McCain on why he chose Sarah Palin

[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?

[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?

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 What's the Matter with Kansas? by Thomas Frank.

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 What's the Matter with Kansas? by Thomas Frank.

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.

[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.

No no, it's all George Bush's fault. He alone and no one else!

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.

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, 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..... ) 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.............

[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.