-to-alaska/

[thekid]

Let me revive this thread with a little gasoline and a match.........

I saw the interview last night with the Gov on ABC and admittedly went in with a bias that she was not qualified and not the outsider she claims to be. After the interview that impression was strengthened and I am surprised (though I should'nt be) that the Dems have not jumped all over the inconsistencies in her record. A few highlights......

"I told Congress thanks but no thanks to the bridge to nowhere"- What I am not telling you is that I pulled my support after it was politcally unpopular to support the bridge but we still took the money from Congress for other road projects.

"I am not from Washington"- This is apparently true only from the geographical sense because while mayor she hired a lobbyist at 30k a year to "represent" the town's interest in Washington. I'm sure I will be attacked as naive but I thought Alaska had Congressmen and Senators to represent the state and the people of her town in Washington?? Does a town of 7,500 need that big a voice in Washington????

Opposes wasteful government spending- Before she was Mayor the town was not in debt. After her time in office, the town was running a deficit primarily because of the building of a sports arena. "It was the will of the people". True it was voted on in a referendum but Washington is full of pols that bring home the bacon because of the "will of the people".

Won't raise taxes/will cut taxes- Well kinda/sorta..... okay not really. Eliminated personal property tax but raised the sales tax. In effect substituting a once a year tax based on what you own with a every day tax based on what you need.

There were others but I thought I'd just start the "conversation" that will ensue. I am sure her answers will not change anyone's minds. Her supporters are still her supporters and her detractors are still her detractors. I only hope that now that a few facts have come to light the McCain people will at least write her some new lies....er sorry.... I mean lines to memorize for her next round of meet and greets.

I know people say you should vote for the top of the ticket but McCain has lost me based on this poor choice for VP and the most obvious move yet that the "Straight Talk Express" blew an engine a couple of months back and is sitting in the garage gathering dust........

[Ajani]

Let me revive this thread with a little gasoline and a match.........

I saw the interview last night with the Gov on ABC and admittedly went in with a bias that she was not qualified and not the outsider she claims to be. After the interview that impression was strengthened and I am surprised (though I should'nt be) that the Dems have not jumped all over the inconsistencies in her record. A few highlights......

"I told Congress thanks but no thanks to the bridge to nowhere"- What I am not telling you is that I pulled my support after it was politcally unpopular to support the bridge but we still took the money from Congress for other road projects.

"I am not from Washington"- This is apparently true only from the geographical sense because while mayor she hired a lobbyist at 30k a year to "represent" the town's interest in Washington. I'm sure I will be attacked as naive but I thought Alaska had Congressmen and Senators to represent the state and the people of her town in Washington?? Does a town of 7,500 need that big a voice in Washington????

Opposes wasteful government spending- Before she was Mayor the town was not in debt. After her time in office, the town was running a deficit primarily because of the building of a sports arena. "It was the will of the people". True it was voted on in a referendum but Washington is full of pols that bring home the bacon because of the "will of the people".

Won't raise taxes/will cut taxes- Well kinda/sorta..... okay not really. Eliminated personal property tax but raised the sales tax. In effect substituting a once a year tax based on what you own with a every day tax based on what you need.

There were others but I thought I'd just start the "conversation" that will ensue. I am sure her answers will not change anyone's minds. Her supporters are still her supporters and her detractors are still her detractors. I only hope that now that a few facts have come to light the McCain people will at least write her some new lies....er sorry.... I mean lines to memorize for her next round of meet and greets.

I know people say you should vote for the top of the ticket but McCain has lost me based on this poor choice for VP and the most obvious move yet that the "Straight Talk Express" blew an engine a couple of months back and is sitting in the garage gathering dust........

I think Palin's success so far as a VP choice is a reflection of how heavily the US is divided along party lines... (note: many countries suffer from this same problem)... The republicans rightly attacked Obama on his lack of experience, yet now they are willing to rally around an even more inexperienced candidate for VP... So basically if McCain had picked anybody with the proper Republican views (even his poolboy) the party would have supported him... I really wish people would vote based on real issues and not just party lines... I really don't care who people vote for... but I'd really love to see the choice based on some actual thought and not this red state/blue state nonsense...

[Feanor]

...

I know people say you should vote for the top of the ticket but McCain has lost me based on this poor choice for VP and the most obvious move yet that the "Straight Talk Express" blew an engine a couple of months back and is sitting in the garage gathering dust........

As an outside observer I'd never heard of Palin before her nomination by McCain and I must say I was surprised. However in retrospect it isn't all that surprising.

The Obama success proved to McCain and the Repubilican honchos, (if they ever doubted it), that you don't need "experience" to be saleable. With Palin's nomination, McCain's attacks on Obama were revealed for the cynical hypocracy that they actually are.

In any case, as they reasoned, the VP job isn't that big a deal, (despite the insidious influence of Cheney over the feeble-minded Bush). So they felt they free find a saleable person to complement McCain. If the suspicsion is that McCain has centerist tendancies, then why not alay that by appointing a red-neck bible-belter, albeit from the north. Why not someone who can appeal to the common man, (more specifically, the common women)? The suckers will buy that. I think I'll puke they next time I hear Josephine Sixpack say, "Oh, I really like her. She see things like I do". Yeah, maybe, but I wouldn't want you for President.

And suppose John does die in office? Think of it like the Republican insiders: who better to manipulate to their will than some ingenue for the sticks? Guys, please just keep her away from the big red button.

[Auricauricle]

Again: I think the whole thing has been a pretty (un)clever ruse to dupe a pretty jaded populace. Think Jerry Springer cubed: That's this man's perception of the American Voters, 2008....And why he will be locking the doors and barring the windows and loading up the shotgun come election night...

[E-Stat]

With Palin's nomination, McCain's attackes on Obama were revealed for the cynical hypocracy that they actually are.
Wow, the acidic comments keep coming. There is a difference between the experience of managing at least a city and a state vs. managing...well absolutely nothing, especially when this is the veep vs. the primary candidate.

rw

[Feanor]

Wow, the acidic comments keep coming. There is a difference between the experience of managing at least a city and a state vs. managing...well absolutely nothing, especially when this is the veep vs. the primary candidate.

rw

You won't catch me saying that Obama is emminently qualified by experience to be President. (I rooted for Hilary to the bitter end.) I might argue that 3 years as Senator plus a brilliant nomination campaign are better experience for President that 1.5 years as Governor of a minor state (however close geographically to Russia), but I'll save my breath.

The business of arguing "executive" experience in the case of Palin is an irrelevancy. Being manager of the local gas station, however great a job you might have done, doesn't qualify you to be CEO of Exon.

But it wouldn't matter if Sarah Palin had, say, Mitt Romney's executive experience. Palin, Romney, and McCain are all disqualifed, IMHO, by their extreme right-wing socio-political ideas which are untimely and harmful for the people of the US in time of global turmoil and change.

[E-Stat]

Palin, Romney, and McCain are all disqualifed, IMHO, by their extreme right-wing socio-political ideas which are untimely and harmful for the people of the US in time of global turmoil and change.
The Angry Left speaks.

rw

[Feanor]

The Angry Left speaks.

rw

'Stat,

I don't know whether your charge is meant to be dismissive, but it is ture. I won't deny that I'm very, very angry about certain things that right-wing and centerist, (Democrat / Liberal), governments have done and not done in this country and in the U.S.

But you might find it odd that I have never considered myself a "liberal". For few examples I don't really supported:

Large-scale wealth redistibution
Unconditional entitlement, except close to it for health care, education, and civic protection
"Affirmative action" -- it's just more discrimination
Big labor unions in either the public or private sectors -- they are just another special interest group
Punitive taxation of corporation and businesses
Unrestriced immigration, (illegal or otherwise) -- But is this really a "liberal" policy? I think not: the right-wing business constituency covertly favors because it provides cheap labor (which not only includes farm workers but doctors and engineers too)
Gay marriage, though I'm fine with civil union
I'm a gun owner and I oppose arbitary anti-gun laws

[Ajani]

Could someone please tell me what McCain's substantial Executive Experience is? Years in the military barely making the grade and becoming a fighter pilot? 5 Years in a war prison? 26 Years in the Senate (I thought that was legislative)?

(If I remember correctly) There have been only 2 presidents to be elected straight out of the senate... so one way or another we will see a 3rd one soon...

[Feanor]

Could someone please tell me what McCain's substantial Executive Experience is? Years in the military barely making the grade and becoming a fighter pilot? 5 Years in a war prison? 26 Years in the Senate (I thought that was legislative)?

(If I remember correctly) There have been only 2 presidents to be elected straight out of the senate... so one way or another we will see a 3rd one soon...

I won't be telling you that McCain, (much less Obama), have substatial executive experience. But please accept in a non-partisan way that I think vision and judgement are more important in the case of the Presidency.

Canadians will bring to mind Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Prime Minister most of the time between 1968 and 1984. Trudeau had truly minimal experience and had been elected politicitian for a year before becoming PM. Trudeau and his Liberal (large 'L') government made various policy errors, not the least large deficits, but it was rarely accused of administrative in compotence.

Trudeau hadn't had a day's executive experience before becoming Minister of Justice in 1967, having come from a purely academic background, (Université de Montréal, Harvard, Institut d'Études Politiques de Paris, London School of Economics). Further, he was much more an elitist than, say Obama, not only by his education but coming from well-to-do and influencial French-English Quebec familty. Trudeau was routinely criticised for a blatantly arrogant attitude but people kept voting for him.

[Auricauricle]

It's interesting hearing (or should I say, reading) the Canadian POV. At the same time, don't you think that the Canadian ethos (for order, e.g.) is different than the American (hedonism, e.g.) and might cloud your perception of things a bit?

Not a dagger; just a question for the sake of curiosity....

[bobsticks]

But you might find it odd that I have never considered myself a "liberal". For few examples I don't really supported:

Large-scale wealth redistibution
Unconditional entitlement, except close to it for health care, education, and civic protection
"Affirmative action" -- it's just more discrimination
Big labor unions in either the public or private sectors -- they are just another special interest group
Punitive taxation of corporation and businesses
Unrestriced immigration, (illegal or otherwise) -- But is this really a "liberal" policy? I think not: the right-wing business constituency covertly favors because it provides cheap labor (which not only includes farm workers but doctors and engineers too)
Gay marriage, though I'm fine with civil union
I'm a gun owner and I oppose arbitary anti-gun laws

It's interesting, until you edited the post to include immigration it was like a laundry list of things that Obama does support. Also, it's easy to say you don't support "Large-scale redistribution" when none of the scale is coming out of your pocket.

I spent part of the day watching clips of Obama speeches and interviews. He genuinely seems like a nice guy, a good fella. I still have no use for his wife and his tax plan has ben presented in a downright fraudulent manner, but he seems like the kinda cat I could have have a menschy convo with while I drank a Red Bull and Jager and he had a cranberryjuice...

[Feanor]

It's interesting hearing (or should I say, reading) the Canadian POV. At the same time, don't you think that the Canadian ethos (for order, e.g.) is different than the American (hedonism, e.g.) and might cloud your perception of things a bit?

....

Please don't suppose that mine is the typical Canadian point of view: it isn't, (unfortunately maybe). Canadians and Americans have more similarities than differences in general, including political opinions. In particular we aren't more left-wing or "liberal" up here that Americans. It seems certain that the Conservative Party is bound to win a strong majority here in a Federal Parliamentary Election in mid-October.

One real difference here, however, is that we don't have a self-aware Evangelical / Christian Right constituency in Canada. Thank God for that (-- ironic ;) ).

[Ajani]

It's interesting, until you edited the post to include immigration it was like a laundry list of things that Obama does support. Also, it's easy to say you don't support "Large-scale redistribution" when none of the scale is coming out of your pocket.

I spent part of the day watching clips of Obama speeches and interviews. He genuinely seems like a nice guy, a good fella. I still have no use for his wife and his tax plan has ben presented in a downright fraudulent manner, but he seems like the kinda cat I could have have a menschy convo with while I drank a Red Bull and Jager and he had a cranberryjuice...

Ummmm.... Yeah.... Ummmm.... What?

[Rich-n-Texas]

I'd have use for Cindy McCain though. The amount of experience she must have in the sack?! :ihih:

[nightflier]

I'd have use for Cindy McCain though. The amount of experience she must have in the sack?! :ihih:

That is one image that I really don't want to revisit: McCain's pasty crinkly old bones making the beast with two backs (literally) with that stretch-faced skin-and-bones arm-piece. Ugh!

Anyhow, in addition to my comments elsewhere about Palin, perhaps the biggest issue I have with her is that she was a member of the Alaskan Independence Party. Not only does this smack of David Koresh type religious/seperatist extremism, but it's downright treasonous. The group advocates secession from the union and that to me is completely incompatible with the Republican ticket and everything McCain should stand for.

Look, she's got a truckload full of baggage (everything from Troopergate, to the Bridge-to-Nowhere flip flopping, to her obvious inexperience), but if I had fought for my country, maybe even left a limb in some god-forsaken jungle, then I would have some real issues with a candidate who would just as soon split up my country. What amazes me is that more veterans aren't bothered by this. Wonder what our soldiers who are currently serving abroad must think about this.

And just so I don't get blasted for being a liberal again, I'm also pretty piping mad with the Democrats for not raising Cain over this issue. This smacks of the "impeachment-is-off-the-table" inaction that this pathetic party is so well known for. Why not just put the death-nail in the Palin coffin, call her out for the traitor that she is and be done with it? Why isn't this the ad that the Dems are running: "McCain, the war hero's first presidential decision? Picks a traitor to be his running mate." No amount of PR or spin will fix that. Do we really need to drag this process out another month and a half?

[thekid]

On a somewaht related subject..... Tina Fey's impression and the bit on SNL was hilarious and close to the mark on a couple of issues.....

[nightflier]

I just watched Tina Fey on YouTube. Very funny. But the prospect of a Palin presidency is not funny at all. After watching the clip I stumbled on this clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rw_SJzDEd3M&feature=related

Now I know it's been out for a while, but the part about Palin staring down Putin someday should scare the bejeesus out of anyone. Not exactly sure what the "dinosaurs 4000 years ago" comment was about, but let's be honest folks, she's one scary alternative. Does anyone want Palin to be negotiating with some of the world's smartest, craftiest, and sometimes most dishonest leaders? How many screw-ups will she make before it will affect each an every one of us personally? If either McCain or Obama were to kick the bucket, for whatever reason, would you rather have Palin or Biden sitting across the table from Chavez/Jintao/Ahmadinejad?

[Feanor]

...
If either McCain or Obama were to kick the bucket, for whatever reason, would you rather have Palin or Biden sitting across the table from Chavez/Jintao/Ahmadinejad?

Is this a trick question?? :confused5: :nonod:

[nightflier]

Is this a trick question?? :confused5: :nonod:

...then I'm all out of explanations.

But let's review:

Biden with 30+ years experience in congress, widely published, prominent international awards, and who's been around the block with such baddies as Castro, Khomeini, and Il-Sung

or

Palin who's lived her whole life in Washamacallit, Alaska (which is close to Russia, ya know).

[Feanor]

...then I'm all out of explanations.

But let's review:

Biden with 30+ years experience in congress, widely published, prominent international awards, and who's been around the block with such baddies as Castro, Khomeini, and Il-Sung

or

Palin who's lived her whole life in Washamacallit, Alaska (which is close to Russia, ya know).

Weren't they talking in tongues at her local church? Communicating with them in their own languages could make all the difference, yanno. :lol:

[bobsticks]

... Bill Clinton was a hillbilly governor from Arkansas, Jimmy Carter was a hillbilly governor from Georgia. Smacks of sexism.

and

Biden with 30+ years experience in congress, widely published, prominent international awards, and who's been around the block with such baddies as Castro, Khomeini, and Il-Sung

Umm, to a lot of us thirty plus years of the same status quo bull**** is more of an indictment than a credential...and if he was so successful and influential how's come Cubans are still paddling across the Gulf on a chicklet and the Middle East is still a mess and North Korea is run by the most dangerous Elvis-impersonating sock puppet in the history of the planet?

You just nominated any lifer on the Cubs farm team for the last 95 years.

[Feanor]

Re. Palin ...


Weren't they talking in tongues at her local church? Communicating with them in their own languages could make all the difference, yanno. :lol:

Since she speaks all their languages, I presume when she pronounces the name of that country, "EYE-rak", instead of the proper pronounciation, "eee-RAK", she is merely wanting to avoid seeming elitist. :eek6:

[Ajani]

... Bill Clinton was a hillbilly governor from Arkansas, Jimmy Carter was a hillbilly governor from Georgia. Smacks of sexism.

and

Biden with 30+ years experience in congress, widely published, prominent international awards, and who's been around the block with such baddies as Castro, Khomeini, and Il-Sung

Umm, to a lot of us thirty plus years of the same status quo bull**** is more of an indictment than a credential...and if he was so successful and influential how's come Cubans are still paddling across the Gulf on a chicklet and the Middle East is still a mess and North Korea is run by the most dangerous Elvis-impersonating sock puppet in the history of the planet?

You just nominated any lifer on the Cubs farm team for the last 95 years.

I'm just not buying the sexism arguement from the McCain camp... I didn't buy it when Hilary started losing and tried to use it to her advantage and I'm certainly not buying it from the woman who criticised Hilary for using it... It's a sad ploy to generate both attention and to try and appeal to female voters (who make up about half the population)... playing the sex card worked well for Hilary in the later part of her campaign, so I guess they hope to use it straight off the bat with Palin....

Now imagine if Obama tried to play the whole race card and get sympathy from Black voters, how well would that work? Let's see: Blacks make up about 13.4% of the US population... So he'd totally distance himself from non-black voters (the remaining 86% of the population) which = Massive loss in November...

The real reasons Palin gets attacked on her lack of experience is because A) She has none (much Like Obama and Hilary for that matter) B) John McCain made such a big deal of the experience issue in his earlier campaigning, that his selection of a running mate with even less experience than Obama, was seen as little more than a cheap ploy to grab media attention and female votes C) Unlike Obama and Hilary, who have been through well over a year and a half of demanding primaries, debates, media attention and questions to show why they should be selected (despite their lack of experience), Palin has come out of nowhere, has not been put to the test and has been essentially hidden from any tough questions (under the protective umbrella of 'Sexism')... If Palin wants to be respected then she needs to stop being sheltered, step into the light and answer the tough questions (and I don't mean joke interviews with Republican Media on Fox news or Republican townhalls)... She claims to be a pitbull with lipstick, so it's time she proves it...

[nightflier]

OK, I know this is going to get Tex's blood boiling, but I call it as I see it. So here goes....


... Bill Clinton was a hillbilly governor from Arkansas, Jimmy Carter was a hillbilly governor from Georgia. Smacks of sexism.

Clinton was a Rhodes scholar, Carter was a Physicist with a Ph.D. And Palin? She dropped out of college a whopping 6 times before finally getting through with a C average. This is much less about sexism, than about experience and training. She has neither.


Umm, to a lot of us thirty plus years of the same status quo bull**** is more of an indictment than a credential...

Only in the US could someone make a statement like that. Anywhere else in the world, 30 yrs experience trumps zero experience, anyday. And if we are to compete in a global community, we had better pay attention to what the rest of the world is doing. Bill and Jimmy may have been hillbillies, while Shrub (he's not grown up enough to be called a Bush), and Palin are absolute nitwits, but we can't afford to elect those kinds of presidents anymore. Do you really want us to be the hillbillies of the world?


and if he was so successful and influential how's come Cubans are still paddling across the Gulf on a chicklet and the Middle East is still a mess and North Korea is run by the most dangerous Elvis-impersonating sock puppet in the history of the planet?

This is straight out of a Carl Rove playbook, Sticks. Deflection, misdirection, and obfuscation. Biden stood up to Castro on issues like human rights and political freedom. That people are still paddling over here from Cuba, is only marginally related. Had there been a more pragmatic approach taken the last 16 years towards Cuba, this immigration would probably have diminished a whole lot. People are leaving Cuba primarily because of abject poverty and much less because of political persecution. And that is a result of right-wing political maneuvering and certainly not the position of the majority of people.

Unfortunately Bush and McCain-Palin support the current situation, hence the reason they are still "paddling over here on Chicklets," as you put it. The right-wing unilateral all-or-nothing position that our government has taken towards Cuba is the reason why we're still talking about this at all.

Khomeini is dead, but Biden was one of the few senators who did not support the mullahs, in opposition to the Republicans who saw nothing wrong with cozying up to them to get a foothold with the Bin Laddens in Afghanistan. And that's why we're now in the blowback quagmire we are in now. Biden has consistently supported positions in favor of human rights and the rights of people to self-determination. He supports a split-up of Iraq into ethnic zones, he supports greater transparency for Human Rights policy in Iran and Saudi Arabia, and he opposes the use of Chinese water torture (called waterboarding since we started doing it) and rendering of people by US personnel. He's being criticized for supporting the war in Iraq, but he did so for entirely different reasons than most Republicans did and he's worked actively to redirect our mission there to a more humanitarian and globally supported one. The point being that Biden has been actively involved in Middle Eastern policy-making since the 1970s.

Meanwhile, Palin doesn't even know where Yemen is on the map (she had to be shown when she was informed of the attack this week). Biden doesn't seem to have that kind of a problem, now does he?

Finally, regarding North Korea, a very good argument can be made that Clinton's multi-lateral negotiations (which included the Chinese and the Russians) with Kim Il Sung were on the verge of bringing North and South to the table for the first time since the armistice was signed. Then Shrub-Cheney come to power, re-allign foreign relations priorities and bring back Reagan-era (and outdated) unilateral negotiations and the whole plan sinks into the Yellow Sea. Biden supports multilateral negotiations because they have a much higher rate of success (duh). Our empire-thinking mentality that we still have the clout to go it alone is rooted in a past-sense of superiority we can no longer expect (the demise of which is also a product of Shrub-Cheney foreign policy). And guess what, McCain-Palin support? Unilateralism. Well, McCain does, but I doubt Palin even knows how to spell such a big word.


You just nominated any lifer on the Cubs farm team for the last 95 years.

Ummm, no.

[Rich-n-Texas]

OK, I know this is going to get Tex's blood boiling, but I call it as I see it. So here goes....
Under NO circumstances will there be any boiling of Tex's blood. It'll make all the alcohol burn off. :nono: No sir!

[Ajani]

Clinton was a Rhodes scholar, Carter was a Physicist with a Ph.D. And Palin? She dropped out of college a whopping 6 times before finally getting through with a C average. This is much less about sexism, than about experience and training. She has neither.

................................................

Bill and Jimmy may have been hillbillies, while Shrub (he's not grown up enough to be called a Bush), and Palin are absolute nitwits, but we can't afford to elect those kinds of presidents anymore. Do you really want us to be the hillbillies of the world?

Excellent points (frankly, I'm almost ashamed that I forgot to mention them in my earlier response)...

Oh and having President Shrub at the helm these last 8 years (especially the last 4: fool me once, shame on you... fool me twice, WTF???) has only hurt America's credibility internationally...now many will say: who cares what the rest of the world thinks? But anyone, who really thinks things through, should realize that America does not have enough Soldiers, Equipment and Money to fight and defeat the rest of the world... so losing allies and making more enemies is a stupid move... Just look at how many years, how much money, lives and equipment was spent on war in Iraq (which was not a major military threat)... Imagine trying to take on Russia, China, North Korea and Iran alone...

So you might want to focus on having a president who will increase your allies, instead of one who is: a) a war monger b) and idiot or c) both....

[bobsticks]

Hehehe, "Carl Rove Handbook"...you guys rise to bait like yer chewin' on a pineal gland. If you really wanna see Rich's blood boil wait til I reveal that I truly believe Clinton to have been the best President of the later 20th century. Most presidents piss me off a couple of times a day...Clinton, only twice in the entire administration's historied run. He's a Lincolnesque Caligula.

I did mean the part about the "30 year status quo bull****". And, yeah, maybe only in the United States but the picture you paint is as equally rose-coloured glasses as is the hyperbolic tyrannical one I brush. I suspect somewhere in the middle lies the truth, or the shadow if you're T.S. Eliot...In any case all these powermongers run the gambit of meandering douchebags to gnashing debauchers to malignant cancers and Biden is a combination.

Ajani, I felt your ill-willed response to be overly dour, and so, leave you with my response here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU) .

[Ajani]

Ajani, I felt your ill-willed response to be overly dour, and so, leave you with my response here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU) .

ill-willed? :frown5: Ok it might have sounded a bit more dour than it could have, but there's no ill-will...

And that song is awesome!!! Good old 80's music.....

[Ajani]

Hehehe, "Carl Rove Handbook"...you guys rise to bait like yer chewin' on a pineal gland. If you really wanna see Rich's blood boil wait til I reveal that I truly believe Clinton to have been the best President of the later 20th century. Most presidents piss me off a couple of times a day...Clinton, only twice in the entire administration's historied run. He's a Lincolnesque Caligula.

IMVHO, Clinton was for the most part an excellent President... but he suffered from 2 major problems that will always mar his presidency: 1) He had zero problem with either 'stretching the truth' or outright lying (while this seems to be almost a requirement of getting elected, it's never good to be publicly regarded as dishonest) & 2) He couldn't contain his sex-drive (or at least keep his affairs subtle and private)...

[thekid]

Can we all agree to retire this thread until November 5th........ :)

[Ajani]

Can we all agree to retire this thread until November 5th........ :)

Hell No!!! You peace loving hippie!!! We want to have a political war in this thread until at least January!!!

This won't end until someone drags Rich outta here in a bodybag!!!

[Rich-n-Texas]

IMVHO...
:rolleyes:

And that song is awesome!!! Good old 80's music.....
Good Lord! Don't tell me we have a Disco maven among us. :crazy: Another one-hit wonder derailed from the tracks headed towards fame and fortune.

This won't end until someone drags Rich outta here in a bodybag!!!
Cripes!!! First they're trying to de-nature me then they're trying to zip me up! :incazzato:

Sorry fellas, politics are outta bounds on weekends. :cornut:

:smilewinkgrin:

[Auricauricle]

"Chewin' on a pineal gland"? "Lincolnesque Caligula"?

Man, that's a lot fer a poor sod t' wrap around the corpus callosum!

Anybody gotta beer?

[thekid]

Hell No!!! You peace loving hippie!!! We want to have a political war in this thread until at least January!!!

This won't end until someone drags Rich outta here in a bodybag!!!

Peace Loving Hippie???????
Why I oughta club you to death with my crunchy granola bar.....

[Auricauricle]

...Ajani, I felt your ill-willed response to be overly dour, and so, leave you with my response here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU) .

Death by Rick Astley? God, it's getting ugly around here...

[nightflier]

Well it looks like Palin is cramming for that debate on Oct. 2nd and getting some foreign policy experience:

Palin Meets Karzai, Uribe, Kissinger:

The opening of the General Assembly also saw what’s believed to be Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin’s first meetings with a foreign leader. Palin held separate talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Colombian President Alvaro Uribe. She also later met with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

...maybe they talked about going salmon fishing?

Wait a minute, Kissinger? Isn't he a wanted international criminal? Why is he still free as a bird?

[Ajani]

Well it looks like Palin is cramming for that debate on Oct. 2nd and getting some foreign policy experience:

Palin Meets Karzai, Uribe, Kissinger:

The opening of the General Assembly also saw what’s believed to be Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin’s first meetings with a foreign leader. Palin held separate talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Colombian President Alvaro Uribe. She also later met with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

...maybe they talked about going salmon fishing?

Wait a minute, Kissinger? Isn't he a wanted international criminal? Why is he still free as a bird?

It's great that she got the chance to socialize with foreign diplomats... but the question everyone still wants to know is: What did they talk about? Hiding from the media is NOT a good campaign strategy...

[nightflier]

but the question everyone still wants to know is: What did they talk about?

Fishing? Hunting game? Snowdrifts? Maybe they didn't talk much at all and there were just these long awkward silences... :Yawn: I wonder what a meeting between her and Amahdinnerjacket would be like... :p


Hiding from the media is NOT a good campaign strategy...

Neither is canceling a debate when your opponent says that a president should be able to deal with several issues at the same time... Makes one look too old for the job...

...The best comedians couldn't make this stuff up any better!

[Auricauricle]

When Palin "deals with several issues at the same time"...she gets a manicure and a pedicure.

Oh, the stress!!

[thekid]

After her latest meeting with several world leaders she has some tough policy decisions to make in the next several days

Matte or Glossy finish..........

[Rich-n-Texas]

Neither is canceling a debate when your opponent says that a president should be able to deal with several issues at the same time... Makes one look too old for the job...

...The best comedians couldn't make this stuff up any better!
:Yawn:

:Yawn:

:Yawn:

:out:

:sleep: :sleep: :sleep: :sleep:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
:0:

[thekid]

I borrowed this from a game forum my son visits
I could not resist.......... :D

[Rich-n-Texas]

What's the name of this game??

:confused:

[thekid]

What's the name of this game??

:confused:

I think we have a contest Rich.
Assuming that it is a photo for new video game - name the game.
My first suggestions;

Putin Rising
Backyard Diplomacy- 90 miles to Nowhere
PaliNome- The Adventures of Kayak Bob

:p

[Ajani]

I think this link says everything that needs to be said about Palin:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/27/tina-fey-as-sarah-palin-k_n_129956.html

[Feanor]

I think this link says everything that needs to be said about Palin:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/27/tina-fey-as-sarah-palin-k_n_129956.html

The fact is that Palin was choosen to complement McCain:

Old / young (relatively)
Experienced / enthusiastic
Male / female
Experienced Senate legislator / raw, boondocks executive
Rationalist / umm ... enthusiastic
Centerist inclined / ideologue free-enterprizer
Secular inclined / born-again Christian (a.k.a. modern-day Pharisee)
Slightly inclined to non-conform / capable of being lead by the nose by the Republican back-room eliteIn short Palin was chosen to appeal to the moron consituency of the Republican Party while being controllable by their cynical agenda setters.

[bobsticks]

You know, with 142 days of experience most of my employees are just coming off of a "probationary period"...never thought about making one of 'em CEO.

...ooops, that's the other guy. Sorry, wrong thread.

[nightflier]

The fact is that Palin was choosen to complement McCain:

Old / young (relatively)
Experienced / enthusiastic
Male / female
Experienced Senate legislator / raw, boondocks executive
Rationalist / umm ... enthusiastic
Centerist inclined / ideologue free-enterprizer
Secular inclined / born-again Christian (a.k.a. modern-day Pharisee)
Slightly inclined to non-conform / capable of being lead by the nose by the Republican back-room eliteIn short Palin was chosen to appeal to the moron consituency of the Republican Party while being controllable by their cynical agenda setters.

If so, can we then say that McCain is:


Old, & tired
Inexperienced / unenthusiastic
Female / Male
Inexperienced Senate legislator / polished, slick executive
Irrational / umm ... unenthusiastic
Polarized / wishy-washy socialist
Worldly / agnostic (a.k.a. modern-day Bahai)
Strongly inclined to conform / Unwilling to be lead by the nose by the Republican back-room elite

In short McCain was chosen to appeal to the erudite constituency[/U] of the Republican Party (except they're all voting for Obama) while being uncontrollable by their cynical agenda setters.

Seeing as the only thing that fits McCain is that he's Old & Tired, I'd rather think that she doesn't compliment him at all. Actually I'm going to guess that she was shoved up his rear by the religious right and now he's doing everything he can to keep the McSame Gravy Train on track, any track. He's keeping her out of the media, he tried to eliminate the VP debate but that wasn't going to hold up, he begged and pleaded for a vanilla debate with no candidate back & forth (and actually got it), and now he's locked her up at one of his 9 mansions with his crew of fixers to cram for the inevitable debate. As far as I'm concerned, all Biden has to do is stand there and smile at the crowd, and she'll do all the work of falling apart on her own.

As I said, the best comedians can't make this stuff up.

Rich, I figured you for someone with more of a funny bone than a few smilies. Or at the very least, defend your favorite hockey mom....:incazzato:

[Feanor]

...
In short McCain was chosen to appeal to the erudite constituency of the Republican Party (except they're all voting for Obama) while being uncontrollable by their cynical agenda setters.

...

There are only two constituencies in the Republican Party:

The selfish rich, and
The stupid.There is considerable overlap however.

[nightflier]

Feanor, I hope you are not including Tex in that list....

[Auricauricle]

Submission for game name: "Darn Putin"....

You may be right, N'Flier. I'm just concerned that with McCain at the helm, the progesterone overload would tip the ship of state right over....

*The way he sulked, refused to acknowledge Obama's presence, and prated, he reminded me of an adolescent on a handie.

I reckon "Manb---" works.

[Feanor]

Feanor, I hope you are not including Tex in that list....

I'm very confident that he's seen the error of his past allegiance. :idea:

[bobsticks]

Kewl new avi, Feanor.

[nightflier]

Kewl new avi, Feanor.

Huh?

By the way, that picture of Putin coming over the horizon? I printed it out and I'm gona put that in a "Lock Box" for a few years. I bet it will be worth something someday, LOL.

[thekid]

Huh?

By the way, that picture of Putin coming over the horizon? I printed it out and I'm gona put that in a "Lock Box" for a few years. I bet it will be worth something someday, LOL.

Night

Glad someone here noticed it in between the squabbling. As Larry the Cable Guy says..."That's funny I don't care who you are".

It is amazing what can be done with Photo Shop these days.......

[nightflier]

Someone sent me this, and I thought it brings the point home pretty well:
http://gallery.audioreview.com/uploads/audio/235531/By_the_Balls.jpg

[Feanor]

Someone sent me this, and I thought it brings the point home pretty well:
http://gallery.audioreview.com/uploads/audio/235531/By_the_Balls.jpg

It seems the Christian Right, Fundamentalist/Evanglelical constituency has grown to hold great power in the Republican Party. According to some pundits Bush would have lost handily if he had not had their support in 2004.

But who's got who by the short 'n curlies? Didn't I say the RP has only two constituencies: the Rich and the Stupid? I say the Rich are still in control. The conservative religionists are just part of the larger Stupid constituency. If you're going to be Raptured any day now, the economy matter doesn't matter. War in the middle east is good because it portends the end-of-days. Etc, etc.

[Auricauricle]

Seems to be an ongoing strategy the GOP has: instill fear and circle the wagons! I cannot think of one GOP candidate that has refrained from using this appeal, whether it's done by lambasting opponents with ad hominem invective or conjuring up the baser instincts of our species. I have yet to think of one member of the party who could use intellectual savvy to get voted in....

Even worse: So oftentimes it works. Think Willie Horton, Ayalotlla Khomeini, Sadam Hussein, or who ever, these guys would be impotent if they had no monsters they could trot out.

[Rich-n-Texas]

Frankenstien was misunderstood. Pity that was.

[nightflier]

My favorite new quote from the McCain campaign: "If we keep talking about the economy, we're going to loose this election." So basically they're going to yap about everything but the white elephant in the room.

[Auricauricle]

Well it doesn't do much for your credibility if your kitchen table is laid with Wedgwood and Tiffany! Sounds just a tad condenscending, ya think?

[RoadRunner6]

... Bill Clinton was a hillbilly governor from Arkansas

Speaking of the devil, see photo below of Hill-Billy

RR6 :biggrin5:

[Ajani]

While we're all posting pretty pictures, has anyone noticed that Palin was found GUILTY of abuse of Power in the Trooper investigation yesterday?

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/10/palin.investigation/index.html

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1849399,00.html?xid=rss-politics-cnn

Best VP pick I've ever seen....

[Feanor]

Disclaimer

I am not voting for either side as of now. I'm pretty much middle of the road politically. However, I love irreverent humor which ever way it goes so don't anyone jump on my bones. A friend from work sent me this photo.

RR6 :ciappa:

Proper work for a "boy", eh?

[Auricauricle]

Funny thing when the dung yer throwing hits the fan...it sometimes comes right back at ya!

[Ajani]

While we're all posting pretty pictures, has anyone noticed that Palin was found GUILTY of abuse of Power in the Trooper investigation yesterday?...

I guess not...

[Auricauricle]

For those who love Palin, and there are many--for they are Legion!--it won't matter a whit.

For those who revile her, and there are many--for they wear Weejuns!*--it'll set the house on fire.

Another day, another headline. Ho-hum!

*I know...Work with me on this!

[Ajani]

For those who love Palin, and there are many--for they are Legion!--it won't matter a whit.

For those who revile her, and there are many--for they wear Weejuns!*--it'll set the house on fire.

Another day, another headline. Ho-hum!

*I know...Work with me on this!

Sadly, you're probably right... it might affect a few undecided who weren't certain about Palin, but it probably wouldn't have much effect beyond that...

Unless McCain decides to make one of his usual radical moves and drop her for a new VP pick....

[Auricauricle]

I think that would be like the drowning rat that throws away his cheese so he can swim a little longer before he sinks altogether...

He's gonna have to more than that if he wants to save his asphalt.

[nightflier]

Best VP pick I've ever seen....

I think she forgot to put the swastika on the other collar...

Seriously, though, the left has been ranting about Troopergate since the RNC, and only now that it's in vogue to be Palin-bashing does it make headlines. Now that McCain is having to defend Obama during his own town hall meetings, and the inherent racism in the Republican base is finally rearing its ugly head (not that it wasn't there all along), Palin is becoming less an less useful. Do they let her continue with the Obama-bashing lies and risk getting the Klan to publicly endorse them, or do they try to stuff her back in the can and hope people will forget she's the ugly part of the ticket? Either way, now that the surprise factor of a woman on the ticket has worn off, she's increasingly becoming a boat-anchor tied to the heel of a McCain that could hardly swim in the first place. Even the National Review, the Black Republicans, Newt Gingrich, and host of conservative commentators in the major papers are having serious second thoughts about supporting McCain-Palin (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/16/conservatives-turn-on-mcc_n_126749.html).

So to address the original topic of this thread: McCain didn't choose Palin, she was chosen for him by the religious right, and now that the whole vessel is breaking apart, the rats are jumping off that ship as if it was on fire too. The whole Republican ticket is sinking faster than the Titanic.

[Ajani]

I think she forgot to put the swastika on the other collar...

Seriously, though, the left has been ranting about Troopergate since the RNC, and only now that it's in vogue to be Palin-bashing does it make headlines. Now that McCain is having to defend Obama during his own town hall meetings, and the inherent racism in the Republican base is finally rearing its ugly head (not that it wasn't there all along), Palin is becoming less an less useful. Do they let her continue with the Obama-bashing lies and risk getting the Klan to publicly endorse them, or do they try to stuff her back in the can and hope people will forget she's the ugly part of the ticket? Either way, now that the surprise factor of a woman on the ticket has worn off, she's increasingly becoming a boat-anchor tied to the heel of a McCain that could hardly swim in the first place. Even the National Review, the Black Republicans, Newt Gingrich, and host of conservative commentators in the major papers are having serious second thoughts about supporting McCain-Palin (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/16/conservatives-turn-on-mcc_n_126749.html).

So to address the original topic of this thread: McCain didn't choose Palin, she was chosen for him by the religious right, and now that the whole vessel is breaking apart, the rats are jumping off that ship as if it was on fire too. The whole Republican ticket is sinking faster than the Titanic.

I think the KKK is already endorsing them:

http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/rush-limbaugh-says-blacks-are-angry-and

[Auricauricle]

Ah, my favorite gang of meatballs: the Kuku Kleenex Klueless....

[nightflier]

Is there such a thing as a Limbaughism? If not there ought to be.


I think the KKK is already endorsing them:

http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/rush-limbaugh-says-blacks-are-angry-and

I didn't see any mention of the Klan in there, but Limbaugh's racism is already well documented, if you ask me. I mean we all suspected Rush was a bit of a racist when he made those comments about black athletes on Fox sports, but this time he's gone quite a bit further. I guess Limbaugh just doesn't get that the further he trots down that road, the more he alienates the middle-of-the-road Republicans that McCain needs to stay afloat. This Obama-is-a-terrorist strategy just isn't going to work. It's sad to see, but maybe it's about time that the Republican party sheds its own radical element, even if they need to loose this election to bring that about.

[Ajani]

Is there such a thing as a Limbaughism? If not there ought to be.



I didn't see any mention of the Klan in there, but Limbaugh's racism is already well documented, if you ask me. I mean we all suspected Rush was a bit of a racist when he made those comments about black athletes on Fox sports, but this time he's gone quite a bit further. I guess Limbaugh just doesn't get that the further he trots down that road, the more he alienates the middle-of-the-road Republicans that McCain needs to stay afloat. This Obama-is-a-terrorist strategy just isn't going to work. It's sad to see, but maybe it's about time that the Republican party sheds its own radical element, even if they need to loose this election to bring that about.

I regard Limbaugh as an 'undercover' Klan member....

The problem McSame and Failin don't realize is that very few people are openly willing to admit to being racist... So even many racists will distance themselves from a campaign that is too blatantly racist... Trying to define Obama as an angry black man who hates America is almost impossible, because so many people having seen Obama's speeches... I've seen him compared to Mr. Spock (Star Trek) for his calculating logic and lack of emotion... but 'Angry Black Man'? That image just doesn't fit... so trying to portray him as an Angry Black Radical or Islamic Extremist can only backfire....

[nightflier]

I regard Limbaugh as an 'undercover' Klan member....

The problem McSame and Failin don't realize is that very few people are openly willing to admit to being racist... So even many racists will distance themselves from a campaign that is too blatantly racist... Trying to define Obama as an angry black man who hates America is almost impossible, because so many people having seen Obama's speeches... I've seen him compared to Mr. Spock (Star Trek) for his calculating logic and lack of emotion... but 'Angry Black Man'? That image just doesn't fit... so trying to portray him as an Angry Black Radical or Islamic Extremist can only backfire....

But he does look a bit like Malik El-Shabazz, no? That is, not the Plymouth Rock one, but the post Hajj one.

[Auricauricle]

Gotta love the guy!

[nightflier]

Gotta love the guy!

Let's remember that brother Malcolm was a lot more congenial after he came back. That's why they had to kill him off. 'Couldn't have the most influential black figure after MLK start talking about class warfare in a way that all poor people would start listening. Naw, way too dangerous. And he was against Vietnam, too; talking about peace and mending fences with white folk, too. He might as well have been wearing a big bull's eye below that little bow-tie. Not only did the Nation want him out of the way, but just about everybody else too. Tragically he never lived to continue spreading his message.

Anyhow, that whole nonsense about Obama painting the white house black is just fear mongering - more in tune with something Palin would say than someone who actually understands the political process. It's much more likely that after the nation-wide (and world-wide) celebrations die down, that he will disappoint the uber-lefties more than the wall-street brokers (let's not forget that he refers to Buffet and Trump as personal friends and advisers). But at least, we can be pretty sure that the positivity of his presence in the oval office will demonstrate a real possibility for a new beginning. Even if he accomplishes nothing during his term (highly unlikely, BTW), the fact that someone with a deep dark natural tan became the most powerful man in the world, will change us (and the rest of the world) forever. And any true capitalist, won't give a hoot about the color of his skin.

Let's consider for a moment the absolute stupidity of the neo-racists who support McSame, everyone from Limbaugh who is becoming more and more outspoken about his racism to Palin who refuses to rebuke those chanting Kill Him, Arab, and Traitor with glee every time she mentions Obama during her speeches. What's next? Hanging nooses at the entrances? The message that is clear to most people is that another 4 (or god-forbid 8) years of a backwards Republican administration will set us back further than the Lash Law. Is it any wonder that everyone from David Duke to George Wallace Jr. is supporting McSame? Electing him and especially Palin, would legitimize the racism that has been so pervasive in our recent memory - everything from the monthly police beatings we see on TV to the execution of Troy Davis. Not only did McSame and Palin never lift a finger to effect any meaningful change during their times in office, but they now happily pander to the most racist elements in their own parties. The rest of the world already sees us as backward hicks in so many other things, now we have to add racism to the list?

Yeah, I said it, race matters. But to all those who fear, suspect, or secretly hope that the Bradley effect will change this election, the very opposite could just as well be true. How many people who live in racist enclaves will actually admit publicly that they support Obama because his economic plan is better? Of course they won't say this when they are questioned in full view where their friends and neighbors will see. But that may not at all be the case in the privacy of the voting booth. So we could actually see a reverse effect that could not only cancel out the racist vote, but even surpass it. And that is exactly what the research seems to suggest (http://www.overdetermined.net/site/content/bradley-reverse-bradley-and-double-secret-un-bradley).

Obama is polling in the double digits ahead of McCain now, and the major Electoral College tracking sites are giving him a 95-99% chance of winning. This is why this race is getting so ugly, because the most heinous elements of the Republican party are getting desperate. Change is coming and they don't like it. Dawn is finally shining on the long and depressing nightmare of this post-9/11 shock doctrine. When light returns, and we finally do look around and see the bitter fruits of these seeds that we have sown, maybe then will we finally be able to move forward. A vote for McSame is a vote for Palin, and that is a sure way to remain comatose for four more years.

[Auricauricle]

Ayup!

If McCain, Palin et al. have any notion that the usual Republican tactic of using outlandish, sharp tongued language to galvanize their base is going to work, they have another thought coming this year. As the Stock Market crumbles, the War that Never Was disintegrates, Mother Nature rips up the coasts and Fundamentalist ministers of the Trinity Channel get ready for the Apocalypse, the GOP has failed to rise to the occasion. The current administration and the various cronies therein is going down in flames, disgraced and battered by corruption and bad luck, and McCain and crew have not done anything to demonstrate their ability to conduct their affairs any differently. If the current polls indicate anything, it is that American Disenchantment is growing, and the likes of McCain and company will not be gladly installed.

In debates, McCain’s wooden posture is echoed in a strained countenance that speaks of a man who does not like confrontation. Befitting his “maverick” style, McCain’s portrait is one of an outsider who nevertheless thrives on the admiration of others. This contradictory message is perplexing and confusing at first, but in the end typifies the entitled style of the soft-bellied elite, who forgets that true leadership is more a quality earned than bought. Bush forgot this core principle, and his cabinet of toadies and loyalists never wavered from their agendas to give due consideration to their opposition. Like the Tao’s waxing and waning nature shows, too much of the Right thing can leave plenty Left.

McCain and crew, like many before them, counted on fear mongering tactics and knee jerk sentimentality to keep the country’s pendulum swayed. True to form, alas, a large number of American voters will fall right in line. The racist, radical, thoughtless herd is a massive one: Limabaugh, Duke, etc., are not preaching to an empty choir by any stretch. Conversely, Obama has, masterfully galvanized support from a disenchanted public who, having seen their voices squelched and stifled, has seen their faith reenergized and empowered. While minorities have grievously suffered much "in the system", their day, as exemplified by Obama, is coming.

Obama’s demeanor on the debate circuit has consistently projected a rarely seen cool- headed alacrity, a quality that is quite refreshing from the hot-headed image of his adversary. In his ability to brush aside much of the ugliness (to be fair, his hands are not very clean either), Obama shows the sensibility and the capacity to listen to various points of view and then make decisive and sensible decisions. If there is anything that eight years of autocratic decision-making and oligarchic cronyism has done, it has persuaded us, the American people, that while we like our leaders to be strong, we like them to be reasonable and sane.

So McSame and crew can continue to pull out their race cards, their boogey men and fire off all the cheap shots they like, but it just won’t work. The American people are tired and ready for a mature leader possessed of a refined acumen befitting the world stage and broad-minded sensibility befitting the podium at home.

McSame, Impailin’ and crew just don’t make the cut.

[Rich-n-Texas]

What a bunch of whiney old women. :rolleyes:

[nightflier]

What a bunch of whiney old women. :rolleyes:

Or is that a special Texan dialect denoting a little extra "ay" at the end of the word? After all, you wouldn't want to be confused for a Yankey.:skep:

But about the whining issue, I do take offense, as I think everyone should. Let's review. If the names on the tickets were reversed, would we even be having this discussion?

What if John McCain were a former president of the Harvard Law Review?
What if Barack Obama finished fifth from the bottom of his graduating class?

What if McCain were still married to the first woman he said 'I do' to?
What if Obama were the candidate who left his first wife after she waited for him for years to come home from 'Nam, but she then no longer measured up to his standards?

What if Michelle Obama were a wife who not only became addicted to pain killers, but acquired them illegally through her charitable organization?
What if Cindy McCain graduated from Harvard?

What if Obama were a member of the Keating-5?
What if McCain were a community organizer who rode his bike to work, owned just one house, and came from humble beginnings?

What if Obama were an aging, angry, and condescending attack dog resorting to personal attacks rather than the topics of a debate?
What if McCain were a charismatic, eloquent, and presidential speaker?

If these questions were seriously confronted, do you really believe the election numbers would be anywhere near as close as they are? This is what racism, anti-intellectualism and fear accomplishes. It covers up, rationalizes and minimizes positive qualities in one candidate and emphasizes negative qualities in another when there is a color difference or a refusal to simply examine the facts devoid of emotionalism.

If you were the boss of your own company and it's on the verge of bankruptcy, which team would you hire? With America facing historic debt, two wars, stumbling health care, a weakened dollar, all-time high prison population, mortgage crises, bank foreclosures,
etc., can we really afford to be playing race politics?

FYI: Educational Background:

Obama:
Columbia University - B.A. Political Science with a Specialization in International relations.
Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude

Biden:
University of Delaware - B.A. in History and B.A. in Political Science.
Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)

vs.

McCain:
United States Naval Academy - Class rank: 894 of 899

Palin:
Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study
University of Idaho - 2
semesters - journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in Journalism


Anyhow, I would hardly call this issue whiny. This is an absolute insult to Obama, anyone who isn't a lily-white old man, and anyone who isn't filthy rich, Moreover, it should be an appalling shame to all of us, even recalcitrant Republicans.

P.S. And I hope you were not being sexist when you implied that women were whiny....

[Rich-n-Texas]

No. I didn't make the generalization that all women were whiny, only old women. Irregardless, it was code for "democrats". :lol:

Anyhow, I would hardly call this issue whiny. This is an absolute insult to Obama, anyone who isn't a lily-white old man, and anyone who isn't filthy rich, Moreover, it should be an appalling shame to all of us, even recalcitrant Republicans.
:Yawn: :Yawn: ... :sleep:

[Auricauricle]

Smile when say that, Rich!

(Before I gum yer leg!)

Now pack your bags and go home. The game is over, and we're havin' a party! :cornut:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=pink+floyd+loss+for+words&search_type=&aq=f

Warning: This video can be disturbing to the thoughtful, but will probably not matter much to the thoughtless.

[nightflier]

Irregardless? More Texan?

[Rich-n-Texas]

HEY! Look at that! My weekend is now starting. Sorry, no more political talk from meeeeee!!! :biggrin5:

[Auricauricle]

Y'know....I'll have a beer to that. Rich, have one on me, bro' (clink!)!

[Rich-n-Texas]

Thanks man! chug chug chug chug chug... ahhhhhhhhh.

[nightflier]

Hey bucko, I thought your weekend started a few hours back? Unless you're working late down there in Texas, don't be rubbing it in that you're sitting at the happy hour bar while the rest of us are still plugging away....

[Rich-n-Texas]

OH! It was only 4:20 Cali time when I last posted wasn't it? That's too bad. :nonod:

I'd say... it sucks to be you, but is nightime your time now isn't it? (It's very difficult typing this right now while PF's Pulse: RUN!!! is playing on the HDTV)

If it's any consolation nightflier, I haven't done Happy Hours since the 80's in NJ. .....I've had some bad luck along the way. :sad:

[RoadRunner6]

I understand that both Obama and Palin are great dancers!

RR6 :lol:

[thekid]

You know when times are tough you just have to ....Dance-Dance-Dance!!

Now we know how she got her figure back so quickly after the baby and what hobby he took up to kick the smoking habit.

[Auricauricle]

Shazam!

Man, we can use her as a secret weapon in the War on Terror....

Just sic 'er on 'em and they'll spend more time tryin' to pick their jaws off the ground before they can get a shot off or an RPG launched....

"All we are saying,
Is give the piece a chance!"

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Hey, some great opinions here. I am really enjoying the read.

[JohnMichael]

This is where I get my news.

[Ajani]

The GOP's latest line of attacks:

Obama is a socialist:

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/18/campaign.wrap/index.html?iref=newssearch

Colin Powell only endorsed him because he's black:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/19/limbaugh-george-will-powe_n_135968.html

Seriously, The Economy is still in crisis and the US is deeply involved in two wars in the middle east + Bin Laden is still out there, yet the focus of McCain/Palin and the GOP is on character attacks against Obama and Colin Powell???

If Powell only supports Obama because of race, then when all those white people support McCain is that because they are racist? The shear stupidity of some lines of attack just amaze me... Why does McCain seem hell bent on losing his campaign in shame???

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

The GOP's latest line of attacks:

Obama is a socialist:

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/18/campaign.wrap/index.html?iref=newssearch

Colin Powell only endorsed him because he's black:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/19/limbaugh-george-will-powe_n_135968.html

Seriously, The Economy is still in crisis and the US is deeply involved in two wars in the middle east + Bin Laden is still out there, yet the focus of McCain/Palin and the GOP is on character attacks against Obama and Colin Powell???

If Powell only supports Obama because of race, then when all those white people support McCain is that because they are racist? The shear stupidity of some lines of attack just amaze me... Why does McCain seem hell bent on losing his campaign in shame???

I think it is funny that they would say this about Colin Powell when he has aligned himself with a party dominated by white people.

As I have said time and time again(and was rebuffed) racism is alive and well in this country, but it is a different racism than that in the past. More subtle, just below the surface(just waiting to pop out), but nevertheless devastating to those it is directed at.

Limbaugh= African American parents raising their children to hate American???? How insulting is that?

[Feanor]

I think it is funny that they would say this about Colin Powell when he has aligned himself with a party dominated by white people.

As I have said time and time again(and was rebuffed) racism is alive and well in this country, but it is a different racism than that in the past. More subtle, just below the surface(just waiting to pop out), but nevertheless devastating to those it is directed at.

Limbaugh= African American parents raising their children to hate American???? How insulting is that?

... for Republicans, then the racism gets rather less subtle. And other bigotries are stoked too: ultra-patriotism, "rugged" individualism, religious dogmatism, science rejectionism, anti-intellectualism, American exceptionalism, zenophobia. (Which of these does Sarah Palin not represent? Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer!)

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

... for Republicans, then the racism gets rather less subtle. And other bigotries are stoked too: ultra-patriotism, "rugged" individualism, religious dogmatism, science rejectionism, anti-intellectualism, American exceptionalism, zenophobia. (Which of these does Sarah Palin not represent? Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer!)

I think you have covered it all very nicely! LOL

[nightflier]

Powel isn't the only one. Here's a few more: Dennis Hopper, Susan Eisenhower, Tricia Moseley, Joe Scarborough, Lincoln Chafee, George Will, David Brooks, Christopher Buckley, Lilibet Hagel, Elizabeth Drew, Wayne Gilchrest, David Gergen (almost), and even Alaskans are starting to endorse Obama, like Jim Whitaker, mayor of Fairbanks. It seems to be the hip thing to do...

Let's also remember that the major newspapers are now 122-33 endorsing Obama (http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003875230).

[Auricauricle]

Last night, I went by the neighborhood coffee house. At the counter, the owner and a couple of customers were talking over things political when the words of one of the customers fell onto my ears. In tone, gesture and word, the message was unequivocal: politics as usual had become sickening. In a voice that was nearly a whisper, he spoke of his apathy over the entire electoral process: “What does it matter?” he said. “Why should we even bother to vote?” and so on. As the owner of the shop listened, he echoed the man’s words in a tired, resigned voice that was defeated and beaten.

In the year of Bush’s victory over Kerry, I did not vote. Like the young man at the counter and the coffee-shop owner, I too felt weary of “politics as usual”, and seeing the Bush campaign work, I succumbed to apathy and a no-shiv-a-git attitude. To this day, I am deeply ashamed of myself. It is that shame, perhaps, that made me interrupt. “Vote,” I interrupted. “Vote,” I repeated.

“Why? What’s the point? What will it matter?” they asked. The looks in their eyes told me that they were looking at a madman.

“It may not matter,” I said, “but it will count. Even if you don’t win, even if you don’t see things go the way you want them to, you have to exercise your right.”

It was hard for me to put together my thoughts, and so I left nearly as quickly as I came, realizing my ranting voice was sounding a bit fevered.

As far as I am concerned, the Bush presidency represents one of the most heinous and inept periods of our country’s history. In years to come, I may be proven right or wrong: that is of no consequence to me, now. What is of consequence is that by not voting, I effectively failed in my duty to exercise my rights in a time where my country most needed it. At the time, I was vocal about my views, and discussed with many willing and patient ears my thoughts concerning Bush and crew. But I did not vote, and all the words I uttered and will utter about the matter mean precious little as a result.

We Americans live in a country that is by no means perfect. In fact, in many respects, our country has become a hypocrite in many eyes of the world who see our words and deeds as contradictory and ridiculous. In our credo, terms like “freedom” and “democracy” ring out in bold letters. In action, however, we have succumbed to instincts that are vile and cowardly. This is neither a Republican problem nor a Democratic one: It is a systemic one that we all must address., if our country is to be restored.

It is not enough to sit at our computers and fuss and stew over the problems and corruptions that saddle our government, favor the elite few and discard the inessential multitude. We cannot be content with sitting in shops and discuss these problems with frinds and strangers, hoping that our words somehow find purchase. All these words will mean nothing if we do nothing to back them up through action.

Action does speak much louder than words!

Perhaps I am being rhetorical, but the point is, we cannot let this apathy over come us to the point where we forget that this America is and always will be a country of People. We have rights, rights that may be threatened, rights that may be altered, but we have them, and as long as they are in place, we must exercise them to the fullest extent possible.

So vote, my friends. Vote. Vote because it is your voice, your right, and your country. Vote. Do not let the apathy win out and snuff out hope, for if we do, monsters foreign and domestic will destroy what is left, and there will be no one to blame but ourselves.

Vote.

Vote!

[nightflier]

Auric, I sure hope you don't forget to vote, LOL.

[Auricauricle]

Huh? Oh...Yeah...good day to...er...

(Excuse me....I just went insane for a moment....)

[Rich-n-Texas]

Last night, I went by the neighborhood coffee house. At the counter, the owner and a couple of customers were talking over things political when the words of one of the customers fell onto my ears. In tone, gesture and word, the message was unequivocal: politics as usual had become sickening. In a voice that was nearly a whisper, he spoke of his apathy over the entire electoral process: “What does it matter?” he said. “Why should we even bother to vote?” and so on. As the owner of the shop listened, he echoed the man’s words in a tired, resigned voice that was defeated and beaten.

In the year of Bush’s victory over Kerry, I did not vote. Like the young man at the counter and the coffee-shop owner, I too felt weary of “politics as usual”, and seeing the Bush campaign work, I succumbed to apathy and a no-shiv-a-git attitude. To this day, I am deeply ashamed of myself. It is that shame, perhaps, that made me interrupt. “Vote,” I interrupted. “Vote,” I repeated.

“Why? What’s the point? What will it matter?” they asked. The looks in their eyes told me that they were looking at a madman.

“It may not matter,” I said, “but it will count. Even if you don’t win, even if you don’t see things go the way you want them to, you have to exercise your right.”

It was hard for me to put together my thoughts, and so I left nearly as quickly as I came, realizing my ranting voice was sounding a bit fevered.

As far as I am concerned, the Bush presidency represents one of the most heinous and inept periods of our country’s history. In years to come, I may be proven right or wrong: that is of no consequence to me, now. What is of consequence is that by not voting, I effectively failed in my duty to exercise my rights in a time where my country most needed it. At the time, I was vocal about my views, and discussed with many willing and patient ears my thoughts concerning Bush and crew. But I did not vote, and all the words I uttered and will utter about the matter mean precious little as a result.

We Americans live in a country that is by no means perfect. In fact, in many respects, our country has become a hypocrite in many eyes of the world who see our words and deeds as contradictory and ridiculous. In our credo, terms like “freedom” and “democracy” ring out in bold letters. In action, however, we have succumbed to instincts that are vile and cowardly. This is neither a Republican problem nor a Democratic one: It is a systemic one that we all must address., if our country is to be restored.

It is not enough to sit at our computers and fuss and stew over the problems and corruptions that saddle our government, favor the elite few and discard the inessential multitude. We cannot be content with sitting in shops and discuss these problems with frinds and strangers, hoping that our words somehow find purchase. All these words will mean nothing if we do nothing to back them up through action.

Action does speak much louder than words!

Perhaps I am being rhetorical, but the point is, we cannot let this apathy over come us to the point where we forget that this America is and always will be a country of People. We have rights, rights that may be threatened, rights that may be altered, but we have them, and as long as they are in place, we must exercise them to the fullest extent possible.

So vote, my friends. Vote. Vote because it is your voice, your right, and your country. Vote. Do not let the apathy win out and snuff out hope, for if we do, monsters foreign and domestic will destroy what is left, and there will be no one to blame but ourselves.

Vote.

Vote!

Well, that's all well and good but umm... you DO know that it's the "Dark Society" that picks the president, right? :idea:

[Rich-n-Texas]

Let's also remember that the major newspapers are now 122-33 endorsing Obama...

I am absolutely astonished to read this.

:rolleyes:

[Feanor]

The United States is still the leading democracy in the world and the "greatest country" in important respects. Like Winston Churchill said democracy is a terrible system but still the best there is. We need to vote; if no candidate seems really good, we've got to choose the least evil among the candidates. If people always did this I believe things would change for the better over a very few elections.

It is said that in a democracy people get the the government they deserve. People do not take the time to inform themselves; this is especially true in the areas of economics and international affairs. Without sufficient knowledge voters can't make informed choices: in that case they will still get the governments they deserve but not the ones they want.

It's outrageious but politicians routinely try to veil the issues, surpress information, and inflame bigotries. This has never been more obvious than in the current election campaign and, yes, the Republicans are the most guilty. Sarah Palin obviously represents an attempt to reach out the the "real Americans" -- by which we may construe the ignorant, mindless patriots and religiously befuddled. Voters would reject this contemptuous treatment from politicians if only they could recognize it for what it is

[thekid]

Touching on a few points and keeping my promise not to discuss politics per se until after the 4th......

If you don't vote you can't complain. The government we have is the one we deserved because despite the cynicism one vote at a time We the People can make a difference. Both political parties have in the last several decades have not been concerned with the majority. Instead they focus on appealing to their bases that will vote and the independents who also vote. If both parties see that through the election process, that they have to work for the good of all people and not the vocal minority great things can be accomplished in the name of democracy.

[nightflier]

Well, that's all well and good but umm... you DO know that it's the "Dark Society" that picks the president, right? :idea:

Is that some kind of off-color joke?

[Rich-n-Texas]

Uhhh... no Valley boy. Not up on you're X-Files I suspect.

[Rich-n-Texas]

Touching on a few points and keeping my promise not to discuss politics per se until after the 4th......
Yeah. Keep telling us that thekid. Eventually you'll believe it. :biggrin5:

[nightflier]

Tex, that was a joke.

[Rich-n-Texas]

I know. So was mine. I thought the Valley boy reference was kinda funny. Whatever happened to those people anyway? Their houses burn down? :biggrin5:

[nightflier]

They're out canvassing for Obama, what else would you have Californians do?

[thekid]

Yeah. Keep telling us that thekid. Eventually you'll believe it. :biggrin5:

All kidding aside I really do believe it.

Think how things would have been different had a few hanging chads gone the other way in 2000.....

As my grandfather used to say "Every drop fills the bucket".....

[Ajani]

... for Republicans, then the racism gets rather less subtle. And other bigotries are stoked too: ultra-patriotism, "rugged" individualism, religious dogmatism, science rejectionism, anti-intellectualism, American exceptionalism, zenophobia. (Which of these does Sarah Palin not represent? Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer!)

Hopefully the Democrats will sweep both national and local elections, forcing the Republican party to re-brand.... I think the Republican party needs to stop catering to religious nutjobs, gun lovers, anti-intellectuals, racists, war mongers and all purpose @$$holes... the party needs to re-brand as a moderate party, focused on true fiscal conservatism....

[Feanor]

Hopefully the Democrats will sweep both national and local elections, forcing the Republican party to re-brand.... I think the Republican party needs to stop catering to religious nutjobs, gun lovers, anti-intellectuals, racists, war mongers and all purpose @$$holes... the party needs to re-brand as a moderate party, focused on true fiscal conservatism....

Moderate fiscal conservatism: hummm ... Yes, that would appeal to a lot people, but there are a few problems with that "sell" and they have to do with the Republican record (and that of conservatives in other countries too).

First, if you consider government surpluses to be fiscally conservative, then the record doesn't show the Republicans -- or the Conservative Party in Canada -- to be conservative at all. In recent history it has take the Democrates and the Liberal Party in Canada to show surpluses. The real fiscal agenda of conservatives is low taxes, and they are ready to lower taxes (for the well-to-do) even if it means borrowing.

Secondly, the conservative predeliction to anarcho-capitalism. One might argue that being fiscally conservative doesn't require a believe in ultra doctrinaire lassez faire, but this has been the association in recent decades, especially in the U.S. The train of events during the Bush II administration was to given in to every demand to loosen regulation or sensibly guide the US economy in any way. The result we can see: ramped greet and pander to quick-buckism has shafted not only the US but the world economy for the next several years at least. If you think other nations aren't p!ssed off about this, you'd be wrong.

Thirdly, fiscal conservativism is an increasing hard sell to the working and lower middle classes, when when the "basics of the economy" are so poor (or at least direly threatened). When times were good "liberal" entitlement was sold as a luxury that a wealthy nation ought to afford: this is poor sell today. But other factors are showing people that dog-eat-dog isn't going to work in tough times either, in fact common action is a luxury but a necessity. Some facts to consider:

Globalism is ensuring the nations were people earn 10 cents per $1 vs. American works will get the jobs. Not only manufacturing jobs, but increasingly technical and even service jobs. This trend is inevidable but American workers will demand that their goverment mitigate the trend in various ways, e.g. health care, education, cost of commodities such as fuel.
For the last 25 years or more, wealthy American has chosen to lend workers the money to sustain their lifestyles rather than pay them living wages. This trend can't go on forever: the sub-prime mortgate crisis is just one symptom of the inevidable failure of this approach.(More observations are likely to follow ...)

[Woochifer]

I am absolutely astonished to read this.

:rolleyes:

That same E&P list had the endorsements nearly even between Bush and Kerry in 2004. For all the chatter about liberal media bias, newspaper publishers and editorial boards have historically leaned conservative.

[Feanor]

That same E&P list had the endorsements nearly even between Bush and Kerry in 2004. For all the chatter about liberal media bias, newspaper publishers and editorial boards have historically leaned conservative.

It isn't a "liberal" bias, it's an intelligence bias.

[Rich-n-Texas]

:Yawn:

Is it the weekend yet? :D

[Auricauricle]

I think the Republican party needs to stop catering to religious nutjobs, gun lovers, anti-intellectuals, racists, war mongers and all purpose @$$holes...

Who'd be left?

[Woochifer]

Who'd be left?

Even my long-standing conservative parents are abandoning the GOP this election. They're independents, but vote straight ticket Republican most of the time. However, at this point they've had it with Bush and his acolytes. They're more in the traditional left coast Republican vein -- states rights, lower taxes, fiscal restraint, tough on crime, strong defense, and get the govt out of people's personal business. With the modern GOP's ballooning deficits, out of control spending, invading the wrong country (my dad has always felt that North Korea was far more dangerous than Iraq), corporate tax giveaways, creeping invasion of people's privacy, and now the financial bailout, they're absolutely livid.

And now that they have a granddaughter and rely on Social Security and Medicare, they see both Bush and McCain pushing all this debt onto the next generation.

If McCain loses, I think there will be a big time bloodletting in the Republican party (even if he wins, the schism is now out in the open and widening). The corporate wing of the party can't give mere lip service to the social conservatives for much longer, and the two sides' objectives are intersecting less and less.

I suspect that someone like Mike Huckabee, whose ideas about corporate regulation and social programs don't play into the Bush corporate GOP orthodoxy, will emerge into a movement leader. Forget about Palin, she has no intellectual foundation from which she can lead a movement, and can't answer simple questions.

And that will run in conflict with the corporate wing of the party, which is where Bush comes from. That philosophy of deregulation, corporate welfare, and suppressing labor costs by any means necessary (i.e., opening the borders to foreign workers, and giving incentives for companies to move jobs elsewhere), attracts big donors but does not put boots on the ground.

This uneasy alliance has been fracturing since the 2004 election with the GOP alternately pushing corporate agenda items like a guest worker program and allowing Arab firms to assume control over U.S. ports, and social conservative hot buttons like the intervention in the Terry Schiavo case. All of these extremes lead people like my parents, who are not liberal by any stretch, to conclude that the modern Republican party has completely disconnected from reality. In the process, this created two pissed off voters who, for the first time ever, will vote Democratic for President.

None other than Charles Barkley probably said it best -- "I was a Republican until they lost their minds."

[kexodusc]

Even my long-standing conservative parents are abandoning the GOP this election. They're independents, but vote straight ticket Republican most of the time. However, at this point they've had it with Bush and his acolytes. They're more in the traditional left coast Republican vein -- states rights, lower taxes, fiscal restraint, tough on crime, strong defense, and get the govt out of people's personal business. With the modern GOP's ballooning deficits, out of control spending, invading the wrong country (my dad has always felt that North Korea was far more dangerous than Iraq), corporate tax giveaways, creeping invasion of people's privacy, and now the financial bailout, they're absolutely livid.

And now that they have a granddaughter and rely on Social Security and Medicare, they see both Bush and McCain pushing all this debt onto the next generation.

If McCain loses, I think there will be a big time bloodletting in the Republican party (even if he wins, the schism is now out in the open and widening). The corporate wing of the party can't give mere lip service to the social conservatives for much longer, and the two sides' objectives are intersecting less and less.

I suspect that someone like Mike Huckabee, whose ideas about corporate regulation and social programs don't play into the Bush corporate GOP orthodoxy, will emerge into a movement leader. Forget about Palin, she has no intellectual foundation from which she can lead a movement, and can't answer simple questions.

And that will run in conflict with the corporate wing of the party, which is where Bush comes from. That philosophy of deregulation, corporate welfare, and suppressing labor costs by any means necessary (i.e., opening the borders to foreign workers, and giving incentives for companies to move jobs elsewhere), attracts big donors but does not put boots on the ground.

This uneasy alliance has been fracturing since the 2004 election with the GOP alternately pushing corporate agenda items like a guest worker program and allowing Arab firms to assume control over U.S. ports, and social conservative hot buttons like the intervention in the Terry Schiavo case. All of these extremes lead people like my parents, who are not liberal by any stretch, to conclude that the modern Republican party has completely disconnected from reality. In the process, this created two pissed off voters who, for the first time ever, will vote Democratic for President.

None other than Charles Barkley probably said it best -- "I was a Republican until they lost their minds."
Interesting account. My dad's retired USAF and military folk more often than not vote Republican, but even he's voting Dem this time around.
It's good for a political party to undertake serious renewal every so often.

[thekid]

Well I'll let the registered GOP supporters here opine on the direction of their party. I would say that if the GOP base who were skeptical of McCain's conservative credentials in the first place think that he (like Bush as some have suggested) was not conservative enough you can see the GOP swinging even further to the right rather than the center.

[Ajani]

Well I'll let the registered GOP supporters here opine on the direction of their party. I would say that if the GOP base who were skeptical of McCain's conservative credentials in the first place think that he (like Bush as some have suggested) was not conservative enough you can see the GOP swinging even further to the right rather than the center.

If they swing even further right, then they may never regain power... the party needs to become more moderate (drop the 'social conservatism', since it really just alienates both liberals and moderates) and focus on fiscal prudence... Everyone likes low taxes, so that's an easy sell (once they realize that low taxes does not mean just tax breaks for the rich, but means low taxes for the middle class as well)... Also having a strong stance on national security is good... but perpetual nonsense wars just leads to recession (The legacy of both Bush's wars in Iraq).... Wars are expensive (True Fiscal Conservatives would realize that, and avoid unnecessary conflicts)...

[Woochifer]

If they swing even further right, then they may never regain power... the party needs to become more moderate (drop the 'social conservatism', since it really just alienates both liberals and moderates) and focus on fiscal prudence... Everyone likes low taxes, so that's an easy sell (once they realize that low taxes does not mean just tax breaks for the rich, but means low taxes for the middle class as well)... Also having a strong stance on national security is good... but perpetual nonsense wars just leads to recession (The legacy of both Bush's wars in Iraq).... Wars are expensive (True Fiscal Conservatives would realize that, and avoid unnecessary conflicts)...

Your basic premise is a return of the Rockefeller wing of the Republican party, but they left the tent years ago.

The problem is that the Republicans have been playing a 50%+1 strategy -- assemble a coalition that will provide a thin majority, go all out with the negative campaigning in order to push the voter turnout as low as possible, and then govern as if that slim margin equates to a mandate. With only a narrow set of interests represented, the Republican party is held together right now by two dichotomous forces that increasingly butt heads yet cannot hold power without one another. Forget about the moderates, they're now either independents or Democrats -- two groups that have grown since 2004, while the Republicans have contracted.

The corporate Republicans are the ones that want amnesty for illegal immigrants, don't care if U.S. ports are outsourced to foreign companies, don't care if U.S. jobs get outsourced overseas, want government subsidies for companies, etc. This is the agenda that Bush has pushed most forcefully. While the corporate wing has the money and control over the media, they don't have the numbers.

The social conservatives provide the numbers and the ground level organization. Their agenda doesn't give a crap about the corporate bottomline. Aside from the religious considerations, they also more of a nativist agenda that they loosely equate to patriotism. One of the dirty little secrets is that patriotism and capitalism are very often at odds, and this is a tension that Bush has tried to circumvent. The Bush GOP uses patriotism in the service of corporatist goals. This is the kind of lip service that social conservatives have begun to wise up to, and they're no longer marching to the corporate wing's lead.

[Feanor]

Wooch, et al., I pointed this out a couple of weeks ago ...


... the Republican party is held together right now by two dichotomous ...
There are two types of Rebulicans:

The selfish rich; (Wooch calls them the "corporate Republicans"), and
The stupid; (Wooch calls them the social/religious conservatives).And he is right that their interests often don't coincide. The latter group are stupid, not so much because they are what they are, but because they believe the former actually have their interests in mind.

A couple of things are worth noting. First is the irony that Corporate anarcho-conservatives wanted total laisser faire and got from Bush II, but now that policy has failed, they are standing with hands out for a huge chunk of "spreading around" of the national weath.

Then too the selfish rich aren't just corporations but a large number of upper middle class, ($250,000+), people who feel that they want directly and personally get back what they pay in taxes. They fail to see (a) that prosperity stems from the larger society, and (b) they benefit disproportionately from programs other than transfer payments. Like I said earlier too, the two categories aren't mutually exclusive.

[Auricauricle]

When the pendulum begins to swing toward the left, Democrats would be well advised to tread carefully. With incompetence and arrogant hubris, the Fed has done its worst, and citizens who are tired of these excesses stand poised to show their resentment in the polls this November. Although Obama’s lead is widening, the continued pressure of the McCain camp indicates fearful equivocation and uncertainty, a presence that will accompany whoever occupies the White House and a reminder that they will be closely monitored.

This writer is confident that the Obama camp will ensconce themselves, and with all good intentions start work on correcting the various wrongs and errors of judgment that have been committed executively and countenanced legislatively. The Obamas cannot lose sight of this even handed ineptitude, and in the inevitable house cleaning, will have to endorse bilateral participation to ensure that the changes made are amenable to both and resilient enough to not be compromised by subsequent administrations. These are not a Republican or Democrat issues. The partisan rhetoric of late is only so much smoke and so many mirrors and has failed to fool a public that has grown increasingly canny and skeptical.

While the powers that be get busy in Washington, the operatives within the Financial sector will have much work to do to correct the market, whose soft underbelly has at last been revealed. This means approaching the problem globally. While we have trotted out the usual suspects and scapegoats, it seems we have lost the greater view that the problems being experienced here are widespread. International markets that politely acknowledged each other’s presence in the past will now have to work in concert, in a synchrony that will require mergers of international dimensions. Don’t be surprised if your bank’s statements are issued in versions English and French in the near future.

In all, the coming election will probably be accompanied by many sweeping changes both nationally and internationally. I have only touched upon Financial and Governmental forecasting, but the ramifications surrounding what lies ahead of us covers much vaster territory. In our haste to enact these sweeping changes, we cannot afford to get so far ahead of ourselves that we resemble the architect who builds a magnificent structure but ignores the foundation. Likewise, our actions must be fast and decisive, yet tempered with great intelligence and forethought.

If that means taking a minute or two to make sure that the new ship is properly equipped for the icebergs that will inevitably loom up, that is small price for experiencing the current calamity all over again.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

When the pendulum begins to swing toward the left, Democrats would be well advised to tread carefully. With incompetence and arrogant hubris, the Fed has done its worst, and citizens who are tired of these excesses stand poised to show their resentment in the polls this November. Although Obama’s lead is widening, the continued pressure of the McCain camp indicates fearful equivocation and uncertainty, a presence that will accompany whoever occupies the White House and a reminder that they will be closely monitored.

Very insightful, and I happen to agree. For this Democrat, the Democrats in Washington have just this one chance. Screw it up, this support has evoporated. I will try independent at that point.


This writer is confident that the Obama camp will ensconce themselves, and with all good intentions start work on correcting the various wrongs and errors of judgment that have been committed executively and countenanced legislatively. The Obamas cannot lose sight of this even handed ineptitude, and in the inevitable house cleaning, will have to endorse bilateral participation to ensure that the changes made are amenable to both and resilient enough to not be compromised by subsequent administrations. These are not a Republican or Democrat issues. The partisan rhetoric of late is only so much smoke and so many mirrors and has failed to fool a public that has grown increasingly canny and skeptical.

One of the toughest things for the Republicans is their possible humiliation in the house and senate will force them to HAVE to be bi-partisian, or they will look even more like the inept bunch they have morphed into. But I absolutely agree with you about Obama. He is going to have to go after this financial problem like a demon on a mission. The great thing for your worldwide approach is that Obama does not have the world wide Republican anchor around his neck like McCain would have had in dealing with foreign Governments on this crises. His style lends itself to world wide cooperation.

While the powers that be get busy in Washington, the operatives within the Financial sector will have much work to do to correct the market, whose soft underbelly has at last been revealed. This means approaching the problem globally. While we have trotted out the usual suspects and scapegoats, it seems we have lost the greater view that the problems being experienced here are widespread. International markets that politely acknowledged each other’s presence in the past will now have to work in concert, in a synchrony that will require mergers of international dimensions. Don’t be surprised if your bank’s statements are issued in versions English and French in the near future.


In all, the coming election will probably be accompanied by many sweeping changes both nationally and internationally. I have only touched upon Financial and Governmental forecasting, but the ramifications surrounding what lies ahead of us covers much vaster territory. In our haste to enact these sweeping changes, we cannot afford to get so far ahead of ourselves that we resemble the architect who builds a magnificent structure but ignores the foundation. Likewise, our actions must be fast and decisive, yet tempered with great intelligence and forethought.

This is called a measured, well thought out approach. It requires a completely different way of looking at and processing information, a new dynamic in interactive cooperation, and a very broad forward thinking perspective. These are things Obama has already demonstrated in both of his campaigns, and McCain has not. This is why I am voting for him, and not for McCain, and it has nothing to do with Republican or Democrat. It is called human characteristic, the very ones we need moving forward.

I think the Republican party, not only in the government but as individuals as well, needs to step back and take a good look at what their ideaology has done to this country. We have never been all that unified, and the policies that have invaded the republican party have served to fracture it down so many more lines, it threatens to just break apart. This is not the Republican Party of 60 years ago, that is for sure. I guess if I was a Republican, I would be a Rockefeller Republican. There are no more of them anymore.


If that means taking a minute or two to make sure that the new ship is properly equipped for the icebergs that will inevitably loom up, that is small price for experiencing the current calamity all over again.

Fix it, and fix it well. Alright, now somebody needs to pass the hat, cause this preacher has earned his offering!

[nightflier]

I guess this thread is a bit moot, now, but apparently the grumbling on the right has started and I suspect that Palin will be the punching bag for the next few months...

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jLmKbgJ9-ZUE7iK-CRfAzoJPbfjwD948L1NG1

[Auricauricle]

http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=6ab09333e36e7203d2db6fb9a8902bda

Yeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[thekid]

I guess this thread is a bit moot, now, but apparently the grumbling on the right has started and I suspect that Palin will be the punching bag for the next few months...

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jLmKbgJ9-ZUE7iK-CRfAzoJPbfjwD948L1NG1


I actually seeing going the other direction in that the criticism seems to be directed at the top by the right wing even though polls suggest Palin was a drag on the ticket. The GOP moderates like Brooks never liked Palin and are having their way now but lets see what happens after the memory of last week fades a bit. She is already doing interviews using the code words of the far right in order to position herself for 2012.

[Rich-n-Texas]

Let's just hope she's as HOT in 2012! :biggrin5:

[thekid]

Let's just hope she's as HOT in 2012! :biggrin5:


Gee Rich I am glad you kept on message...

I was expecting someone to make some comment on all the different "positions" they'd be willing to have her in 2012..... :D

[bobsticks]

Let's just hope she's as HOT in 2012! :biggrin5:

Why, you movin' to Alaska? I'm guessing the GOP will be reconfiguring itself, one way or the other. The GOP braintrust figures that neither McCain nor Palin properly articulated "core values" at the "kitchen table".

And, unfortunately, the National Committee is run by zealots who actually believe in the insane social doctrines the Body Nazi wing of the party espouses. They fail to realize that the only way to secure a victory next time around will be to tap into that disenfranchised youth vote that Obama took. Those kids have been raised in an educational system that praises a lazy egalitarianism, the tyranny of the masses.

Look for a move to the hard right, one set to appease elder values-voters but may draw some of the resentful middle class as the economy continues to get worse under the oppressive weight of bankrupt entitlement programs. Palin won't be conservative enough...look for a Pat Buchanan ticket...maybe with Captain Spaulding.

[nightflier]

Well I'm sure that a whole lot of democrats are hoping she gets fat & ugly soon, because it sure looks like she's lobbying for the nomination:

Palin looks for 'open door' to 2012 White House run
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/12/palin-mccain-republicans-obama-white-house

And if you think about it, if Obama does OK in his first four years, the Republicans might actually let her run with that ball, just to get the rest of the religious loons to come out of the woodwork and finally flush it out of the party. That is, they'll throw in the towel in 2012, won't run a serious middle-of-the-road candidate, and better make the case that the party needs some serious re-branding. And it will also give them some time to mount a real attack on the 2016 Biden race.

Another possibility is that the party really does split into two. On the far right, you'd have a religious, socially-conservative, authoritarian-oriented party, sort of the culmination of a Bush trajectory; and to the left of that (marginally so) you'd have a more pragmatic, fiscally conservative, laisser-faire business-focused party. Palin would then head the former, of course. Now I'm obviously not going to be a fan of her Party (aside from having ample fodder for humor), but I have to acknowledge that there's a lot of mid-Western bible-belt types who don't agree with the socially-moderate and business-liberal aspects of the current Republican party, and who would welcome a new home for their beliefs. Now all that remains is for these two parties to choose new names. Any suggestions?

Ironically, who would have ever thought that a push for a multi-party system would actually come from the right? Who knows, maybe one day, we can grow up to be just like the Europeans. Whohoo! Heck, we could even some day come to actually abide by the UN Charter on Human Rights! And when hell freezes over, the Tokyo Accord!!!

OK, I think I've stirred up the pot enough. Go ahead Tex, I'm sure you're chomping at the bit to get a word in....

[Rich-n-Texas]

Gee Rich I am glad you kept on message...
:lol: Want me to completely derail this thread theunkid? :ihih:


I was expecting someone to make some comment on all the different "positions" they'd be willing to have her in 2012..... :D
Well, like I said, it depends on what she looks like in four years. (Imagine Mrs. Obama with hair plugs) :yikes:

(Note: Count on me to not take this thread seriously.)

[nightflier]

Imagine Mrs. Obama with hair plugs :yikes:

Mrs. Obama isn't in office nor does she plan on running. Gee, how many times have I had to explain this to people before the election - it's like a mantra for the Republicans or something. If it's not that, then it's the comparison between Palin & Obama - they weren't running against each other either....

That aside, I'll grant you that she's not everyone's ideal, but according to some of my lady friends, Mr. Obama is actually pretty attractive. Well at least a whole lot more than McCain is or was. And let's not bring stepford-wife Cindy McCain into this, that poor woman has had to weather some pretty horrible things in that marriage, unfortunately. Yes, she is pretty and was a whole lot more so before McCain, but seeing her objectified would be stooping down to McCain's moral decadence and so I'd rather leave that alone.

[Feanor]

.... And let's not bring stepford-wife Cindy McCain into this...

Good one :thumbsup:

[Rich-n-Texas]

Sorry, it's Biden with the hair plugs isn't it?

(Okay okay! I'll stop for now!)

[Auricauricle]

Look for a move to the hard right, one set to appease elder values-voters but may draw some of the resentful middle class as the economy continues to get worse under the oppressive weight of bankrupt entitlement programs. Palin won't be conservative enough...look for a Pat Buchanan ticket...maybe with Captain Spaulding.

Ah, your words remind me of the good, old days, with nothing, but me, my radio and...

Doctor Demento!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jh9hJaEDmF4

[nightflier]

Dr. Demento, boy that takes me back...

Tex, yes, Biden's hair looks like a backwards baseball cap from the rear. That said, I still think he would again trounce Palin in a debate, even after she's had another 8 years to study up on the Bush Doctrine and had some geography lessons.

The real question is whether the majority of Republicans will rally behind her. I just don't see that happening. The split in the party is pretty pronounced and I really don't see how the two sides can reconcile. Bush & co., pretty much ensured this outcome.

[Ajani]

And it will also give them some time to mount a real attack on the 2016 Biden race.

I wonder if Biden will really run again in 2016... At that point he'll be even older than McCain was this election... That might end up being a deal breaker for some voters (unless he can do the reverse of McCain and pick a VP who most people really would like to see become President)...

[nightflier]

...(unless he can do the reverse of McCain and pick a VP who most people really would like to see become President)...

Barbara Boxer? Although that would really be swinging to the left. My guess is for someone a little more conservative like Kathleen Sebelius, who was actually up for the VP slot (and would have killed McCain's desperate attempt to appeal to women voters by selecting Palin). It would have been a very different race.

But if Biden doesn't run, and I actually don't think he will, then I'm going to guess that Howard Dean would be a top pick (if he keeps the ranting and fist-pounding in check).

[bobsticks]

Another possibility is that the party really does split into two. On the far right, you'd have a religious, socially-conservative, authoritarian-oriented party, sort of the culmination of a Bush trajectory; and to the left of that (marginally so) you'd have a more pragmatic, fiscally conservative, laisser-faire business-focused party....

...or as I like to put it, the dingbat Body Nazi regime versus, well, me.

[Auricauricle]

It will be interesting to watch things in Washington in the coming months, as Obama Inc. gets ensconced and starts bringing in the Dream Team and weeding out the lackeys and panderers who have contributed so much to the sordid ship of state left behind by Shrub et al. While much of what will be enacted will be carefully considered, I am afraid that prudence won’t be the only dictate attending these appointments, human nature and politics being all part of the same fallible infrastructure.

It is integrally important for the regime change to take place as seamlessly as possible while staying close to the mission at hand. Adherence to programs that address past transgressions must be tempered in such a way that they are neither viewed as reactionary or denigrating to former architects. In this way, risk of estrangement and future repercussive countermeasures can be effectively forestalled.

What does this mean to you and me? Simply and directly put, it means that many of us will be sitting on our hands for a while as the dust clears and any possible benefit can be descried. It will tempting in these times to be impatient, especially as our economy continues to slip and many of the benefits and fruits of former days’ affluence and opulence are sacrificed in the name of a more nutritious albeit bitter harvests. For those who have lived on fatted lamb and sweet wine, this will be very difficult to bear, but bolstering the economy is a task that must benefit all, even those who have slipped our attentions in the past.

America is a nation that is known for its optimism. This great strength is also our weakness, for often times it has blinded us to our responsibilities and our accountability for actions that were made in well-intentioned tone but hubris-laden temper. The current fiasco is testament to this fact, and now we Americans find ourselves toe to toe with the rest of the world and the various problems that our neighbors have long suffered. Americans are an impatient people, and we like to see solutions neat and tidy. Unfortunately things don’t work that way, and it looks as though things will be very messy while they get sorted out. This fallacy is one that can be capitalized upon by angry individuals who will seek to undermine the projects that will be instituted by Obama Inc. They must be thwarted, but in the spirit of comradeship and inclusion. Edging out unpopular and inappropriate opprobrium and derisiveness is well and good, but weasels bite at the ankles when they're least expected to.

[thekid]

Since I derailed this post a bit I feel it is my duty to post at least one serious comment.....

While we shouldn't be surprised I am still kid of amazed how suddenly accessible Ms.Palin is to the media. I am half expecting to see her announced as a contestant for "Dancing with the Stars" or sending a "sweet shout out" to McCain from MTV....

[Auricauricle]

I think Ms. Palin is positioning herself quite handily, and will probably be seen as a fairly vocal pundit in the coming months. Despite her poor reception, she made substantial inroads among the Washington Inner Circle, and will not easily returned home to serve cucumber sandwiches and tea.

Watch the spin: I reckon that we will see her given more voice and opportunity to opine in the same pseudo-intellectual forums occupied by Gingrich and other befallen luminaries of the not so distant past. With enough wrangling, who knows? She may be trotted out as a very formidable adversary in '12, when our collective attention span has sufficiently waned and her image has been polished anew....

To be forewarned is to have forearms, y'know!

[Rich-n-Texas]

So what's the press going to write about after Barak takes office?

[nightflier]

She may be trotted out as a very formidable adversary in '12, when our collective attention span has sufficiently waned and her image has been polished anew...

Well you can put lipstick on a pig, or a bulldog, but you're still gona wonder if it's walking forward or backwards. And in Palin's case, both these animals are probably still smarter than she is. Maybe putting lipstick on slug...

Seriously, a presidential debate between Obama and Palin wouldn't even be entertaining, it would be deplorably sad. It would be an embarrassment of our political process of no less scale than the Thomas/Hill hearings, but without the interest. The bottom line is that you just can't make up for such a poor intellect. She's gotten by on her looks and not much else, so no matter how much the Washington conservatives will appreciate someone who's willing to be their mouthpiece, it also clearly demonstrates the nonsense that is being regurgitated by this extremist element as a whole.

I've spoken to many Republicans who all concur that the religious and authoritarian right wing has been a drag on the party they were once proud to be part of. They would like nothing more than to shed the Palin constituency from the ranks and rebuild the party back up with sound economically-liberal and socially-moderate principles. Palin would do none of these things.

One could argue that without the Palin constituency, the party can't muster the numbers to win elections, but I doubt that is a serious concern. Most Republicans would rather be a Gingrich-style vocal minority without them, rather than a despised majority with them. What Bush-Cheney-Rummy have wrought is not what they wanted from electing a Republican in the first place - the morally-bankrupt ideals of that administration are not in line with core Republican values. The '08 election drove a rift between these two halves of the party and I do not believe it can be mended - certainly not by 2012, and definitely not by Palin. She would actually widen it.

Something like 12-15% of Republicans voted for Obama this time around. If Palin runs in 2012, these same Republicans will again vote for him, for the same reasons they did this year. So where is she going to get the necessary votes from? The religious right? They weren't enough this time around, so what is with the illusion that they will be enough against a stronger and more experienced incumbent like Obama? Never happen. And what about a moderate? S/he would not be able to carry the religious right. Think of Giuliani, or even Romney running. Yes, they would be what that constituency who voted for Obama in '08 wants, but will the Bible belt follow suit and vote for him? Opinion polls from the primaries earlier this year suggest otherwise. They wanted Huckabee. Huck-a-who?

Bottom line is that Bush ran on a moderate platform in 2000, which is what got him (almost) elected) but as soon as he came into office he stabbed the moderates and libertarians in the back and continued to punish them for another 8 years. It will take at least another 8 for them to come back, if they will at all. The real legacy of Bush, besides being the worst president in our nation's short history, is to have dismantled the Republican party of Lincoln, Eisenhower, and Reagan.

[bobsticks]

I've spoken to many Republicans who all concur that the religious and authoritarian right wing has been a drag on the party they were once proud to be part of. They would like nothing more than to shed the Palin constituency from the ranks and rebuild the party back up with sound economically-liberal and socially-moderate principles. Palin would do none of these things.


Yup, I'm one of 'em...and I'll even admit to having written at one point that her choice was brilliant. I still think a hottie neo-con could've been impactful had the particular hottie neo-con not been such a dingbat.

I'm more than ready for a re-branded, fiscally conservative, socially-centrist Republican Party...one that'll take some of my money, start a few good wars and leave me the hell alone.

[nightflier]

Yup, I'm one of 'em...and I'll even admit to having written at one point that her choice was brilliant. I still think a hottie neo-con could've been impactful had the particular hottie neo-con not been such a dingbat.

I'm more than ready for a re-branded, fiscally conservative, socially-centrist Republican Party...one that'll take some of my money, start a few good wars and leave me the hell alone.


So what you're saying is that Palin wasn't into men wearing clown make-up?
:biggrin5: :biggrin5: :biggrin5:

[Auricauricle]

I've been asked to contribute something to a local news website, here in Charleston. Thought I'd give you, "my pious friends and drunken companions", a glimpse:

Although Sandra Palin’s fifteen minutes of fame was curtailed to a nine-minute three seconds stretch, her presence in the media was a bright spark in an otherwise lackluster career. CNN has approached the former vice-presidential contender with the post of Chief Pundit Correspondent in its Washington Bureau. Insiders in the Beltway have described Mrs. Palin’s ostensible pleasure with the appointment, but noted a less than enthusiastic response by her husband and children who have returned to Alaska with little to say about the matter.

Sources report that Mrs. Palin has been approached by a number of admiring supporters and “best friends “, including Barbara Walters, who has promised Mrs. Palin “a cushion and a hot cup of tea” on The View. Producers from the hit game show Hollywood Squares have reportedly also approached Mrs. Palin with a contract inclusive of an undisclosed sum and position in the Center Square. Mrs. Palin has refrained from commenting upon any of these developments, but it has been noted by more than one reporter that she has been seen smiling whenever so questioned.

Sources are still in dispute over an alleged pictorial featuring Mrs. Palin, published my Maxim Magazine. Sources close to Mrs. Palin declined comment, but staff close to the magazine’s editor in chief, spoke very highly of Mrs. Palin’s “professionalism and composure during the shoot”. He declined comment when questioned about possible airbrushing methods that were used to accentuate certain portions of the photographs.

In Papua New Guinea, a new religion has been formed in honor of the former first-lady aspirant. In an interview held yesterday, Chief Witchdoctor-in-Residence Mbwa Gubudu spoke highly of Mrs. Palin, who has allegedly inspired his people and described plans for the erection of a forty-foot tall effigy of the former Fist Lady Wannabe that will be installed in a new church now under construction. It is reported that many male Papuans have voiced satisfaction with these plans. Females interviewed have generally replied to questions with various grumbles and gestures.

In Charleston, Mayor Reilly has refrained from commenting upon plans related to a roadway that will run between Folly Beach and an undisclosed location. The new two-lane thruway is expected to facilitate travel and will be named after Mrs. Palin, yet authorities close to the Mayor note harsh debate has attended town meetings held to discuss the matter. In a related note, members of the Folly Beach Pluff Mud League and the local chapter of Alligator Appreciation Association have threatened to sue the City of Charleston if plans for the proposed roadway are approved.

In a final note, authorities of the Nobel Committee are said to have convened this week to discuss possible plans for Ms. Palin’s inclusion in next year’s Nobel ceremonies. When asked to discuss these plans, authorities in Oslo declined to comment. Sources close to His Royal Highness indicate that Mrs. Palin’s favorable comments about Lutefisk were well received.

[tyrocks00]

oh goodness. dont get me started.