Vice President Palin?
Moderator: DBacks
Vice President Palin?
How in the world can John McCain possibly justify saying that Barack Obama is not ready to be president, but Sarah Palin is?
Anyway, here's some fun facts I got from one my evil left wing liberal newsletters.
She was elected Alaska's governor a little over a year and a half ago. Her previous office was mayor of Wasilla, a small town outside Anchorage. She has no foreign policy experience.1
Palin is strongly anti-choice, opposing abortion even in the case of rape or incest.2
She supported right-wing extremist Pat Buchanan for president in 2000. 3
Palin thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.4
She's doesn't think humans are the cause of climate change.5
She's solidly in line with John McCain's "Big Oil first" energy policy. She's pushed hard for more oil drilling and says renewables won't be ready for years. She also sued the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered speciesóshe was worried it would interfere with more oil drilling in Alaska.6
How closely did John McCain vet this choice? He met Sarah Palin once at a meeting. They spoke a second time, last Sunday, when he called her about being vice-president. Then he offered her the position.
I am absolutely terrified of McCain/Palin winning this thing. Scary shit.
Anyway, here's some fun facts I got from one my evil left wing liberal newsletters.
She was elected Alaska's governor a little over a year and a half ago. Her previous office was mayor of Wasilla, a small town outside Anchorage. She has no foreign policy experience.1
Palin is strongly anti-choice, opposing abortion even in the case of rape or incest.2
She supported right-wing extremist Pat Buchanan for president in 2000. 3
Palin thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.4
She's doesn't think humans are the cause of climate change.5
She's solidly in line with John McCain's "Big Oil first" energy policy. She's pushed hard for more oil drilling and says renewables won't be ready for years. She also sued the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered speciesóshe was worried it would interfere with more oil drilling in Alaska.6
How closely did John McCain vet this choice? He met Sarah Palin once at a meeting. They spoke a second time, last Sunday, when he called her about being vice-president. Then he offered her the position.
I am absolutely terrified of McCain/Palin winning this thing. Scary shit.
1. Jesse Ventura was elected governor of Minnesota after his only political experince was being the mayor of his hometown in Minnesota. Lincoln was an unknown Congressman from Illinois who only turned abolishionist in order to further his career, because the Whigs were dead and he had no chance as a Democrat. Teddy Roosevelt didn't have a ton of experience when he was named VP aside from Secretary of the Navy, might've actually been assisstant secretary, I don't recall off the top of my head. No foreign policy experience? What foreign policy experience does Obama have aside from going to visit the troops every once in a while. McCain is obviously going to handle all of the foreign policy.
2. Oh no, she's not a baby killer! How dare her! If you don't want a kid, then get yourself fixed and you can bang all you want. Otherwise, practice safe sex. Gabe, your sister got knocked up, did you want her to go have an abortion just cause she wasn't planning on getting pregnant?
3. Raise your hand if you actually thought Pat Buchanan was going to be given the Republican nomination in 2000. That's the same as someone supporting Dennis Kucinich, or being a Royals fan. You're not gonna be successful.
4. So do a lot of other people. Hell you can't even say Merry Christmas in school anymore. One athiest gets in a bad mood and causes a stink and millions of people have to deal with it. If people a problem with teaching creationism because of it being Christian, then teach intelligent design, where religion is not brought into the lesson. I don't see why intelligent design shouldn't be taught, its another theory, just like evolution, plus it doesn't teach that you're the mutant offspring of a retarded frog squirrel having butt sex with a mutant fish frog.
5. Climate change has happened throughout history without it being caused by humans. Did cavemen cause the ice age? Humans are a factor, but not the sole cause. Look at the Little Ice Age in the late 1700s to the mid 1800s. Could this just be a slight warming period we're seeing?
6. I'm big on conservation, but I think if there's a way you can drill in Alaska and make it have the smallest possible impact on caribu and other wildlife, then go for it. Polar bears are not endangered, they are listed as threatened. That is like an NFL player being listed as probable on an injury report. There was a big article in Newsweek in June on the listing of the polar bear, and it was pretty much agreed that the polar bear was listed as threatened mainly through the work of global warming fanatics that couldn't find an animal cute enough that was actually endangered in the Artic to be the face of a media blitz. Why aren't they using a spider that lives in snow caves in Alaska, or a fish in the Bearing Sea that are both endangered? Because nobody gives a shit if a spider goes extinct because people hate spiders.
2. Oh no, she's not a baby killer! How dare her! If you don't want a kid, then get yourself fixed and you can bang all you want. Otherwise, practice safe sex. Gabe, your sister got knocked up, did you want her to go have an abortion just cause she wasn't planning on getting pregnant?
3. Raise your hand if you actually thought Pat Buchanan was going to be given the Republican nomination in 2000. That's the same as someone supporting Dennis Kucinich, or being a Royals fan. You're not gonna be successful.
4. So do a lot of other people. Hell you can't even say Merry Christmas in school anymore. One athiest gets in a bad mood and causes a stink and millions of people have to deal with it. If people a problem with teaching creationism because of it being Christian, then teach intelligent design, where religion is not brought into the lesson. I don't see why intelligent design shouldn't be taught, its another theory, just like evolution, plus it doesn't teach that you're the mutant offspring of a retarded frog squirrel having butt sex with a mutant fish frog.
5. Climate change has happened throughout history without it being caused by humans. Did cavemen cause the ice age? Humans are a factor, but not the sole cause. Look at the Little Ice Age in the late 1700s to the mid 1800s. Could this just be a slight warming period we're seeing?
6. I'm big on conservation, but I think if there's a way you can drill in Alaska and make it have the smallest possible impact on caribu and other wildlife, then go for it. Polar bears are not endangered, they are listed as threatened. That is like an NFL player being listed as probable on an injury report. There was a big article in Newsweek in June on the listing of the polar bear, and it was pretty much agreed that the polar bear was listed as threatened mainly through the work of global warming fanatics that couldn't find an animal cute enough that was actually endangered in the Artic to be the face of a media blitz. Why aren't they using a spider that lives in snow caves in Alaska, or a fish in the Bearing Sea that are both endangered? Because nobody gives a shit if a spider goes extinct because people hate spiders.
Cardinals wrote:1. Jesse Ventura was elected governor of Minnesota after his only political experince was being the mayor of his hometown in Minnesota. Lincoln was an unknown Congressman from Illinois who only turned abolishionist in order to further his career, because the Whigs were dead and he had no chance as a Democrat. Teddy Roosevelt didn't have a ton of experience when he was named VP aside from Secretary of the Navy, might've actually been assisstant secretary, I don't recall off the top of my head. No foreign policy experience? What foreign policy experience does Obama have aside from going to visit the troops every once in a while. McCain is obviously going to handle all of the foreign policy.
2. Oh no, she's not a baby killer! How dare her! If you don't want a kid, then get yourself fixed and you can bang all you want. Otherwise, practice safe sex. Gabe, your sister got knocked up, did you want her to go have an abortion just cause she wasn't planning on getting pregnant?
3. Raise your hand if you actually thought Pat Buchanan was going to be given the Republican nomination in 2000. That's the same as someone supporting Dennis Kucinich, or being a Royals fan. You're not gonna be successful.
4. So do a lot of other people. Hell you can't even say Merry Christmas in school anymore. One athiest gets in a bad mood and causes a stink and millions of people have to deal with it. If people a problem with teaching creationism because of it being Christian, then teach intelligent design, where religion is not brought into the lesson. I don't see why intelligent design shouldn't be taught, its another theory, just like evolution, plus it doesn't teach that you're the mutant offspring of a retarded frog squirrel having butt sex with a mutant fish frog.
5. Climate change has happened throughout history without it being caused by humans. Did cavemen cause the ice age? Humans are a factor, but not the sole cause. Look at the Little Ice Age in the late 1700s to the mid 1800s. Could this just be a slight warming period we're seeing?
6. I'm big on conservation, but I think if there's a way you can drill in Alaska and make it have the smallest possible impact on caribu and other wildlife, then go for it. Polar bears are not endangered, they are listed as threatened. That is like an NFL player being listed as probable on an injury report. There was a big article in Newsweek in June on the listing of the polar bear, and it was pretty much agreed that the polar bear was listed as threatened mainly through the work of global warming fanatics that couldn't find an animal cute enough that was actually endangered in the Artic to be the face of a media blitz. Why aren't they using a spider that lives in snow caves in Alaska, or a fish in the Bearing Sea that are both endangered? Because nobody gives a shit if a spider goes extinct because people hate spiders.
Well you're missing the point entirely. You just admitted that she has no foreign policy experience. So, it is EXTREMELY hypocrytical of John McCain to say Obama is not qualified to be president because of his lack of foreign policy experience, while simultaneously choosing to put a candidate with less experience a heartbeat away from the Presidency. The man is in his 70s and looks like he's about to fall over everytime he gives a speech. Who he picks for the VP slot is a very big deal.
Listing people who were successful without a lot of foreign policy experience really only helps Obama's case, no matter how hard you might wanna use that to justify Palin. Either way, the hypocracy among the GOP is undeniable, yet expected. Oh, and running Minnesota and running the United States are two very different things.
As far as abortion goes, it's not a point I'm gonna argue. I don't think any woman who has one is evil and I think that woman have the right to choose, but its not something I'm in favor of, and I would certainly never judge someone who was Pro-Life. That seems kind of stupid to me. It's one of my few conservative opinions. Believe it or not, I have my own brain, I don't just follow the Democratic Platform, wherever it may lead.
Pat Buchanan I'm gonna ignore. Who gives a fuck about Pat Buchanan. Intelligent Design, theoretically, should be taught in schools. The problem is keeping it from being religous, as it would be prone to favor the religion of the teacher who's teaching it. I, personally, think intelligent design is as important a theory as evolution, but I think the specific religous aspects are best saved for high school and college courses where students have a choice whether or not to take the class.
I firmly believe that human beings have a great deal to do with global warning. I also believe that it is a crisis we should be looking at in great detail. To label our climate change as natural, and ignore it, will be disastrous for the generations that come after us, in my opinion. Going green is important, and is a project this generation of Americans should embrace. It's really not that hard.
And, drilling isn't the problem. But the GOP have two large flaws in this area. They lack urgency and they mislead the public. First, drilling for oil will not net you immediate results. Time and time again I've seen these GOP spin specialists go on TV and imply that drilling will help bring gas prices down immidiately and significantly cut our dependence on foreign oil. Neither of those are true. And, they do not look at finding renewable, alternative fuels as an urgent need. They seem to think that its just going to happen on its own, which could not be further from the truth. But they don't wanna spend the money on it, because, hey, why spend our tax dollars on something like that.
I agree with you that going green is important, but you also have to look at if the average person can afford it. Can a guy that works in Borden at the Kimball Furnature factory afford to go green? No, he's more worried about if the factory is gonna be shut down or not. Speaking of hypocracy, all these Hollywood types talk about going green and the fly everywhere in private jets, but they've got the money to buy those green cards or whatever they are that plant a tree in Africa.
I never said running Minnesota and running the US were similar, I was just saying its not unprecidented for someone to go from being a small town mayor to being governor of a state.
Most colleges and every high school require students to take biology, in which evolution is taught, so there's really no way to avoid it. IMO, you either teach both evolution and intelligent design or you teach neither. Or if you're going to teach evolution and not intelligent design, then you only teach small scale evolution where an animal adapts to a habitat over time.
Take the rose colored glasses off for a second Gabe, in regards to renewable alternative fuels. Do you really think Big Oil isn't going to line the pockets of every politician they can get their hands on to not spend more than a token amount on researching renewable energy? Its smart business on their part. I don't like it any more than you do, but its just the way things are
I never said running Minnesota and running the US were similar, I was just saying its not unprecidented for someone to go from being a small town mayor to being governor of a state.
Most colleges and every high school require students to take biology, in which evolution is taught, so there's really no way to avoid it. IMO, you either teach both evolution and intelligent design or you teach neither. Or if you're going to teach evolution and not intelligent design, then you only teach small scale evolution where an animal adapts to a habitat over time.
Take the rose colored glasses off for a second Gabe, in regards to renewable alternative fuels. Do you really think Big Oil isn't going to line the pockets of every politician they can get their hands on to not spend more than a token amount on researching renewable energy? Its smart business on their part. I don't like it any more than you do, but its just the way things are
Cardinals wrote:I agree with you that going green is important, but you also have to look at if the average person can afford it. Can a guy that works in Borden at the Kimball Furnature factory afford to go green? No, he's more worried about if the factory is gonna be shut down or not. Speaking of hypocracy, all these Hollywood types talk about going green and the fly everywhere in private jets, but they've got the money to buy those green cards or whatever they are that plant a tree in Africa.
Take the rose colored glasses off for a second Gabe, in regards to renewable alternative fuels. Do you really think Big Oil isn't going to line the pockets of every politician they can get their hands on to not spend more than a token amount on researching renewable energy? Its smart business on their part. I don't like it any more than you do, but its just the way things are
As far as the "Hollywood" types go, no matter how much they may be hated, let's not forget that some of them continuously give millions of their dollars away to help causes such as going green and other important humanitarian issues. Yeah, they got money to spare, but the world is full of greedy people and they dont have to give away a cent. So lets give some credit where credit is due.
And, yes, when it comes to renewable fuels, I suppose that is the way things are. I'm not exactly sure what "rose colored glasses" means, but I will not for a second stop bitching about it or demanding more of the people in charge of my country. Things do not change on their own, things chang because they are forced to change. Change comes when a persistent minority refuses to go unheard. When that persistent minority knows that the majority is wrong, and that the status quo is unacceptable. So, yeah, thats the way things are, but I don't give a fuck. Things need to change.
Cardinals wrote:I agree with you that going green is important, but you also have to look at if the average person can afford it. Can a guy that works in Borden at the Kimball Furnature factory afford to go green? No, he's more worried about if the factory is gonna be shut down or not. Speaking of hypocracy, all these Hollywood types talk about going green and the fly everywhere in private jets, but they've got the money to buy those green cards or whatever they are that plant a tree in Africa.
Take the rose colored glasses off for a second Gabe, in regards to renewable alternative fuels. Do you really think Big Oil isn't going to line the pockets of every politician they can get their hands on to not spend more than a token amount on researching renewable energy? Its smart business on their part. I don't like it any more than you do, but its just the way things are
As far as the "Hollywood" types go, no matter how much they may be hated, let's not forget that some of them continuously give millions of their dollars away to help causes such as going green and other important humanitarian issues. Yeah, they got money to spare, but the world is full of greedy people and they dont have to give away a cent. So lets give some credit where credit is due.
And, yes, when it comes to renewable fuels, I suppose that is the way things are. I'm not exactly sure what "rose colored glasses" means, but I will not for a second stop bitching about it or demanding more of the people in charge of my country. Things do not change on their own, things chang because they are forced to change. Change comes when a persistent minority refuses to go unheard. When that persistent minority knows that the majority is wrong, and that the status quo is unacceptable. So, yeah, thats the way things are, but I don't give a fuck. Things need to change.
Gabe your liberal screed (and Aaron's equally "deep" conservative response) both completely miss the brilliance of this pick. If Sarah Palin isn't experienced enough to be Vice President then there's no way Barack Obama is experienced enough to be President. McCain's campaign doesn't need the experience argument anymore, the celebrity argument is just as good and the reality is that Obama does not hold up well under close scrutiny.
As for the candidate herself, Sarah Palin supports more oil drilling, so do the majority of Americans. She is a right winger on social issues, but here's the thing about that, we are going to have a heavily Democrat congress, so whatever social measures she might want to try and push (or any Alito/Scalia clones that she and McCain might want to nominate) would be rendered irrelevant by Congress (boy, aren't checks and balances neat?). Her major success has been in reforming a mess of a state government in Alaska, which actually required her to go up against the big oil companies. How are you going to put her down for believing that alternative energy is years away? Alternative energy is years away, that isn't a question up for debate. McCain/Palin doesn't approach Bush/Cheney in the realm of scary, and arguing that it does is like trying to accuse the Bush Administration of war crimes when compared to what's happening in Zimbabwe, in Darfur, in Burma, or anywhere else where actual war crimes are happening. What scares me is having a progressive version of George W. Bush in power with a strong enough majority in Congress to pass whatever ridiculous legislation appeals to his party's elite that particular week. We've had 8 years of that, and that's where we really need a Change.
As for the candidate herself, Sarah Palin supports more oil drilling, so do the majority of Americans. She is a right winger on social issues, but here's the thing about that, we are going to have a heavily Democrat congress, so whatever social measures she might want to try and push (or any Alito/Scalia clones that she and McCain might want to nominate) would be rendered irrelevant by Congress (boy, aren't checks and balances neat?). Her major success has been in reforming a mess of a state government in Alaska, which actually required her to go up against the big oil companies. How are you going to put her down for believing that alternative energy is years away? Alternative energy is years away, that isn't a question up for debate. McCain/Palin doesn't approach Bush/Cheney in the realm of scary, and arguing that it does is like trying to accuse the Bush Administration of war crimes when compared to what's happening in Zimbabwe, in Darfur, in Burma, or anywhere else where actual war crimes are happening. What scares me is having a progressive version of George W. Bush in power with a strong enough majority in Congress to pass whatever ridiculous legislation appeals to his party's elite that particular week. We've had 8 years of that, and that's where we really need a Change.
- Yankees
- Posts: 4540
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2003 1:00 am
- Location: Fulshear, TX
- Name: Brett Zalaski
- Contact:
Gabe, I hate to break this to you - but your reaction is EXACTLY what the Republicans were looking for by announcing that on Friday. Instead of everyone talking about the brilliance of Obama's speech (which it was), which pushed for change above the petty arguments - the Dems started bitching and moaning about the selection.
Do I think she was the best selection for the Republicans? I wear liberal-tinted glasses, but my initial response is 'no.' But she IS a GOOD candidate (as laid out above) - and the arguments made against her are the petty arguments Obama asked us to rise above in his speech.
One side note on Obama's speech - I thought it was the absolute perfect combination of Michael Douglas' speech at the end of An American President (we're all American, make it about the issues), and Eminem's speech at the end of 8 Mile (tell me something they don't already know about me).
Do I think she was the best selection for the Republicans? I wear liberal-tinted glasses, but my initial response is 'no.' But she IS a GOOD candidate (as laid out above) - and the arguments made against her are the petty arguments Obama asked us to rise above in his speech.
One side note on Obama's speech - I thought it was the absolute perfect combination of Michael Douglas' speech at the end of An American President (we're all American, make it about the issues), and Eminem's speech at the end of 8 Mile (tell me something they don't already know about me).
Z, Palin wasn't chosen just to break into Obama's news cycle. Everyone knew the announcement was coming Friday and no matter who he chose, you were going to hear spin artists from the left side go on the attack. The great thing was hearing Obama and Biden themselves refuse to go negative on her, and they actually pulled in the reigns on their own campaign.
And in what world are these petty arguments? Abortion rights are petty arguments? Teaching intelligent design in public schools is a petty argument? Maybe they are petty to you, Z, but to many of us they are very, very important.
And Jake. in your amazingly condescending response, what you call the brilliance of her pick is what I call the stupidity of her pick. While Obama used his VP slot to pick a candidate ready to be President at a moment's notice, McCain used his to pick a candidate who is not ready. And the best part about it, no one I've talked to about it has argued that she is ready, because they all know she's not. McCain decided he should use his VP slot to play more bullshit political games, and he miscalculated big time. The tides will turn on Palin, just wait and see.
And yeah, she' hot.
And in what world are these petty arguments? Abortion rights are petty arguments? Teaching intelligent design in public schools is a petty argument? Maybe they are petty to you, Z, but to many of us they are very, very important.
And Jake. in your amazingly condescending response, what you call the brilliance of her pick is what I call the stupidity of her pick. While Obama used his VP slot to pick a candidate ready to be President at a moment's notice, McCain used his to pick a candidate who is not ready. And the best part about it, no one I've talked to about it has argued that she is ready, because they all know she's not. McCain decided he should use his VP slot to play more bullshit political games, and he miscalculated big time. The tides will turn on Palin, just wait and see.
And yeah, she' hot.
- Cardinals
- Posts: 8041
- Joined: Sat May 18, 2002 1:00 am
- Location: Manch Vegas, CT
- Name: John Paul Starkey
First off, I absolutely hate people who label Palin or other conservatives as "Anti-choice." What's wrong with saying pro-life? After reading on various news outlets that she's "Anti-Choice" I'm going to go ahead and label every leftist that supports abortion "Anti-Life." So she's not anti-life. Would you expect anything else from a conservative? I would certainly hope not.
How exactly do you qualify somebody as being not ready to be the Vice President? What are the qualifications you have to have to hold the Presidency in the USA? Born in the USA? Check. Age 35? Check. Alive? Check. So who exactly are you to say she's not qualifies given that she meets the qualifications right there? Are you going to tell me because she doesn't have a Masters like some chick at work did? Because I don't believe Harry Truman even obtained a college degree. Did JFK own a masters? I don't think so. Remind me how old JFK was again?
How will the tides turn on Palin? She earned the spot on her own. She didn't live off her husbands Presidency and stand on that as her real ground to hold on for her political career like a certain witch I recall running for this past year.
So explain to me how this will backfire. This will help secure the evangelical vote that McCain, who is fairly moderate for a Republican, was not guaranteed to win thanks to her conservative nature. This will help her in many battle ground states, specifically the Rocky Mountain area I suspect. I forget who mentioned it, but she brings Babies, guns and Jesus to the table as well as her energy plan and drilling in Alaska etc. She will also help scoop up all the feminist voters that are not sold on Obama.
How exactly do you qualify somebody as being not ready to be the Vice President? What are the qualifications you have to have to hold the Presidency in the USA? Born in the USA? Check. Age 35? Check. Alive? Check. So who exactly are you to say she's not qualifies given that she meets the qualifications right there? Are you going to tell me because she doesn't have a Masters like some chick at work did? Because I don't believe Harry Truman even obtained a college degree. Did JFK own a masters? I don't think so. Remind me how old JFK was again?
How will the tides turn on Palin? She earned the spot on her own. She didn't live off her husbands Presidency and stand on that as her real ground to hold on for her political career like a certain witch I recall running for this past year.
So explain to me how this will backfire. This will help secure the evangelical vote that McCain, who is fairly moderate for a Republican, was not guaranteed to win thanks to her conservative nature. This will help her in many battle ground states, specifically the Rocky Mountain area I suspect. I forget who mentioned it, but she brings Babies, guns and Jesus to the table as well as her energy plan and drilling in Alaska etc. She will also help scoop up all the feminist voters that are not sold on Obama.
12, 14, 15, 17, 22
Gabe, you seem to insist on missing the point. Barack Obama is not significantly more experienced than Sarah Palin, in fact it's hard to argue that he is even AS EXPERIENCED as she is, considering how thin his legislative record is. If you honestly believe that Sarah Palin isn't experienced enough to be President, then you can't believe that Barack Obama is experienced enough and you have to vote for McCain.Cubs wrote:Z, Palin wasn't chosen just to break into Obama's news cycle. Everyone knew the announcement was coming Friday and no matter who he chose, you were going to hear spin artists from the left side go on the attack. The great thing was hearing Obama and Biden themselves refuse to go negative on her, and they actually pulled in the reigns on their own campaign.
And in what world are these petty arguments? Abortion rights are petty arguments? Teaching intelligent design in public schools is a petty argument? Maybe they are petty to you, Z, but to many of us they are very, very important.
And Jake. in your amazingly condescending response, what you call the brilliance of her pick is what I call the stupidity of her pick. While Obama used his VP slot to pick a candidate ready to be President at a moment's notice, McCain used his to pick a candidate who is not ready. And the best part about it, no one I've talked to about it has argued that she is ready, because they all know she's not. McCain decided he should use his VP slot to play more bullshit political games, and he miscalculated big time. The tides will turn on Palin, just wait and see.
And yeah, she' hot.
No.
First, you can absolutely make the argument that Obama is more prepared to be President than Palin, because its true. Obama is ready to step in as our commander and chief on day one. Palin has spent her entire politcal career in Alaska. No amount of "bridge to nowhere" bullshit and ethics reform is going to convince me otherwise.
I can believe Palin isn't experienced enough and that Barack Obama is. They are not the same person. They're credentials are not the same. I don't know why you think someone can't believe that. It's easy. I'm doing it right now. Tons of people are. Spending a year and half as governor of Alaska of all places is not the same thing as being Senator. Not even close.
If you wanna argue that Palin is more prepared to be President than Obama, go right ahead, but you're gonna have trouble convincing folks of that, just like John McCain will. Republicans will believe it, they have to. But the fight isn't among Dems and Republicans anymore, its among independants, and I don't think they're gonna buy into Palin as much you think.
First, you can absolutely make the argument that Obama is more prepared to be President than Palin, because its true. Obama is ready to step in as our commander and chief on day one. Palin has spent her entire politcal career in Alaska. No amount of "bridge to nowhere" bullshit and ethics reform is going to convince me otherwise.
I can believe Palin isn't experienced enough and that Barack Obama is. They are not the same person. They're credentials are not the same. I don't know why you think someone can't believe that. It's easy. I'm doing it right now. Tons of people are. Spending a year and half as governor of Alaska of all places is not the same thing as being Senator. Not even close.
If you wanna argue that Palin is more prepared to be President than Obama, go right ahead, but you're gonna have trouble convincing folks of that, just like John McCain will. Republicans will believe it, they have to. But the fight isn't among Dems and Republicans anymore, its among independants, and I don't think they're gonna buy into Palin as much you think.
- Yankees
- Posts: 4540
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2003 1:00 am
- Location: Fulshear, TX
- Name: Brett Zalaski
- Contact:
That's fine if Obama and Biden don't go negative, but McCain got EXACTLY the response he wanted from Obama's followers.Z, Palin wasn't chosen just to break into Obama's news cycle. Everyone knew the announcement was coming Friday and no matter who he chose, you were going to hear spin artists from the left side go on the attack. The great thing was hearing Obama and Biden themselves refuse to go negative on her, and they actually pulled in the reigns on their own campaign.
And in what world are these petty arguments? Abortion rights are petty arguments? Teaching intelligent design in public schools is a petty argument? Maybe they are petty to you, Z, but to many of us they are very, very important.
All of his followers went negative in showing their dismay at the choice - just as you did above. Palin is, in fact, a good choice - just like Biden was.
Petty was definitely the wrong word. But the importance of them is WAY WAY WAY down the food chain, and should be used as tiebreakers - not campaign issues. The economy, actually funding education, immigration, foreign policy, health care, etc. are the issues that campaigns should be run on. Except Bush won the last two campaigns with the "Can you believe these jackasses want to murder babies?" and the ever popular "Can you believe these assholes think gays should be able to marry?" Obama's speech was saying that while those are issues, they should not be campaign deciding issues - as he stated, the underlying issues are that whatever side of the fence you sit on, unwanted pregnancies are not good, and people who love other people, regardless of gender, should be able to promote their love. And those are answers everyone can support.
Creationism/Intelligent Design ISN'T science, there's nothing scientific about it, therefore it doesn't belong in a science classroom. If you want to teach creationism, teach it at Sunday school or in a religion class. Intelligent Design is a belief, one that has been debunked by scientific evidence.
Drilling for more oil, either in Alaska or offshore, isn't an 'energy plan'. It's steering the same moronic course that got us into trouble in the first place. There simply isn't enough volume out there to make a significant difference in a global petroleum economy that is expanding and will continue to expand unless we make major changes in direction immediately.
Drilling for more oil, either in Alaska or offshore, isn't an 'energy plan'. It's steering the same moronic course that got us into trouble in the first place. There simply isn't enough volume out there to make a significant difference in a global petroleum economy that is expanding and will continue to expand unless we make major changes in direction immediately.
Two things. Totally with you on Intelligent Design, which is bullshit. For it to be a viable theory two things need to happen, 1 is real scientific evidence for its existence, and two is another possibility for the Intelligent Designer besides the Judeo-Christian God (or at least some non-religious type who believes in it). And I say that as someone open to the idea (meaning I would like it to be true).
On the other hand, the major flaw in the argument against drilling is the assumption that banning drilling in Alaska and the continental shelf is going to lower the total amount of oil drilled. If oil isn't drilled here it will be drilled in Russia, the Gulf States, South America, or Africa, and none of those places will drill with the same environmental safeguards that American companies would have to put in place here. Secondly, neither of us are geological experts about oil in ANWR or off the coast, but it is well established that exploiting the oil shale fields in Colorado and the midwest should net reserves greater than the known reserves of Saudi Arabia. Bye Bye dependence on foreign oil right there, and the main source of funding for Radical Islam as well. Within the next 20 years someone will develop the alternative to oil. Meanwhile we still need it, and better it come from us under the watchful eye of liberal wackos like Bren to protect the environment then by CITGO in Venezuela under the corrupt eye of whatever official Chavez feels like putting in charge that week.
On the other hand, the major flaw in the argument against drilling is the assumption that banning drilling in Alaska and the continental shelf is going to lower the total amount of oil drilled. If oil isn't drilled here it will be drilled in Russia, the Gulf States, South America, or Africa, and none of those places will drill with the same environmental safeguards that American companies would have to put in place here. Secondly, neither of us are geological experts about oil in ANWR or off the coast, but it is well established that exploiting the oil shale fields in Colorado and the midwest should net reserves greater than the known reserves of Saudi Arabia. Bye Bye dependence on foreign oil right there, and the main source of funding for Radical Islam as well. Within the next 20 years someone will develop the alternative to oil. Meanwhile we still need it, and better it come from us under the watchful eye of liberal wackos like Bren to protect the environment then by CITGO in Venezuela under the corrupt eye of whatever official Chavez feels like putting in charge that week.
Well said Jake. Those of you against drilling in Alaska, is it just because of the environmental concerns, or is it strictly because its a policy Republicans support? We're a lot more protective of the environment now when it comes to drilling, if you want to see real environmental damage, look at what Standard Oil did to the bayou as far as erosion goes. I recommend picking up the book Bayou Farewell if you're interested in that, its a really interesting read and shows how all of the environmental damage could be stopped for less than the cost of the Big Dig.
The more I hear a lot of Obama supporters talk, the more I'm convinced that they're just anti-Bush sheep that would've voted for a broomstick if that's what the Dems chose to run. The Daily Show (yes I know, a great journalistic source but still) was at the Democratic convention asking people questions about what Obama would do about the situation in Georgia or the mortgage crisis, every single one of them just repeated an Obama campaign soundbite. I don't know what affordable health care has to do with South Ossieta, but that was one response to that question
The more I hear a lot of Obama supporters talk, the more I'm convinced that they're just anti-Bush sheep that would've voted for a broomstick if that's what the Dems chose to run. The Daily Show (yes I know, a great journalistic source but still) was at the Democratic convention asking people questions about what Obama would do about the situation in Georgia or the mortgage crisis, every single one of them just repeated an Obama campaign soundbite. I don't know what affordable health care has to do with South Ossieta, but that was one response to that question
- Yankees
- Posts: 4540
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2003 1:00 am
- Location: Fulshear, TX
- Name: Brett Zalaski
- Contact:
Aaron, you can ask a ton of Republicans about that crap and they'll give you soundbites from the McCain campaign. You can go to your local mall and 75% of the people won't have an idea about what the fuck you're talking about. The only Georgia they know is in the South.
What Stewart show did is a funny bit that's been done 1,000 times in a variety of different ways - it's not just a criticism against Democrats, it's laughing at how uninformed most of the voting public is - and the pendulum swings both ways. I was talking to JP, and he said his store sold a shirt that said "Vote" - and when they asked about it, JP was ask them very basic questions, and no one knew the answers.
It's a sad state of politics that we're in that people just vote for party lines, and get fed the requisite "soundbites" to "back up their vote." I felt totally uninformed going into this election - so I went out and informed myself. I read everything I could get my hands on. I voted for Richardson because he was the candidate that clearly stated his intentions, with most aligning with mine. When I had no clue what Obama's economic policy was I read "Obamanomics" in the New Yorker - and, guess what, between his speech and Obamanomics I know feel comfortable with my vote for him. But that doesn't mean I'm not reading about the RNC.
To pretend a lack of knowledge of a candidate is a Democratic issues is, I'm sorry, assinine.
What Stewart show did is a funny bit that's been done 1,000 times in a variety of different ways - it's not just a criticism against Democrats, it's laughing at how uninformed most of the voting public is - and the pendulum swings both ways. I was talking to JP, and he said his store sold a shirt that said "Vote" - and when they asked about it, JP was ask them very basic questions, and no one knew the answers.
It's a sad state of politics that we're in that people just vote for party lines, and get fed the requisite "soundbites" to "back up their vote." I felt totally uninformed going into this election - so I went out and informed myself. I read everything I could get my hands on. I voted for Richardson because he was the candidate that clearly stated his intentions, with most aligning with mine. When I had no clue what Obama's economic policy was I read "Obamanomics" in the New Yorker - and, guess what, between his speech and Obamanomics I know feel comfortable with my vote for him. But that doesn't mean I'm not reading about the RNC.
To pretend a lack of knowledge of a candidate is a Democratic issues is, I'm sorry, assinine.
- Yankees
- Posts: 4540
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2003 1:00 am
- Location: Fulshear, TX
- Name: Brett Zalaski
- Contact:
And you want to know why all people have is soundbites? It's because they get fed a steady diet of this shit everyday:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jRhN5Et9QQ
PLEASE NOTE: I'm not saying it's just Republicans who spin this shit, but I think everyone on this board can admit this is pretty f'ing funny...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jRhN5Et9QQ
PLEASE NOTE: I'm not saying it's just Republicans who spin this shit, but I think everyone on this board can admit this is pretty f'ing funny...
Totally agreed Z, the major difference between this campaign and past campaigns is that the Obama team has adopted Karl Rove's playbook, so now we have two shallow, sound-bite filled campaigns instead of one like we had in 2000 and 2004. When we have nothing but bullshit from the candidates and their surrogates, the only thing we can rely on is a candidate's record.