# Official "Sarah Palin" thread



## Shark Skin (Aug 29, 2008)

Yahoo/AP said:
			
		

> DENVER - John McCain tapped little-known Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his vice presidential running mate, two senior campaign officials told The Associated Press on Friday.
> ADVERTISEMENT
> 
> A formal announcement was expected within a few hours at a campaign rally in swing-state Ohio.
> ...


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080829/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_mccain_veepstakes


----------



## Raiden (Aug 29, 2008)

Yeah, didn't see that coming. I guess this VP pick will help McCain reach out to Middle America and is bound to draw in Hillary Clinton supporters that so desperately want a female to walk out with power in this election. I think Mit Romney would have been the better and clear choice but I can understand McCain's reasoning here.


----------



## drache (Aug 29, 2008)

But this hasn't been confirmed right?

Because there are reports she is still in Alaska, then again I'd like her to be picked; nothing like balant pandering and hypocrisy to show you who McCain really is.


----------



## Mael (Aug 29, 2008)

Oh dear God...if this is true then my Spider Sense just went haywire the second extremist Clintonistas heard this.


----------



## sadated_peon (Aug 29, 2008)

fucking lol, 

All this shit about Obama's experience and he chooses a VP whose only real political career is serving 1 an a half years as governor of Alaska?

Not to mention the glaring "I know you Clinton bitches only want a woman, so here is a woman."


----------



## Mael (Aug 29, 2008)

sadated_peon said:


> fucking lol,
> 
> All this shit about Obama's experience and he chooses a VP whose only real political career is serving 1 an a half years as governor of Alaska?
> 
> *Not to mention the glaring "I know you Clinton bitches only want a woman, so here is a woman*."



Oh good.  Someone else has cheap trickery Spider Sense like I do.  I swear if I do see women that were Clinton supporters flocking to Palin I will have pretty much lost my faith in many female voters.


----------



## mayumi (Aug 29, 2008)

i find this utterly insulting, he can't possibly believe that this Palin person can equal hilary? that people would vote for him just cause he has a woman on the ticket? he is totally using her. its sad. if something happened to him she would be the president.


----------



## SeventhDan (Aug 29, 2008)

*You know, one could easily raise the question that how in the world could a governer new to the stage and extremely young lead the nation.*

How can Obama lead the nation under the same concept?

Good pick though.


----------



## Rukia (Aug 29, 2008)

It's an unusual pick, but I think you guys are right about why she was chosen.  Hilary fans are disenchanted with Obama skipped over Hilary during the vice presidential selection.  McCain is further attempting to take advantage of this and is doing so by doing what Obama wouldn't...picking a female running mate.


----------



## SeventhDan (Aug 29, 2008)

Hillary was definatly snubbed big time by the DNC. I would have clapped louder if she were McCain's VP.


----------



## sadated_peon (Aug 29, 2008)

SeventhDan said:


> *You know, one could easily raise the question that how in the world could a governer new to the stage and extremely young lead the nation.*
> 
> How can Obama lead the nation under the same concept?
> 
> Good pick though.


Because Obama isn't a governor new to the stage nor is he extremely young. 

How the fuck is 47 extremely young. HE IS OLDER THAN BILL CLINTON WHEN HE RAN FOR PRESIDENT. 

But McCain will be the OLDEST first time president in united states history.


----------



## Xion (Aug 29, 2008)

Now there's a surprise.

A woman? A Republican? A youngin?


----------



## Elim Rawne (Aug 29, 2008)

II Xion II said:


> Now there's a surprise.
> 
> A woman? A Republican? A youngin?



A Virgin?


----------



## Shark Skin (Aug 29, 2008)

drache said:


> But this hasn't been confirmed right?


I'm not sure, but if two of his senior campaign officials say it's so then it must be true. 


WalkingMaelstrom said:


> Oh good.  Someone else has cheap trickery Spider Sense like I do.  I swear if I do see women that were Clinton supporters flocking to Palin I will have pretty much lost my faith in many female voters.


As will I.


----------



## SeventhDan (Aug 29, 2008)

*if I do see women that were Clinton supporters flocking to Palin I will have pretty much lost my faith in many female voters*

an outstanding example of "tollerence" as aspoused by the liberal left.


----------



## drache (Aug 29, 2008)

Rukia said:


> It's an unusual pick, but I think you guys are right about why she was chosen. Hilary fans are disenchanted with Obama skipped over Hilary during the vice presidential selection. McCain is further attempting to take advantage of this and is doing so by doing what Obama wouldn't...picking a female running mate.


 
So you assert that Obama didn't pick a woman for VP not becuase there was no one he felt was qualified but becuase he doesn't like women?

I'm sorry but I'm supposed to believe McCain who laughed when one of his supporters asked 'how do we beat the bitch (Clinton)?; McCain the man who called his wife a c***, McCain the man who has vowed to destroy Roe v Wade completely, McCain the man who thinks it's apporiate to tell rape jokes on the stump, McCain the man who allows himself to be around people that compare rape to the weather. You want to imply that that McCain somehow is more for women then Obama?!?

Let me guess you also have a bridge to sell me



Shark Skin said:


> I'm not sure, but if two of his senior campaign officials say it's so then it must be true.
> 
> As will I.


 

I'm just saying there seems to be alot of chaos about this pick, because 2 other 'senior McCain aides' last night stated that the pick was Romney  

So either McCain doesn't know who he's picking or they're just causing chaos for it's own sake.w

If there's an offical confirmation that would be helpful, I think I'll check the net myself for one


----------



## Elim Rawne (Aug 29, 2008)

SeventhDan said:


> *if I do see women that were Clinton supporters flocking to Palin I will have pretty much lost my faith in many female voters*
> 
> an outstanding example of "tollerence" as aspoused by the liberal left.



tolerance has its limits,especially if a group does something extremely idiotic that effects the whole country.


----------



## Mael (Aug 29, 2008)

SeventhDan said:


> *You know, one could easily raise the question that how in the world could a governer new to the stage and extremely young lead the nation.*
> 
> How can Obama lead the nation under the same concept?
> 
> Good pick though.



Remember Teddy Roosevelt?  Though he was 46 when he was *elected* as POTUS, he was 42-43 when he *became POTUS* due to McKinley's assassination.  The rest...well it's now history but his legacy remains, and he was younger than Obama.

This age thing is starting to annoy me.  Youth =/= lack of qualification.  There have been problems from more experienced presidents, like Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon, Herbert Hoover, hell even Jimmy Carter has issues.



SeventhDan said:


> *if I do see women that were Clinton supporters flocking to Palin I will have pretty much lost my faith in many female voters*
> 
> an outstanding example of "tollerence" as aspoused by the liberal left.



I'm actually a moderate but thanks for playing.  Oh and one shouldn't be callling the kettle black with tolerance.  I give conservatives their share in voicing but not when it's idiotic fear espoused by trolls.  And once again you fail to show your educated side when you can't even spell tolerance correctly.  How can I take a supposed educated man of the Armed Forces seriously when he cannot even spell correctly?

With so many Bushites lingering in the halls of Washington's politics and with the failing Pelosi heading Congress, do you really think McCain can go back to the good McCain and get anything done?


----------



## SeventhDan (Aug 29, 2008)

*Barack Obama's Blueprint for Change*

Read it, what a load of bile.

Like his plan to take tax breaks away from companies who ship jobs overseas. You do that and they will ship them twice as fast!

His blueprint is a 33 page plan for a huge welfare state, a weak defense, a weak country, weak borders and an environmental policy that will piss off the environmental left.

*Remember Teddy Roosevelt? Though he was 46 when he was elected as POTUS, he was 42-43 when he became POTUS due to McKinley's assassination. The rest...well it's now history but his legacy remains, and he was younger than Obama.*

But Teddy was a supporter of a large Navy, a big stick foreign policy and not afraid to threaten maniacs, like the pasha of Tunisia who took the U.S. Ambassador hostage, Teddy threatened the man directly to release the Ambassador within 3 days or he would have his head on a plate.

Obama and Biden are masters of the yellow back 100 yard backwards dash. Few young people know that Biden supported Jimmy Carter in returning the Ayatollah Khomeni to Iran in 1978.


----------



## drache (Aug 29, 2008)

SeventhDan said:


> *Barack Obama's Blueprint for Change*
> 
> Read it, what a load of bile.
> 
> ...


 
So what, by taking away the incentive to ship jobs overseas jobs will be shipped overseas twice as fast? 




And where did you come up with this 'gem' of logic? A fortune cookie?

It seems pretty obvious that you desperately don't want Obama elected, so desperate in fact that you're reduced to making things up and twisting logic.


----------



## Raiden (Aug 29, 2008)

SeventhDan said:


> *You know, one could easily raise the question that how in the world could a governer new to the stage and extremely young lead the nation.*
> 
> How can Obama lead the nation under the same concept?
> 
> Good pick though.



Barack Obama has done a number of things while apart of the Senate, while this VP pick has virtually none:

*Spoiler*: __ 








 I'm not saying this pick is good or bad, but it's a big gamble on McCain's part:


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 29, 2008)

lol at women getting manipulated by this


----------



## Mael (Aug 29, 2008)

SeventhDan said:


> But Teddy was a supporter of a large Navy, a big stick foreign policy and not afraid to threaten maniacs, like the pasha of Tunisia who took the U.S. Ambassador hostage, Teddy threatened the man directly to release the Ambassador within 3 days or he would have his head on a plate.
> 
> Obama and Biden are masters of the yellow back 100 yard backwards dash. Few young people know that Biden supported Jimmy Carter in returning the Ayatollah Khomeni to Iran in 1978.



I'll acknowledge that Carter was FP fail, but you never know if Obama and Biden could actually have a change of attitude in dealing with the assholes of the world.  Stranger things have been known to happen.  Obama won't be another TR that's for sure but we're in a different environment.  I certainly don't expect Bush or the rest of the neocons to make things actually progress.

As for picking Palin?  Well I would certainly love to see how countries would treat a female VP.  She ain't no Condi that's for sure and given the world attitude towards the GOP, it won't be just Middle Eastern nations not listening to her...it might be European as well.

The GOP and McCain are playing serious hardball trying to win over the woman vote.  There's no denying it.  I'll also say that with tolerance, it doesn't mean acceptance.  I could be tolerant of Hillary supporters but that doesn't mean I have to accept if they want to vote McCain now that Palin's in there.  In fact it's not about tolerance, it's about staining the reputation of female voters and politicians.


----------



## SeventhDan (Aug 29, 2008)

*So what, by taking away the incentive to ship jobs overseas jobs will be shipped overseas twice as fast? *

Did I stutter? Why should companies respond to such threats when they hold the cards? Obama's understanding of economics is pathetic.

*so desperate in fact that you're reduced to making things up and twisting logic. *

I'm making things up?



Archived version of a site selling them

Care to explain why he's so willing to give drivers licenses to illegal aliens?

So.....I'm lying? How about these tidbits? Explain these.

*Voted to raise the minimum wage in Illinois from $5.15 an hour to $6.50 an hour over two years. (2003) 

Helped pass a 5 percent earned-income tax credit for low-income working families in 2000; made the credit permanent in 2003. 

Voted to end $300 million worth of tax breaks for businesses. (2004) 

Voted against making permanent the repeal of the state?s 5 percent sales tax on gasoline. (2000)

HEALTH CARE= 
Voted for having Illinois endorse embryonic stem cell research. (2004) 
Successfully sponsored the Health Care Justice Act, a study of ways to implement a universal health care system statewide. (2004) 
Voted against restrictions on public funding of abortion. (2000) 
Successfully co-sponsored a prescription drug discount buying club program for seniors and the disabled. (2003)

CRIME & GUN CONTROL 
Voted against letting people argue self-defense in court if charged with violating local weapons bans by using a gun in their home. (2004) 
Voted to let retired police and military police carry concealed weapons. (2004) 
Successfully sponsored requirement that law enforcement videotape interrogations of suspects in some serious crimes. (2003) 
Successfully sponsored law enforcement study of the race of people pulled over for traffic tickets. (2003) 
Helped pass an overhaul of the state?s troubled death penalty system. (2003) 
Unsuccessfully sponsored measure to expunge some criminal records and create an employment grant program for ex-criminals. (2002) 
Unsuccessfully sponsored limit of one handgun purchase per month. (2000) 
Voted against making gang members eligible for the death penalty if they kill someone to help their gang. (2001)

MISCELLANEOUS 
Unsuccessfully co-sponsored ban on discrimination based on sexual orientation. The measure became law after Obama was elected to the U.S. Senate. (2003) 
Successfully sponsored move to shield Illinois workers from federal rules that threatened overtime pay for some employees. 
Successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform called the Gift Ban Act. (1998) 
Voted against giving tax credits to parents who send their children to private school. (1999) *


----------



## Lord Yu (Aug 29, 2008)

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, I see what you did there McCain.


----------



## SeventhDan (Aug 29, 2008)

*I certainly don't expect Bush or the rest of the neocons to make things actually progress.*

Like John McCain's Iraq surge, which is working BTW.


----------



## Mael (Aug 29, 2008)

SeventhDan said:


> *I certainly don't expect Bush or the rest of the neocons to make things actually progress.*
> 
> Like John McCain's Iraq surge, which is working BTW.



And the Sons of Iraq?  The tribal shieks who had enough of al-Qaida's indiscriminate killings?  The fact that some Iraqi politicians actually want to get along?  The Iraqi Army actually wanting to get stuff done now?  I gather you don't think they get any of the credit since they're mostly responsible for it.  The surge backed them up.  Hell even General Petraeus said himself that the Iraqis deserve most of the credit and the surge just helped.

It doesn't change the fact that even though I'm in the Armed Forces, Bush and Cheney are still fuckups and have depleted me of any respect I'd ever have for a neocon, Bible-thumper politicians, and snarling VPs.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 29, 2008)

why u stupid asses wanna vote old people in office? they never helped you!  AARP is one of the largest if not largest lobbies in the US, and they only help themselves!


----------



## Shark Skin (Aug 29, 2008)

SeventhDan said:


> So.....I'm lying? How about these tidbits? Explain these.
> 
> 
> *Spoiler*: __
> ...



That's all supposed to be bad?


----------



## Mael (Aug 29, 2008)

narutosimpson said:


> why u stupid asses wanna vote old people in office? they never helped you!  AARP is one of the largest if not largest lobbies in the US, and they only help themselves!



As odd as it is I'm going to side with you on this.  Older age doesn't equate to knowing how to do your job.  Sometimes being older is worse because you're usually so set in your ways it's harder to adapt.  Youth is not completely bad, and SD, you always mention young people so how old exactly are you?  I mean...you are on NF.

I cannot vote Republican despite my respect I have for McCain.  I just cannot.  You can call McCain a fairweather Republican but he's ten times more of a politician than anything else the Republicans have right now.  Bush and Cheney have fucked up so badly with so many things that the party has just left an awful taste in my mouth.  Katherine Harris, Jeb Bush, Tom DeLay, Alberto Gonzalez, Ashcroft, Rummy (I mean the stuff he has said...), that gay Senator from Oregon, and so many others have just eroded my trust so immensely that it'll take a while before I could trust another Republican.  I think the only Rep I could respect is Condi because she's actually very intelligent (I was lucky enough to meet her in DC once) and tried to bring some sensibility to the table to counter Cheney's murderous appetite.


----------



## Elim Rawne (Aug 29, 2008)

Did you even read it?


----------



## drache (Aug 29, 2008)

SeventhDan said:


> I'm making things up?


 
yes you are



SeventhDan said:


> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...


oh look bullshit, here go educate yourself Link removed

I'm not going to wade though all that crap but odds are there's not a bone of truth in either site, espeically given how the top ones are about how Obama is a secert Muslim.

You don't have to like his policies but this fear mongering is just wrong.



SeventhDan said:


> Care to explain why he's so willing to give drivers licenses to illegal aliens?


 
why don't you provide the link, proof and context and then I'll go from there.


SeventhDan said:


> *Voted to raise the minimum wage in Illinois from $5.15 an hour to $6.50 an hour over two years. (2003) *


 


Is this supposed to be a bad thing or is this just a trick question?



SeventhDan said:


> *Helped pass a 5 percent earned-income tax credit for low-income working families in 2000; made the credit permanent in 2003. *


 
Again  is this suposed to  be a bad thing or a trick question?



SeventhDan said:


> *Voted to end $300 million worth of tax breaks for businesses. (2004) *


 
Provide the bill not your own slanted, biased opnion.



SeventhDan said:


> *Voted against making permanent the repeal of the state?s 5 percent sales tax on gasoline. (2000)*


 
You are aware that that tax is what keeps the roads in repair right? There's no magic fairies that repair the roads while yuo sleep.



SeventhDan said:


> *HEALTH CARE= *
> *Voted for having Illinois endorse embryonic stem cell research. (2004) *




Again how is this a bad thing? Or is this a trick question?



SeventhDan said:


> *Successfully sponsored the Health Care Justice Act, a study of ways to implement a universal health care system statewide. (2004) *
> *Voted against restrictions on public funding of abortion. (2000) *
> *Successfully co-sponsored a prescription drug discount buying club program for seniors and the disabled. (2003)*


 
Provide the bills not your summaries and if you won't I will. I know the full context, do you? 



SeventhDan said:


> *CRIME & GUN CONTROL *
> *Voted against letting people argue self-defense in court if charged with violating local weapons bans by using a gun in their home. (2004) *
> *Voted to let retired police and military police carry concealed weapons. (2004) *
> *Successfully sponsored requirement that law enforcement videotape interrogations of suspects in some serious crimes. (2003) *
> ...


 
You know I'm tired of doing this piece by peice, what we have here is a rant and you won't even provide the bills these things were in.

You are at worst a liar and at best just misinformed. I'm not wasting my time if you're not going to provide full reference.


----------



## Amaretti (Aug 29, 2008)

*Obama is off topic. There are plenty of other threads to discuss him, leave this thread to discussion of McCain's VP choice.*


You know, I never disliked McCain and figured that even if Obama lost, he'd still be a change.

But I find this move patronising and shallow. He's passed over men to go straight for a woman with very little experience and more beauty pageant credentials than political. Fuck him. Fuck him with a rusty chainsaw. If women fall for this shit, they ought to kill themselves.


----------



## Flagg1982 (Aug 29, 2008)

Very clever choice.


----------



## drache (Aug 29, 2008)

I'm still searching for a handy useable link but yeah it's definitely offical.

So my thoughts:

I can't believe McCain was stupid enough to take the experience arguement off the table to secure Alaska, I mean is that how desperate McCain feels? I mean we're talking about a woman who while Obama was securing loose nuclear weapons was a *part time* mayor of 6,000 people.

I also can't beleive that McCain thinks he'll get away with such naked and balant pandering. I mean this isn't a person who is qualified and happens to be a woman, this is a woman who was chosen because she's a woman. Women should be outraged at such sexism and at such disregaurd for thier ability to think.

Also why the hell would McCain choose someone who just last month said this:


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 29, 2008)

Hmm. I was expecting him to pick Lieberman to try to draw over the Democratic malcontents, considering Lieberman's own political history...

This... eh, as much as I'd like a woman on the ballot, pick one who has more to offer than just her gender. Though admittedly, I know nothing about her yet. =/

[eta] Oh, _that_ one. Yeah, she is supposed to be good.


----------



## Raiden (Aug 29, 2008)

I'm listening to her acceptance speech now....I think I can see why McCain chose her:

a. She has a family member that is going to be deployed to Iraq on September 11th. That should give McCain some sort of gain in the patriotic families/families that have others enlisted in the military.

b. She's supposedly a "soccer mom." I suppose this will help her reach out to the Middle Class.

c. She is Commander of the National Guard in Alaska. Republicans argue that this shows that she does have the experience to be the VP, and if necessary, the President.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 29, 2008)

WalkingMaelstrom said:


> As odd as it is I'm going to side with you on this.  Older age doesn't equate to knowing how to do your job.  Sometimes being older is worse because you're usually so set in your ways it's harder to adapt.  Youth is not completely bad, and SD, you always mention young people so how old exactly are you?  I mean...you are on NF.
> 
> I cannot vote Republican despite my respect I have for McCain.  I just cannot.  You can call McCain a fairweather Republican but he's ten times more of a politician than anything else the Republicans have right now.  Bush and Cheney have fucked up so badly with so many things that the party has just left an awful taste in my mouth.  Katherine Harris, Jeb Bush, Tom DeLay, Alberto Gonzalez, Ashcroft, Rummy (I mean the stuff he has said...), that gay Senator from Oregon, and so many others have just eroded my trust so immensely that it'll take a while before I could trust another Republican.  I think the only Rep I could respect is Condi because she's actually very intelligent (I was lucky enough to meet her in DC once) and tried to bring some sensibility to the table to counter Cheney's murderous appetite.



I'm probably around ur age.  Don't equate old age and wisdom at all.  I bet the most corrupt people are also the older ones, while the least corrupt are the younger ones.  This guy mccain and his wife have seven houses.  Most of us might not even own one with our current national situations.  It's such a joke.  There wont' be social security when we get old,  Im' gonna have to make 10 kids in the next 10 years, hope one of them helps me out when i'm old and dying.  Foreigners are running this country now and living the sweet life while everyday americans break their back, and young people can't afford an education even if they wanted one.  There's alot of trouble up ahead choosing the same shit over and over again.  

I'm cool i got plenty of money saved up, something i doubt most of u can say because most people have ZERO SAVINGS.  I also speak enough languages to go live on some exotic island eating coconuts, if my savings don't last.  Lastly i got an education, there's always work for me, even if it's work cheating people out of their money. Bothers me to see people make horrible decisions, but either way i'll be fine.



Amaretti said:


> *Obama is off topic. There are plenty of other threads to discuss him, leave this thread to discussion of McCain's VP choice.*
> 
> 
> You know, I never disliked McCain and figured that even if Obama lost, he'd still be a change.
> ...



it's a joke, at least dems were just votes away from putting a woman at the front of the ticket.  Makes me think repubs would have put keys on their ticket and played this trick against blacks.  Man don't fall for these dirty rotten tricks.


----------



## Xion (Aug 29, 2008)

Could he have picked anyone more inexperienced? 

If he wanted a woman, he should have nominated Hillary.


----------



## Lord Yu (Aug 29, 2008)

I watched her speech at the rally. It was brilliantly epic lulz. God this is hilarious.


----------



## Lezard Valeth (Aug 29, 2008)

It doesn't smell tactics.
McBush is totally not trying to catch bitter Hillary supporters.

Anyway, if McBush wins, he'll trash her like the puppet she is, and pick another old man for VP.


----------



## Denji (Aug 29, 2008)

Wow.

McCain may very well have thrown the election with this pick. If I were a woman, I would be insulted at this transparent and obvious ploy to try and convert Hillary supporters. She has no real qualifications, certainly not to be President were something to happen to McCain.

This election is now Obama's and Biden's to win. I think they have this in the bag now.


----------



## Superrazien (Aug 29, 2008)

He must of felt desperate after Bill, Hillary. Biden, Gore, and Obama pwnd the republicans. Its a smart move though, McCain knows alot of people arn't looking at qualification, just what you look like. By picking a Woman its sure to help him.


----------



## Xion (Aug 29, 2008)

Lezard_Valeth said:


> It doesn't smell tactics.
> McBush is totally not trying to catch bitter Hillary supporters.
> 
> Anyway, if McBush wins, he'll trash her like the puppet she is, and pick another old man for VP.



If you say McBush one more time, I will buy a McNugget and shove it down your McThroat. McComprendes?


----------



## Raiden (Aug 29, 2008)

You know Yu, I can't believe it myself, but ofcourse, if the Obama Camp flat out says that this is ridiculous, they will be accused of using dirty/old world politics.

Picking her was the perfect demonstration of the fact that McCain will say or do anything to win the election, as if shifting on policies was not enough. 

For now, the only good thing that is pick does for Obama is that it takes experience off the table indefinitely.


----------



## drache (Aug 29, 2008)

Oh I forgot, she's also in favor of Obama's energy plan:
What if : somehow someone was able to control two bijuus at once, say, naruto...

I had to use google cache because apparently this press release has 'disappeared' (silly GOP nothing is lost in the internet)


----------



## Elim Rawne (Aug 29, 2008)

in b4 BI


----------



## drache (Aug 29, 2008)

Raiden said:


> I'm listening to her acceptance speech now....I think I can see why McCain chose her:
> 
> a. She has a family member that is going to be deployed to Iraq on September 11th. That should give McCain some sort of gain in the patriotic families/families that have others enlisted in the military.


 
And Biden has family going to, I mean if we've devolved to that stage then this is just childish on McCain's part



Raiden said:


> c. She is Commander of the National Guard in Alaska. Republicans argue that this shows that she does have the experience to be the VP, and if necessary, the President.


 
The govenor of *any* state is by default the Commander of that state's National Guard so this makes absolutely no sense. She wasn't chosen to lead the National Guard, she was elected Govenor and so gets to lead because of that.

And being the National Guard Commander of one the smallest states prepares you for the VP how? I wasn't aware the VP could call out the national guard to deal with emergencies.


----------



## Lord Yu (Aug 29, 2008)




----------



## Simulacrum (Aug 29, 2008)

Let's look at her record. 



			
				wikipedia said:
			
		

> Palin served two terms on the Wasilla City Council from 1992 to 1996. In 1996, she challenged and defeated the incumbent mayor, criticizing wasteful spending and high taxes.[4] The ex-mayor and sheriff tried to organize a recall campaign, but failed.[4] Palin kept her campaign promises by reducing her own salary, as well as reducing property taxes by 60%.[4] She ran for reelection against the former mayor in 1999, winning by an even larger margin.[4][6] Palin was also elected president of the Alaska Conference of Mayors.[7]
> 
> In 2002, Palin made an unsuccessful bid for Lieutenant Governor, coming in second to Loren Leman in a four-way race. After Frank Murkowski resigned from his long-held U.S. Senate seat in mid-term to become governor, Palin interviewed to be his possible successor. Instead, Murkowski appointed his daughter, then-Alaska State Representative Lisa Murkowski.[4]
> 
> ...



This is exactly the kind of person that was needed on the Republican ticket and she compliments McCain rather well, with him being one of only a handful of senators that hasn't spent any tax dollars via earmarks and is running on spending and tax reform. It's also nice that the inexperienced name is on the bottom of the ticket.


----------



## Jin-E (Aug 29, 2008)

Diceman said:


> A Virgin?



Heard she had 5 kids, so i doubt it


----------



## Mael (Aug 29, 2008)

II Xion II said:


> If you say McBush one more time, I will buy a McNugget and shove it down your McThroat. McComprendes?



Lulz.



drache said:


> The govenor of *any* state is by default the Commander of that state's National Guard so this makes absolutely no sense. She wasn't chosen to lead the National Guard, she was elected Govenor and so gets to lead because of that.
> 
> And being the National Guard Commander of one the smallest states prepares you for the VP how? I wasn't aware the VP could call out the national guard to deal with emergencies.



Shitt Romney was the governor of MA for a while and when I just started my stint in the National Guard.  Big deal.  He's still a massive douchebag.  The whole Guard thing, while nice and all, could be said about any governor no matter how good or bad he/she was.  Bad appeal attempt.


----------



## sadated_peon (Aug 29, 2008)

Wikipedia said:
			
		

> Palin served two terms on the Wasilla City Council from 1992 to 1996. In 1996, she challenged and defeated the incumbent mayor, criticizing wasteful spending and high taxes.[4] The ex-mayor and sheriff tried to organize a recall campaign, but failed.[4] Palin kept her campaign promises by reducing her own salary, as well as reducing property taxes by 60%.[4] She ran for reelection against the former mayor in 1999, winning by an even larger margin.[4][6] Palin was also elected president of the Alaska Conference of Mayors.[7]


Lol, Wasilla city 



“As of the 2000 census, its population was 5,470. The 2005 estimate gives it a population of 8,471”

Community college student government has to manage more people than this. 



			
				Wikipedia said:
			
		

> In 2002, Palin made an unsuccessful bid for Lieutenant Governor, coming in second to Loren Leman in a four-way race. After Frank Murkowski resigned from his long-held U.S. Senate seat in mid-term to become governor, Palin interviewed to be his possible successor. Instead, Murkowski appointed his daughter, then-Alaska State Representative Lisa Murkowski.[4]


Break for 1 year….



			
				Wikipedia said:
			
		

> Governor Murkowski appointed Palin Ethics Commissioner of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission,[8] where she served from 2003 to 2004 until resigning in protest over what she called the "lack of ethics" of fellow Alaskan Republican leaders, who ignored her whistleblowing complaints of legal violations and conflicts of interest.[4] After she resigned, she exposed the state Republican Party's chairman, Randy Ruedrich, one of her fellow Oil & Gas commissioners, who was accused of doing work for the party on public time, and supplying a lobbyist with a sensitive e-mail.[9] Palin filed formal complaints against both Ruedrich and former Alaska Attorney General Gregg Renkes, who both resigned; Ruedrich paid a record $12,000 fine.


Though not really a stellar record of accomplishment. 
Well, at least she resigned.



			
				Wikipedia said:
			
		

> In 2006, Palin, running on a clean-government campaign, executed an upset victory over then-Gov. Murkowski in the Republican gubernatorial primary.[4] Despite the lack of support from party leaders and being outspent by her Democratic opponent, she went on to win the general election in November 2006, defeating former Governor Tony Knowles.[4] Palin said in 2006 that education, public safety, and transportation would be three cornerstones of her administration.[10]


2 years break then in 2006 she enters her real political career. 




			
				Simulacrum said:
			
		

> This is exactly the kind of person that was needed on the Republican ticket and she compliments McCain rather well, with him being one of only a handful of senators that hasn't spent any tax dollars via earmarks and is running on spending and tax reform. It's also nice that the inexperienced name is on the bottom of the ticket.


I think you missed those straw you were grasping for. 

But let me get this straight you approve of him having an inexperienced VP? After all your BS about Obama you don’t see a problem with McCain choosing his understudy being inexperienced. Hypocrisy much?


----------



## drache (Aug 29, 2008)

Simulacrum said:


> Let's look at her record.
> 
> 
> 
> This is exactly the kind of person that was needed on the Republican ticket and she compliments McCain rather well, with him being one of only a handful of senators that hasn't spent any tax dollars via earmarks and is running on spending and tax reform. It's also nice that the inexperienced name is on the bottom of the ticket.


 
Really? 

You know they say memory is the first thing that goes with age.

And you never really addressed the Govenor's qualifications.

How does any of that set her up to be a heart beat away from being president?

Can you really say with a striaght face that if she were a man she'd have been choosen?


----------



## LayZ (Aug 29, 2008)

When I first heard about this, I was shocked and kind of confused.  But its refreshing and could be historic, I guess. 

If this is an attempt to get Hillary Supporters, then I don't think its gonna work.  If you know anything about women you know they're emotional and you have to earn their trust.  They like Hillary because they know her story and they felt like they've gone through a lot with her.  They felt her pain, witnessed her journey, and most importantly they trust her.  

To me, its like they're saying "We've got a woman and they don't.  I mean, you have no idea who she is but she's a woman.  She'll still be secondary to man, unless something horrible happens and then we'll be forced to give her real power.  You're women, she's a woman; what more do you want?"

But I'm not Hillary Supporter, so I wouldn't really know how they'll take it.


----------



## Mintaka (Aug 29, 2008)

I wonder if she eats whale blubber.......


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 29, 2008)

drache said:


> Really?
> 
> You know they say memory is the first thing that goes with age.
> 
> ...



i wouldn't say it's so much a man/woman issue as repubs taking advantage of the recent feminist anger.  I don't doubt they would have done it if obama lost the primaries, have a black republican up there.


----------



## sadated_peon (Aug 29, 2008)

lol, after all the complaints about Obama being a celeb, 

McCain VP came second in the Miss Alaska beauty pageant and then went on to be a sports reporter. 

The more I hear the funnier it gets.


----------



## Mael (Aug 29, 2008)

narutosimpson said:


> i wouldn't say it's so much a man/woman issue as repubs taking advantage of the recent feminist anger.  I don't doubt they would have done it if obama lost the primaries, have *a black republican up there*.



Not being a dick or anything but...such a thing exists?


----------



## strongarm85 (Aug 29, 2008)

drache said:


> I'm sorry but I'm supposed to believe McCain who laughed when one of his supporters asked 'how do we beat the bitch (Clinton)?; McCain the man who called his wife a c***, McCain the man who has vowed to destroy Roe v Wade completely, McCain the man who thinks it's apporiate to tell rape jokes on the stump, McCain the man who allows himself to be around people that compare rape to the weather. You want to imply that that McCain somehow is more for women then Obama?!?



Links or it didn't happen.


----------



## Vanity (Aug 29, 2008)

It seems like he's trying to get that women vote here from what Hillary had. :/


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 29, 2008)

WalkingMaelstrom said:


> Not being a dick or anything but...such a thing exists?



plenty, more than a handful.  U said condy urself.  Powell, keyes, that athlete turned governor for PA, lynn swan? he's republican right?  Alot of law enforcement and military blacks lean conservative/republican i think.

It's just that republican party seems to shut them out on purpose.  well the massive amount of redneck hillbilly votes is worth more to shut out the voice of few african american conservatives.


----------



## LayZ (Aug 29, 2008)

WalkingMaelstrom said:


> Not being a dick or anything but...such a thing exists?


Of course they do.  Its just that a lot black people don't like them.


----------



## Lord Yu (Aug 29, 2008)

WalkingMaelstrom said:


> Not being a dick or anything but...such a thing exists?



Ken Blackwell


----------



## Mael (Aug 29, 2008)

LayZ said:


> Of course they do.  Its just that a lot black people don't like them.



Well I can see why.  Nothing like the Boondocks and Aaron McGruder to help distort the image of a black Republican.



narutosimpson said:


> plenty, more than a handful.  U said condy urself.  Powell, keyes, that athlete turned governor for PA, lynn swan? he's republican right?  Alot of law enforcement and military blacks lean conservative/republican i think.
> 
> It's just that republican party seems to shut them out on purpose.  well the massive amount of redneck hillbilly votes is worth more to shut out the voice of few african american conservatives.



Shit I forgot about Condi in that previous post.  I was thinking of the "Racial Draft" from The Chappelle Show and somehow the black ethnicity faded.  I was also going to saw Colin Powell but then I forgot if he even had a political leaning.  If he is a Republican I certainly respect him.

Being in the Army, I see it both ways.  There are shockingly a decent portion of military members who are liberal.  As for blacks in the military, I've seen their politics on both sides.  Their upbringing and personality usually differ from person to person and explain their party loyalty more than race.

On a more on-topic note: I would love to see how PUMA reacted to this VP decision.


----------



## drache (Aug 29, 2008)

strongarm85 said:


> Links or it didn't happen.


 
sure I'll even provide video


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 29, 2008)

WalkingMaelstrom said:


> Shit I forgot about Condi in that previous post.  I was thinking of the "Racial Draft" from The Chappelle Show and somehow the black ethnicity faded.  I was also going to saw Colin Powell but then I forgot if he even had a political leaning.  If he is a Republican I certainly respect him.



powell was the bushies first sec of state and beat that iraq war drum hard, should be pres or vp now but bush ruined it for him with the iraq shit.  Powell wasn't a cross party appointment either.  He's expected to endorse obama against his own party, i think he did already.



> Being in the Army, I see it both ways.  There are shockingly a decent portion of military members who are liberal.  As for blacks in the military, I've seen their politics on both sides.  Their upbringing and personality usually differ from person to person and explain their party loyalty more than race.
> 
> On a more on-topic note: I would love to see how PUMA reacted to this VP decision.



I would think black officers could easily lean republican, enlisted not as much ,due to level of education and net worth, things like this.

puma probably wet their pants (or dusted their panties, seeing how they are a bunch of old bitches) and don't know what to do.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 29, 2008)

Blatant pandering, no doubt about it. Anyone should be able to see through this ploy, but millions will not...


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 29, 2008)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Blatant pandering, no doubt about it. Anyone should be able to see through this ploy, but millions will not...



it's hard to believe that they can see through any ploys anymore.


----------



## Radical Dreamer (Aug 29, 2008)

Let's remind folks here for a second:

Two years as a governor is greater than ten years in the senate. A Senator doesn't do JACK SHIT when it comes to administration. As a governor, and as a leader, Sarah Palin *still* has more experience than Obama.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 29, 2008)

so she should be at the top of the ticket, not mccain


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 29, 2008)

WalkingMaelstrom said:


> Well I can see why.  Nothing like the Boondocks and Aaron McGruder to help distort the image of a black Republican.



People like Jesse Lee Peterson (ugh) and the NBRA (bigger ugh) didn't really do much for improving the image of black Republicans either.


----------



## Killa Cam (Aug 29, 2008)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Blatant pandering, no doubt about it. Anyone should be able to see through this ploy, but millions will not...



Giving women too much credit. These are the same people who would vote for McCain just out of spite.


----------



## Radical Dreamer (Aug 29, 2008)

narutosimpson said:


> so she should be at the top of the ticket, not mccain


I would actually have to agree with you there. I would much rather see someone who's actually done work concordant to being a President running. I honestly don't even like McCain; he's just more reliable than Obama. 


*Spoiler*: _My Pick for President?_ 






Too bad he's not on the South Carolina ticket.


----------



## Xion (Aug 29, 2008)

Killa Cam said:


> Giving women too much credit. These are the same people who would vote for McCain just out of spite.



Don't worry. The VP is just there to make McCain sammiches and to change his diaper.


----------



## Radical Dreamer (Aug 29, 2008)

Okay, you guys seem really misinformed about this lady so I'll help you out. Everything is on her public voting record and proposals which is all public information. Feel free, and I encourage this, to go and look for yourselves rather than saying Palin is just to draw Hilary supporters.

-She has _fought to tax oil companies *in* Alaska_ and has done so to great effect. Alaska is now out of the red and has a large budget surplus.

-Palin has campaigned _against_ Ted Stevens and has decried his silly earmarks in legislation.  

-Her approval rating at home is above 90%. 

-She is for taxing oil companies and expanding searching for new oil reserves to get off of foreign dependency. 

-She was head of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. That commission was created to find new ways to bring oil into the American market.

In all honesty, yeah, a bit of McCain's thinking was probably to get the batshit insane Hillary people. On the other hand, Mrs. Palin has been a champion against oil companies and trying to get us energy independent. Not only that, she's also balked the more dug-in Republicans in her state. 

Seriously, she was a good pick no matter how you slice it.


----------



## Garlock (Aug 29, 2008)

The Entire McCain campaign has been run with Hypocrisy. First he bashes women, and then he picks a VP thats got tits to appease the dems who are still sour over Hilary's loss. McCain slams Obama for Inexperience, while this woman has been a governor for an obscure state filled with Ice and Polar Bears, for less time than Obama has been in the Senate... 

Biden will destroy her in the debates, this will be like Spongebob vs Blackbeard.


----------



## Suzume (Aug 29, 2008)

Ah, another reason bitter Clinton voters should vote for McCain, he's old and she's a woman!  If he dies in office we could have the first female president 

But on a serious note this pissed me off.  I liked Romney a lot better.  This woman is just....  No, that's not fair, I know next to nothing about this woman.  I just liked Romney


----------



## Killa Cam (Aug 29, 2008)

Radical Dreamer said:


> In all honesty, yeah, a bit of McCain's thinking was probably to get the batshit insane Hillary people. On the other hand, Mrs. Palin has been a champion against oil companies and trying to get us energy independent. Not only that, she's also balked the more dug-in Republicans in her state.
> 
> Seriously, she was a good pick no matter how you slice it.



If Palin was born with a penis, she'd still be living in an igloo.


----------



## Radical Dreamer (Aug 29, 2008)

Killa Cam said:


> If Palin was born with a penis, she'd still be living in an igloo.


And Obama came from the most corrupt and violent city in America. Your point?

Who cares where you come from as long as you get the fucking job done.


----------



## sadated_peon (Aug 29, 2008)

Radical Dreamer said:


> And Obama came from the most corrupt and violent city in America. Your point?
> 
> Who cares where you come from as long as you get the fucking job done.



Obama came from Detroit?


----------



## KonohaWind (Aug 29, 2008)

This video sums up my opinion on McCain.


[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Oot9IbQxrI[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Garlock (Aug 29, 2008)

Radical Dreamer said:


> Okay, you guys seem really misinformed about this lady so I'll help you out. Everything is on her public voting record and proposals which is all public information. Feel free, and I encourage this, to go and look for yourselves rather than saying Palin is just to draw Hilary supporters.
> 
> -She has _fought to tax oil companies *in* Alaska_ and has done so to great effect. Alaska is now out of the red and has a large budget surplus.
> 
> ...



Yes, and while were at it, we should have Charlie Crist, Jeb Bush, and Gov. Arnold on that Cabin, since it seems like that would be the dream team that would lead us into Armageddon when world war 3 begins.

This is Alaska, its some small godforsaken out in the middle of nowhere state in the north. Alaska is nothing compared to the United States. The general populace of that State is smaller than the average states, and you're going to just say "Oh he MAYBE picked her to get the Hilary people," 

Clearly you either have not enough experience in politics to understand reading the meaning behind the meanings, or you're just some blind idiot who can't see what is 6 inches in front of your face.


----------



## KonohaWind (Aug 29, 2008)

sadated_peon said:


> Obama came from Detroit?



No, Radicle Drummer is wrong.  Obama came from Hawaii, which last time I checked, isn't Detroit.


----------



## Killa Cam (Aug 29, 2008)

Radical Dreamer said:


> And Obama came from the most corrupt and violent city in America. Your point?
> 
> Who cares where you come from as long as you get the fucking job done.



You seem to overlook my point. McCain wouldn't have made the choice if she was a man.


----------



## Garlock (Aug 29, 2008)

For those who don't know about Barack Obama:

Barack Hussein Obama II is the nominee of the Democratic Party for the office of President of the United States in the 2008 general election. He is the first African American to be a major political party's nominee for this office. Obama is currently the junior United States Senator from Illinois.

A graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School, where he served as president of the Harvard Law Review, Obama worked as a community organizer and practiced as a civil rights attorney before serving in the Illinois Senate from 1997 to 2004. He taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School from 1992 to 2004. Following an unsuccessful bid for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives in 2000, he announced his campaign for the U.S. Senate in January 2003. After a primary victory in March 2004, Obama delivered the keynote address at the Democratic National Convention in July 2004. He was elected to the Senate in November 2004 with 70% of the vote.

As a member of the Democratic minority in the 109th Congress, he helped create legislation to control conventional weapons and to promote greater public accountability in the use of federal funds. He also made official trips to Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. During the 110th Congress, he helped create legislation regarding lobbying and electoral fraud, climate change, nuclear terrorism, and care for returned U.S. military personnel. After announcing his presidential campaign in February 2007, Obama emphasized withdrawing American troops from Iraq, energy independence, decreasing the influence of lobbyists, and promoting universal health care as top national priorities.

Barack Hussein Obama II was born on August 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Obama, Sr., a Black Kenyan of Nyang’oma Kogelo, Siaya District, Kenya, and Ann Dunham, a White American from Wichita, Kansas. His parents met while attending the University of Hawaii at Manoa, where his father was a foreign student. They separated when he was two years old and later divorced. Obama's father returned to Kenya and saw him only once more before dying in an automobile accident in 1982. After her divorce, Dunham married Lolo Soetoro, and the family moved to Soetoro's home country of Indonesia in 1967, where Obama attended local schools in Jakarta until he was ten years old. He then returned to Honolulu to live with his maternal grandparents while attending Punahou School from the fifth grade in 1971 until his graduation from high school in 1979. Obama's mother returned to Hawaii in 1972 for several years and then back to Indonesia for her fieldwork. She died of ovarian cancer in 1995. As an adult Obama admitted that during high school he used cocaine, marijuana, and alcohol, which he described at the Saddleback Church Civil Forum on the Presidency as his greatest moral failure.

Following high school, Barack Obama moved to Los Angeles, where he studied at Occidental College for two years. He then transferred to Columbia University in New York City, where he majored in political science with a specialization in international relations. Obama graduated with a B.A. from Columbia in 1983, then worked for a year at the Business International Corporation and then at the New York Public Interest Research Group.

After four years in New York City, Obama moved to Chicago to work as a community organizer for three years from June 1985 to May 1988 as director of the Developing Communities Project (DCP), a church-based community organization originally comprising eight Catholic parishes in Greater Roseland (Roseland, West Pullman, and Riverdale) on Chicago's far South Side. During his three years as the DCP's director, its staff grew from 1 to 13 and its annual budget grew from $70,000 to $400,000, with accomplishments including helping set up a job training program, a college preparatory tutoring program, and a tenants' rights organization in Altgeld Gardens. Obama also worked as a consultant and instructor for the Gamaliel Foundation, a community organizing institute. In mid-1988, he traveled for the first time to Europe for three weeks then Kenya for five weeks where he met many of his Kenyan relatives for the first time.

Obama entered Harvard Law School in late 1988 and at the end of his first year was selected as an editor of the Harvard Law Review based on his grades and a writing competition. In his second year he was elected president of the Law Review, a full-time volunteer position functioning as editor-in-chief and supervising the law review's staff of 80 editors. Obama's election in February 1990 as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review was widely reported and followed by several long, detailed profiles. He graduated with a Juris Doctor (J.D.) magna cum laude from Harvard in 1991 and returned to Chicago where he had worked as a summer associate at the law firms of Sidley & Austin in 1989 and Hopkins & Sutter in 1990.

The publicity from his election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review led to a contract and advance to write a book about race relations. In an effort to recruit him to their faculty, the University of Chicago Law School provided Obama with a fellowship and an office to work on his book. He originally planned to finish the book in one year, but it took much longer as the book evolved into a personal memoir. In order to work without interruptions, Obama and his wife, Michelle, traveled to Bali where he wrote for several months. The manuscript was finally published as Dreams from My Father in mid-1995.

Obama directed Illinois Project Vote from April to October 1992, a voter registration drive with a staff of 10 and 700 volunteers that achieved its goal of registering 150,000 of 400,000 unregistered African Americans in the state, leading Crain's Chicago Business to name Obama to its 1993 list of "40 under Forty" powers to be.

Obama taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School for twelve years, as a Lecturer for four years (1992–1996), and as a Senior Lecturer for eight years (1996–2004).

In 1993 Obama joined Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, a 12-attorney law firm specializing in civil rights litigation and neighborhood economic development, where he was an associate for three years from 1993 to 1996, then of counsel from 1996 to 2004, with his law license becoming inactive in 2002.

Obama was a founding member of the board of directors of Public Allies in 1992, resigning before his wife, Michelle, became the founding executive director of Public Allies Chicago in early 1993. He served on the board of directors of the Woods Fund of Chicago, which in 1985 had been the first foundation to fund Obama's DCP, from 1993–2002, and served on the board of directors of The Joyce Foundation from 1994–2002. Obama served on the board of directors of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge from 1995–2002, as founding president and chairman of the board of directors from 1995–1999. He also served on the board of directors of the Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the Center for Neighborhood Technology, and the Lugenia Burns Hope Center.


----------



## Cold (Aug 29, 2008)

Radical Dreamer said:


> Let's remind folks here for a second:
> 
> Two years as a governor is greater than ten years in the senate. A Senator doesn't do JACK SHIT when it comes to administration. As a governor, and as a leader, Sarah Palin *still* has more experience than Obama.



Bush had four years of presidential experience going into his second run, which is apparently the best kind that you can have, and clearly he wasn't suited to lead the country.  To even get to the Senate you half to be at least halfway competent.  What's important is your stance on the issues

More on topic though, dumb decision.  Very dumb decision.  I mean, if you're trying to go after women voters, try changing your policies to actually entice them to vote for you.  By choosing Palin, the McCain campaign basically gave women the choice between having the first female VP at the cost of having Roe vs. Wade overturned.  Any woman who understands that, and isn't already on the Republican side of the issue won't be won over.  He probably would have been better off picking Romney to strengthen his position on the economy, while continuing to tear Obama down with negative ads.


----------



## Nae'blis (Aug 29, 2008)

Amaretti said:


> But I find this move patronising and shallow. He's passed over men to go straight for a woman with very little experience and more beauty pageant credentials than political. Fuck him. Fuck him with a rusty chainsaw. If women fall for this shit, they ought to kill themselves.



I completely agree with this. It's so transparent and shallow that the little bit (infinitesimal as it was) of respect I had for him just got flushed down the loo.


----------



## drache (Aug 29, 2008)

Radical Dreamer said:


> Let's remind folks here for a second:
> 
> Two years as a governor is greater than ten years in the senate. A Senator doesn't do JACK SHIT when it comes to administration. As a governor, and as a leader, Sarah Palin *still* has more experience than Obama.


 

Oh wow, am I the only one gettign dizzy from the spin?

Radical why don't you deal with this, there are at least *fifteen*, yes *fifteen*, CITIES that are bigger then the STATE of Alaska.

So by your logic those people are more qualified then Palin, not to mention the other 46 states that are bigger.

PS Chicago is the 3rd biggest at about 2 million and some change


----------



## Zephos (Aug 29, 2008)

I think american women (and men) who are ridiculously enchanted by the mere notion of a female head of state or second in command rather than who they are, should have a nice long chat with the Brits about a certain Miss. Thatcher.

Also lol at "Obama comes from the most corrupt and violent city in america"

Your wrong no matter what you meant, Hawaii or Chicago.

As for the choice, it's baffling to say in the least. Regardless of your opinion on issues of experience, that was clearly a main fighting point of Mccain's campaign and in a way he just snubbed his ability to use it entirely. Considering that, it does seem that Mccain woud have to be thinking of making a bid for the Bitter Clintonian crowd.
But if I know my bitter feminist mindset, they're quite prone to look for instances of patronization under every rock and in every cranny, this could actually backfire.


----------



## Xion (Aug 29, 2008)

Zephos said:


> I think american women (and men) who are ridiculously enchanted by the mere notion of a female head of state or second in command rather than who they are, should have a nice long chat with the Brits about a certain Miss. Thatcher.
> 
> Also lol at "Obama comes from the most corrupt and violent city in america"
> 
> Your wrong no matter what you meant, Hawaii or Chicago.



I thought the British loved Margaret Thatcher.


----------



## Orochimaru (Aug 29, 2008)

LOL. He just fucking got the votes of *all *the American Soccer-moms. What a fucking genius! 

Inexperience? Here's what the GOP Ad will read;

_"Would you rather vote for an inexperienced VP or for an inexperienced PRESIDENT?!" _

I'm telling you, he's a fucking genius!!


----------



## Zephos (Aug 29, 2008)

II Xion II said:


> I thought the British loved Margaret Thatcher.



Well, the conservative ones.

The Clintonites are liberal.


----------



## Cold (Aug 29, 2008)

drache said:


> Oh wow, am I the only one gettign dizzy from the spin?
> 
> Radical why don't you deal with this, there are at least *fifteen*, yes *fifteen*, CITIES that are bigger then the STATE of Alaska.
> 
> ...



I believe that his point was that her experience as governor is greater than Obama's experience as a senator despite the population gap.
EDIT:  Not that I agree with it though, just pointing that out 

As a person, she seems pretty admirable.  Mother of 5, high approval rating in her state.  She seems pretty cool as a person.  The problem arises when you get into her political stances...  I for one wonder how she's going to help bring women on board when she's against Roe V. Wade, and supports McCain who doesn't believe in equal pay despite gender.

I don't quite think people fully understand how important political stances are.  Obama for example would not have so many black people on his side if he were a Republican who was against Affirmative Action.  Palin seems to be a woman who's trying to rally female voters while she herself is against, or at the very least supporting a campaign that's against issues that are important to those women she's trying to reach.


----------



## Sexta Espada (Aug 29, 2008)

Lady is an NRA member and won some beauty contests. I approve of McCain's desicion


----------



## Spencer_Gator (Aug 29, 2008)

I was surprised by this pick


----------



## SeventhDan (Aug 29, 2008)

*Bush had four years of presidential experience going into his second run, which is apparently the best kind that you can have, and clearly he wasn't suited to lead the country.*

Nor is the Congress, who has been the source of most of our problems. Who voted for the war? Who's prolonged the war? Who's had endless debates on the war? Who has used the troops as cannon fodder for their politics?

The U.S. Congress should be impeached and imprisoned for treason.


----------



## Suzuku (Aug 29, 2008)

This just shows they'll do anything to win at this point. He obviously didn't pick her because she'd make a good V.P. or President; hell, I doubt she could contribute to anything in the White House. Just a tool to court woman voters. I pray to God that they don't fall for it.


----------



## Mael (Aug 29, 2008)

SeventhDan said:


> The U.S. Congress should be impeached and imprisoned for treason.



I think both Congress and Bush & Co. should be tried.  They all failed.


----------



## Amaretti (Aug 29, 2008)

Zephos said:


> But if I know my bitter feminist mindset, they're quite prone to look for instances of patronization under every rock and in every cranny, this could actually backfire.



What will also irk feminists is this woman's history as a beauty queen and a sports reporter. Women can be quite hostile towards attractive women who gain success by trading on their looks. 



II Xion II said:


> I thought the British loved Margaret Thatcher.



In Britain, we celebrate her birthday every year with great esteem, because every year gone is a year closer to her death.


----------



## Garlock (Aug 29, 2008)

SeventhDan said:


> *Bush had four years of presidential experience going into his second run, which is apparently the best kind that you can have, and clearly he wasn't suited to lead the country.*
> 
> Nor is the Congress, who has been the source of most of our problems. Who voted for the war? Who's prolonged the war? Who's had endless debates on the war? Who has used the troops as cannon fodder for their politics?
> 
> The U.S. Congress should be impeached and imprisoned for treason.



You mean the Republican Congressmen who have voted down all plans for withdrawing troops and pushed to go to war when the president didn't go through congress to enstate an act of war beforehand? This is the same shit Putin did.


----------



## Bender (Aug 29, 2008)

Hmmm maybe I should vote for McCain now ? 

Like me he likes young white pussy ?

Hopefully, he's able to handle it 

Unlike Bill Clinton he won't get the slap on the wrist 

Also no chance in reaching out to Hillary voters as they're only attracted to a woman with a dick 



OMG 

SeventhDan is back


----------



## Cold (Aug 29, 2008)

SeventhDan said:


> *Bush had four years of presidential experience going into his second run, which is apparently the best kind that you can have, and clearly he wasn't suited to lead the country.*
> 
> Nor is the Congress, who has been the source of most of our problems. Who voted for the war? Who's prolonged the war? Who's had endless debates on the war? Who has used the troops as cannon fodder for their politics?
> 
> The U.S. Congress should be impeached and imprisoned for treason.



Dude why don't you just use the quote button?

Are you really trying to blame Congress for the war?


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Aug 29, 2008)

drache said:


> I'm still searching for a handy useable link but yeah it's definitely offical.
> 
> So my thoughts:
> 
> ...


----------



## Bender (Aug 29, 2008)

Tsukiyomi said:


> Did she just say she doesn't know what the VP does?  And she accepted this position?



Do I smell a sex scandal?


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 29, 2008)

LayZ said:


> When I first heard about this, I was shocked and kind of confused.  But its refreshing and could be historic, I guess.
> 
> If this is an attempt to get Hillary Supporters, then I don't think its gonna work.  *If you know anything about women you know they're emotional and you have to earn their trust.*  They like Hillary because they know her story and they felt like they've gone through a lot with her.  They felt her pain, witnessed her journey, and most importantly they trust her.



Thank you for such a sweeping overgeneralization.

Honestly, when it comes to feminism and this election, there are too many diverse opinions to decide what people are going to do. Myself, I disliked Clinton because of feminist issues.

Hopefully it'll backfire (and I can't imagine liberal feminist being okay with her pro-life stance once they look beyond the gender), but the Democrats are such a train wreck right now, I don't know.


----------



## Elim Rawne (Aug 29, 2008)

Tsukiyomi said:


> Did she just say she doesn't know what the VP does?  And she accepted this position?




Oh,this is gonna be good


----------



## Kanae-chan (Aug 29, 2008)

Well, I gotta say, if you read into this woman, there is absolutely nothing against her. The AP is trying to pull up something about firing, but, isn't the govenor allowed to fire people in her office? Honestly.

I like her. She just a downs baby, she had the choice to abort, and she chose not to! I support her more than either of the candidates.  

At least someone believes in being down-to-earth in this country.


----------



## Megaharrison (Aug 29, 2008)

Women vs. Blacks, who shall prevail in the battle of disenfranchised and underrepresented social groups?!


----------



## Kanae-chan (Aug 29, 2008)

Well, I gotta say, if you read into this woman, there is absolutely nothing against her. The AP is trying to pull up something about firing, but, isn't the govenor allowed to fire people in her office? Honestly.

I like her. She just a downs baby, she had the choice to abort, and she chose not to! I support her more than either of the candidates.  

At least someone believes in being down-to-earth in this country.

Also, someone above said the following:



> The U.S. Congress should be impeached and imprisoned for treason.



Quote for Truth.

Yes, yes, the president can ASK CONGRESS to declare war. The president can't just whip around orders, even if he is the Commander in Chief. If any bill goes through the Congress and even if the President veto's it, if 2/3's of the congress votes again for it to pass, The bill will become a law! If the President and the Congress do not agree, in the end, the Congress will win.

And if you're still so anti-Bush, heck, get all of them out of there, PLEASE!


----------



## Zephos (Aug 29, 2008)

Megaharrison said:


> Women vs. Blacks, who shall prevail in the battle of disenfranchised minorities?!



Women are actually the majority hth.


----------



## Dark Aether (Aug 29, 2008)

I really didn't see this coming, who is this person again? I really hope she means more than a pawn to attract butthurt Clinton supporters.


----------



## Megaharrison (Aug 29, 2008)

Zephos said:


> Women are actually the majority hth.



See seconds after I posted that I realized I made that mistake and edit saved me eternal disgrace and humiliation.


----------



## LayZ (Aug 29, 2008)

Rhaella said:


> Thank you for such a sweeping overgeneralization.


*You're right, it was an over generalization for women*.  But I still think it applies to most of those Hillary Supporters.  

Like I said earlier, I wouldn't really know for sure.


----------



## Trov (Aug 29, 2008)

Tsukiyomi said:


> Did she just say she doesn't know what the VP does?  And she accepted this position?



She said that she would not accept the job until she knew that it would be a productive job where she would do actual work. Since this clip is months old, I think it's best to assume that she found her answer.

“_[A]s for that VP talk all the time, I’ll tell you, I still can’t answer that question until somebody answers for me what is it exactly that the VP does every day? I’m used to being very productive and working real hard in an administration. *We want to make sure that that VP slot would be a fruitful type of position*, especially for Alaskans and for the things that we’re trying to accomplish up here for the rest of the U.S. before I can even start addressing that question.”_​
Funny enough, the Youtube clip drache posted, was originally circulated by AP at HotAir. I also remembered the original post about it back when she was first vetted.(Added note: HA is very Palin friendly, they loved her when she was first introduced and still do.)

Personally, I'm ok with this pick. ALOT of my conservatives friends were hoping McCain would pick her. It didn't have much to do with her being female either. She is a extremely thoughtful and respected person. And often calls bullshit among her own party when she sees it, she fits well with McCain, she's is seen as a reformer, willing to kick her own party in the balls if it she thinks they are wrong(She challenged and defeated the incumbent republican gov.)  Many of my conservative friends, and I as well, don't think this will bring the Hillary vote. or won't bring enough of them for it to matter. We just genuinely like her and her positions. Personally, I wasn't sure about her being VP, but I wasn't sure about anyone. As for experience. It does kinda take the bite out of an argument that Obama is too inexperienced, but Since Palin and Obama aren't running for the same position, I think you can give a little leeway with Palin since she's going for a job that would need less experience than what Obama is going for. In other words, she is not going for the head job, Further more, Obama can't say that she lack experience, since it would only highlight his own lack of it.(But appearantly, this didn't stop him from .)

I'm not mad at McCain's pick. But I can definately see the attacks coming about her being the trophy pick, which would irritate me to no end because I *KNOW* that very few of us conservatives think of her as that. Hopefully, if McCain wins, she'll be set for a run for presidency all on her own. And honestly, I'd love to see that.


----------



## Simulacrum (Aug 29, 2008)

I was just so-so with McCain as a presidential nominee, and mostly because his opponents are so terrible, but now that Palin is part of the ticket I'm actually excited. :X


----------



## Purgatory (Aug 29, 2008)

McCain is obviously doing this to get more Cunton supporters, othwerwise he would've chosen Romney.


----------



## Detonator_Fan (Aug 29, 2008)

She seems like a decent person.

And it looks like she is a fiscal conservative. That's good.

But wouldn't someone like Giulianni get more votes?


----------



## Trov (Aug 29, 2008)

Painkiller said:


> McCain is obviously doing this to get more Cunton supporters, othwerwise he would've chosen Romney.


Like I said, I doubt it. I personally would not have gone Romney, since I thought the left would pull out Romney and McCain's statements during the primary and use it against them.
Palin is good. I would have gone Pawlenty(But I was shaky about him as well.), but Palin isn't a bad pick either.



Detonator_Fan said:


> She seems like a decent person.
> 
> And it looks like she is a fiscal conservative. That's good.
> 
> But wouldn't someone like Giulianni get more votes?


Eh... he's pro-abortion(or is shaky on it). trust me, the whole pro-abortion VP was really really getting to some of his base. Lieberman and Ridge caused the same trouble.



Simulacrum said:


> I was just so-so with McCain as a presidential nominee, and mostly because his opponents are so terrible, but now that Palin is part of the ticket I'm actually excited. :X


I know. Not a McCain supporter. But this is getting me excited as well. I might actually go out a vote McCain.


----------



## Carly (Aug 29, 2008)

lol at the news attacking her. But i do agree with the attackers. IT seems like McCain is trying to use her as a trump card against Hilary. Even if he isn't it seems like it. And he'll probably lose a few women votes because of this bad timing.


----------



## Willy D (Aug 29, 2008)

Seems like McCain is going for the milf vote.


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 29, 2008)

Megaharrison said:


> See seconds after I posted that I realized I made that mistake and edit saved me eternal disgrace and humiliation.



Actually, women do count as a minority, since one of the definitions of "minority" in any subordinate group.



LayZ said:


> *You're right, it was an over generalization for women*.  But I still think it applies to most of those Hillary Supporters.
> 
> Like I said earlier, I wouldn't really know for sure.



Well, their extreme anger at her loss would support such a claim, but just because you react emotionally to something doesn't mean you can't afterwards sit down and think it through logically.

Oh, I hope they do. *I'm so annoyed by the blatant use of feminism by a man to further his own goals.*


----------



## Mider T (Aug 29, 2008)

Woman and experience lacking.

Touche McCain, but after Obama's speech your over.


----------



## Carly (Aug 29, 2008)

Rhaella said:


> Actually, women do count as a minority, since one of the definitions of "minority" in any subordinate group.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You think Obama means any harm? I don't see the women complaining.


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 29, 2008)

Carly said:


> You think Obama means any harm? I don't see the women complaining.



Excuse me?

I am an Obama supporter. Always have been.


----------



## Shark Skin (Aug 29, 2008)

After reading about her for a while she isn't that bad a pick. Of course I don't agree with her on very much, but I do like how she attacked corruption in her state at various levels. She's been cooperating with the ethics investigation, so that means either she has nothing to hide or she's already hidden the evidence. I'm inclined to give people the benefit of the doubt though, so I'll give her credit for cooperating. 
Aside from that I still have a hard time grasping why exactly McCain picked her (other than possibly want to lure Clinton supporters). I mean the major part of his campaign has been to pump up his experience, while criticizing Obama for lacking in that area. Granted, as someone had said before, being governor does give you more administrative experience, it doesn't lend to experience working with people around Washington. Not that it hasn't done before though, but it still brings up the question of whether or not McCain will really continue to put down Obama for lack of experience.  



Detonator_Fan said:


> She seems like a decent person.
> 
> And it looks like she is a fiscal conservative. That's good.
> 
> But wouldn't someone like Giulianni get more votes?



Giuliani?!?! If McCain really wanted to lose these he would have picked him. I think the nation grew tired of him and his milking of 9/11.


----------



## Aeon (Aug 29, 2008)

I was very surprised by her being picked as a VP candidate.


----------



## Trov (Aug 29, 2008)

Shark Skin said:


> Aside from that I still have a hard time grasping why exactly McCain picked her (other than possibly want to lure Clinton supporters). I mean the major part of his campaign has been to pump up his experience, while criticizing Obama for lacking in that area. Granted, as someone had said before, being governor does give you more administrative experience, it doesn't lend to experience working with people around Washington. Not that it hasn't done before though, *but it still brings up the question of whether or not McCain will really continue to put down Obama for lack of experience.*



Like I said before, I think you should give a little leeway here. She's the vice presidential candidate. not the presidential one. So you can make a good argument that she would need less experience that a presidential one.


----------



## Carly (Aug 29, 2008)

Rhaella said:


> Excuse me?
> 
> I am an Obama supporter. Always have been.



Oh, so you were talking about *McCain*? Okies.


----------



## Shark Skin (Aug 29, 2008)

Trov said:


> Like I said before, I think you should give a little leeway here. She's the vice presidential candidate. not the presidential one. So you can make a good argument that she would need less experience that a presidential one.



True. I can see that.


----------



## sadated_peon (Aug 29, 2008)

Trov said:


> Like I said before, I think you should give a little leeway here. She's the vice presidential candidate. not the presidential one. So you can make a good argument that she would need less experience that a presidential one.



The vp of 73 year old man with health problems, the vp MUST be qualified to step in a be president. 

No one in their right mind could think that she is ready.

If McCain cannot say to the American people that she is ready to take over at any time during his presidency then he is admitting that she cannot be vp. If he says that she can, then he is lying.


----------



## Sexta Espada (Aug 29, 2008)

Why is he lying? If comes back to experience, then Obama has the same problem. If it's because she's a woman, I'll just let the women here take care of it. If it's something else, elaborate.


----------



## Carly (Aug 29, 2008)

Sexta Espada said:


> Why is he lying? If comes back to experience, then Obama has the same problem. If it's because she's a woman, I'll just let the women here take care of it. If it's something else, elaborate.



Can you compare obama's lack of experience to hers?


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Aug 29, 2008)

Trov said:


> Like I said before, I think you should give a little leeway here. She's the vice presidential candidate. not the presidential one. So you can make a good argument that she would need less experience that a presidential one.



The most important qualification for ANY VP is that they must be ready to become president at a moments notice.  If McCain gets shot, or has a heart attack then this woman instantly becomes president of the united states.  So if he is going to play the experience card than his VP should have experience to match his own.


----------



## Sexta Espada (Aug 29, 2008)

Carly said:


> Can you compare obama's lack of experience to hers?



Both lack it, but both have a slight advantage, in that Palin had a job similar to the presidency, but on a WAY smaller scale, but Obama was in Washington, so he has some experience with how that works. But still, one should not assume that a president will die, especially when his mother is still alive at the age of 90 or so.


----------



## Trov (Aug 29, 2008)

sadated_peon said:


> The vp of 73 year old man with health problems, the vp MUST be qualified to step in a be president.
> 
> No one in their right mind could think that she is ready.
> 
> If McCain cannot say to the American people that she is ready to take over at any time during his presidency then he is admitting that she cannot be vp. If he says that she can, then he is lying.



The VP of a man that had a doctor say he is in  condition. 

If you don't think she's ready, then you most certainly have to say the same thing about Obama, Who is on equal ground with Palin and you can make a good argument that she is above him in experience since she has actually served in executive office instead of legislative.

However, if you believe that Obama's experience matters little, than Palin's should also matter little too. And like I said before. She's running as VP not President. She may have to take over *IF* McCain passed away but experience wise, it would not be all that difference than Obama.


----------



## Mojo (Aug 29, 2008)

I read up on Sarah Palin and she seems to have her stuff together.


----------



## Orochimaru (Aug 29, 2008)

What a magnificent choice. I'm so happy right now I can't even contain myself. That's why they call McCain a Maverick. Believe me, if McCain gets to run this country, we will be in good shape for decades to come.


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 29, 2008)

I thought this was a great pick; she's a safe conservative known to be rather tight on the budget and can help draw in the young or the women.  

Very amusing how Obama campaigned on a promise of change and picked an elderly white fellow senator (very traditional) while calling McCain out as offering more of the same right before he goes out and selects a female VP (rather radical).  Anyways, my opinion of the Republican party improved after this;  she has a historically high approval ratings and kept her campaign promises.  That's pretty damn rare for a politician.


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 29, 2008)

Carly said:


> Oh, so you were talking about *McCain*? Okies.



I thought that was obvious. >_>  Obama isn't the one trying to use feminist anger to fuel his campaign.


----------



## Trov (Aug 29, 2008)

Tsukiyomi said:


> The most important qualification for ANY VP is that they must be ready to become president at a moments notice.  If McCain gets shot, or has a heart attack then this woman instantly becomes president of the united states.  So if he is going to play the experience card than his VP should have experience to match his own.



And what about President? Should he have little to no experience?

Here's the problem with calling on her experience or lack of it. While McCain's argument that Obama lacks experience is significantly hurt, Obama ALSO can't call out that she's inexperienced. Because he made the case that despite his lack of experience, he has other qualities like Judgement(We will save that argument for another day.) will help him. So why can't the same be said of Palin?

But using the arguments that Palin isn't ready to lead because of her lack of experience, you VALIDATE the arguments that have been made about Obama. and unlike Palin, Obama is at the top of the ticket. Which hurts him.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 29, 2008)

can't compare a VP to a pres candidate.  Obama is better than mccain regardless if mccain is 1000 years old. And biden is better then palin.

Point is nobody gives a fuck about VP anyway


----------



## E (Aug 29, 2008)




----------



## LayZ (Aug 29, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> Very amusing how Obama campaigned on a promise of change and picked an elderly white fellow senator (very traditional) while calling McCain out as offering more of the same right before he goes out and selects a female VP (rather radical).


The hypocrisy on BOTH sides of the VP picks are very amusing.


----------



## Orochimaru (Aug 29, 2008)

Obama is so old news to the female voters right now. Sarah is everything an American Woman wants to be. Cute, successful, honest, powerful, mother of kids, happy wife, and comes from a blue collar family. What's not to like! pek


----------



## Garlock (Aug 29, 2008)

I have that T shirt, I got it at Urban Outfitters.



Orochimaru said:


> Obama is so old news to the female voters right now. Sarah is everything an American Woman wants to be. Cute, successful, honest, powerful, mother of kids, happy wife, and comes from a blue collar family. What's not to like! pek


One sided love must be a bitch when she obviously is doing it for the many angsty women voters out there lulz


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 29, 2008)

LayZ said:


> The hypocrisy on BOTH sides of the VP picks are very amusing.



In McCain's defense, he never promised "more of the same."  That was pretty much propaganda from the Democrats.  I have already stated this a long time ago:  both candidate's political positions are far away from Bush and overlapped at certain points.  John McCain just suffered from being in the same party as this very unpopular president and it was easy for Obama to weaponize it.


----------



## Cold (Aug 29, 2008)

Trov said:


> And what about President? Should he have little to no experience?
> 
> Here's the problem with calling on her experience or lack of it. While McCain's argument that Obama lacks experience is significantly hurt, Obama ALSO can't call out that she's inexperienced. Because he made the case that despite his lack of experience, he has other qualities like Judgement(We will save that argument for another day.) will help him. So why can't the same be said of Palin?
> 
> But using the arguments that Palin isn't ready to lead because of her lack of experience, you VALIDATE the arguments that have been made about Obama. and unlike Palin, Obama is at the top of the ticket. Which hurts him.



While I don't totally disagree, she's more susceptible to the experience argument than Obama because Obama won his position while she was appointed hers.  We've seen how Obama performs under pressure, and we've seen how he carries himself with foreign nations.  We've seen his ability to organize, inspire, and lead just by looking at the campaign he ran against Clinton.  He may not have had the title of governor, but we've definitely seen Obama lead on the national level first hand, and that's more than can be said of Palin who runs a state with such a small population.


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 29, 2008)

Basically, you're implying charisma = experience.


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 29, 2008)

In defense of Obama, a specialist in foreign policy is extremely useful asset right now.



Orochimaru said:


> Obama is so old news to the female voters right now. Sarah is everything an American Woman wants to be. Cute, successful, honest, powerful, mother of kids, happy wife, and comes from a blue collar family. What's not to like! pek



Pro-life stance, reaffirmation of traditional gender values... if you're a liberal feminist, I can't see you not hating her.


----------



## Bender (Aug 29, 2008)

Sexta Espada said:


> Why is he lying? If comes back to experience, then Obama has the same problem. If it's because she's a woman, I'll just let the women here take care of it. If it's something else, elaborate.



Please elaborate? people say she can do the job when she's only been governor for 1 1/2 frickin years that's hardly experienced. What's more is how much of a cornball she is as well as the fact it's a panic choice for all the retarded Hillary Clinton fans. He doesn't care about women he's doing it because he think he's being cunning about it not to mention it's offensive since he's trying to take advantage of women's vulnerability at the moment since Hillary's lost. There is no logic behind it. Compared to Obama she has the experience of a Elementary school teacher. It's pathetic. 

Also she's inspirational because she has five children?  Pleaaaase my  dad's mom had to take care of eleven children (this is true swear on my mother's grave) and my mom's mom had to take care of seven children. 



			
				Carly said:
			
		

> Can you compare obama's lack of experience to hers?



Anyone who says that she has experience you are intellectually dishonest with yourself. Unlike, Obama his VP is one who much more significant. There is nothing good behind his pick.


@ Dreams lie & Trov



I love how stupid your views are

Taking advantage of woman is good? 

She will have no fucking say of situations

McCain's will toss her away like the tool she is


----------



## ShangDOh (Aug 29, 2008)

I can't wait to watch the VP debates, Biden is going to thrash her. This election is going to be so lulzworthy.


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 29, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> @ Dreams lie & Trov
> 
> 
> 
> ...



First off, did she not have a choice to decline?  Second, who says Obama would rely on Biden once he's elected?


----------



## Cold (Aug 29, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> Basically, you're implying charisma = experience.



Basically, I'm SAYING that charisma alone doesn't allow you to run a campaign that defeats Hillary Clinton.  Nor does luck allow that.  He outperformed the Clinton's, which means his strategy must have been pretty damn good, and considering how similar their stances on policy was he has demonstrated first hand that he does have the experience to lead the country.  

The only way that doesn't work is if you count experience as years with a title, in which case Bush is overqualified to lead the country


----------



## Carly (Aug 29, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> Please elaborate? people say she can do the job when she's only been governor for 1 1/2 frickin years that's hardly experienced. What's more is how much of a cornball she is as well as the fact it's a panic choice for all the retarded Hillary Clinton fans. He doesn't care about women he's doing it because he think he's being cunning about it not to mention it's offensive since he's trying to take advantage of women's vulnerability at the moment since Hillary's lost. There is no logic behind it. Compared to Obama she has the experience of a Elementary school teacher. It's pathetic.
> 
> Also she's inspirational because she has five children?  Pleaaaase my  dad's mom had to take care of eleven children (this is true swear on my mother's grave) and my mom's mom had to take care of seven children.
> 
> ...



I wasn't trying to say obama was less experienced as her, i worded it wrong. lol.


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Aug 29, 2008)

Trov said:


> And what about President? Should he have little to no experience?
> 
> Here's the problem with calling on her experience or lack of it. While McCain's argument that Obama lacks experience is significantly hurt, Obama ALSO can't call out that she's inexperienced. Because he made the case that despite his lack of experience, he has other qualities like Judgement(We will save that argument for another day.) will help him. So why can't the same be said of Palin?
> 
> But using the arguments that Palin isn't ready to lead because of her lack of experience, you VALIDATE the arguments that have been made about Obama. and unlike Palin, Obama is at the top of the ticket. Which hurts him.



The point is that MCCAIN was the one who made experience such a central part of the campaign, then he picks a VP with almost no experience whatsoever.  It totally goes against what he was supposed to be running on and makes it totally seem like just a ploy to grab women voters who would have otherwise voted for Hillary.


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 29, 2008)

Cold said:


> Basically, I'm SAYING that charisma alone doesn't allow you to run a campaign that defeats Hillary Clinton.  Nor does luck allow that.  He outperformed the Clinton's, which means his strategy must have been pretty damn good, and considering how similar their stances on policy was he has demonstrated first hand that he does have the experience to lead the country.
> 
> The only way that doesn't work is if you count experience as years with a title, in which case Bush is overqualified to lead the country



You are aware they have people running their campaigns for them, correct?  And last I check, it wasn't so much that he had a whole bunch of experts, it was more of Clinton's own fuckups or the various mistakes her campaign made.  I think an article once spoke of how one of them weren't even aware that they split up the delegates from each state instead of a winner takes all scenario.


----------



## Bender (Aug 29, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> First off, did she not have a choice to decline?  Second, who says Obama would rely on Biden once he's elected?



She did but who would? Honestly, tell me who would?  Obama has plenty to rely on Biden for since he has more knowledge. This pick of McCain's is insulting and utterly fucking pathetic and all of you who are eating this shit up I fucking pity each and every last one of you. As I,ve said before she's a tool for McCain to use to pick up all the Hillary supporters. If he's really going to choose a woman as a stand in for McCain choose someone *smarter*. Sarah Palin went to Idaho University Hillary Clinton went to *Harvard *University.


----------



## Cold (Aug 29, 2008)

Tsukiyomi said:


> The point is that MCCAIN was the one who made experience such a central part of the campaign, then he picks a VP with almost no experience whatsoever.  It totally goes against what he was supposed to be running on and makes it totally seem like just a ploy to grab women voters who would have otherwise voted for Hillary.



Which it clearly is.  If it was about the economy, which they are trying to use as the actual reason for her being picked, they would have picked Romney, who has been governor of a considerably bigger state for a longer period of time


----------



## Cold (Aug 29, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> You are aware they have people running their campaigns for them, correct?  And last I check, it wasn't so much that he had a whole bunch of experts, it was more of Clinton's own fuckups or the various mistakes her campaign made.  I think an article once spoke of how one of them weren't even aware that they split up the delegates from each state instead of a winner takes all scenario.



So you're saying Obama wasn't responsible for his campaign winning, while you blame the Clinton's for losing?  Are they responsible for their campaigns or not?


----------



## Lord Genome (Aug 29, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> Sarah Palin went to Idaho University Hillary Clinton went to *Harvard *University.


Just wanted to mention that picking out colleges is a poor comparison for how smart people are.


----------



## Sexta Espada (Aug 29, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> Please elaborate? people say she can do the job when she's only been governor for 1 1/2 frickin years that's hardly experienced. What's more is how much of a cornball she is as well as the fact it's a panic choice for all the retarded Hillary Clinton fans. He doesn't care about women he's doing it because he think he's being cunning about it not to mention it's offensive since he's trying to take advantage of women's vulnerability at the moment since Hillary's lost. There is no logic behind it. Compared to Obama she has the experience of a Elementary school teacher. It's pathetic.


Actually I said that neither has an advantage when it comes to experience, but if the Obama fans wanna use that against her, don't throw stones at other people when you live in a glass house.


----------



## Sugar&Spice (Aug 29, 2008)

I'd rather have a VP who is inexperienced then a president . McCain was smart for making her VP.


----------



## Lord Yu (Aug 29, 2008)

Orochimaru said:


> Obama is so old news to the female voters right now. Sarah is everything an American Woman wants to be. Cute, successful, honest, powerful, mother of kids, happy wife, and comes from a blue collar family. What's not to like! pek



Don't forget anti-abortion.


----------



## LayZ (Aug 29, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> In McCain's defense, he never promised "more of the same."  That was pretty much propaganda from the Democrats.  I have already stated this a long time ago:  both candidate's political positions are far away from Bush and overlapped at certain points.  John McCain just suffered from being in the same party as this very unpopular president and it was easy for Obama to weaponize it.


I'm just trying to be objective about this.  Obama is mainly running on "Change" and McCain is mainly running on "Experience".  BOTH of their VP picks are the exact opposite of the focus of their campaign.  Now it could be they're trying to make up for what they lack, but its still could be considered as hypocritical.


----------



## Mider T (Aug 29, 2008)

Sean Hannity and his word-twisting analysis.


----------



## Bear Walken (Aug 29, 2008)

Nice choice by McCain but Biden should have no problem with her in a debate. Then again, if he comes on too strong. Motherfuckers are going to cry out bully. And if the media treats her like so & so, the same motherfuckers are going to cry unfair treatment because she's a woman. 

The timing of the VP selection came at a perfect time. Way to overshadow Obama's speech from last night. No one (the media) is talking about it anymore. Brilliant move.

Also, she's hot.


----------



## SwordKing (Aug 29, 2008)

If I vote Republican, I'm racist...

If I vote Democrat, I'm sexist...

Oh no...



*Sigh* No matter who wins, this is going to be one crazy election.


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 29, 2008)

> She did but who would? Honestly, tell me who would?  Obama has plenty to rely on Biden for since he has more knowledge.


 
I would think the right term would be experience, which is silly because he is campaigning on change and often blasted Washington's inability to fix problems.



> This pick of McCain's is insulting and utterly fucking pathetic and all of you who are eating this shit up I fucking pity each and every last one of you. As I,ve said before she's a tool for McCain to use to pick up all the Hillary supporters.



She still holds a lot of the same positions as McCain and have known to have high approval ratings.  Besides, can you really blame him?  The VC pick is pretty much the single most important decision they can make; why wouldn't they pick someone who could help them get their points across and capture more voters?



> If he's really going to choose a woman as a stand in for McCain choose someone smarter. Sarah Palin went to Idaho University Hillary Clinton went to Harvard University.



You are aware George W. Bush went to Yale, right?  



> So you're saying Obama wasn't responsible for his campaign winning, while you blame the Clinton's for losing? Are they responsible for their campaigns or not?


Their personal mistakes effect the campaign.  The campaign itself, however, is not created by the candidate; they leave that to more able people.  Clinton not only made a series of serious personal mistakes, the people she picked were not exactly the brightest in their field.


----------



## Bender (Aug 29, 2008)

Trov said:
			
		

> And what about President? Should he have little to no experience?
> 
> Here's the problem with calling on her experience or lack of it. While McCain's argument that Obama lacks experience is significantly hurt, Obama ALSO can't call out that she's inexperienced. Because he made the case that despite his lack of experience, he has other qualities like Judgement(We will save that argument for another day.) will help him. So why can't the same be said of Palin?
> 
> But using the arguments that Palin isn't ready to lead because of her lack of experience, you VALIDATE the arguments that have been made about Obama. and unlike Palin, Obama is at the top of the ticket. Which hurts him.



This notion of lack of experience was initially brought up by McCain against Obama.  Obama has always said that you also have to consider judgement and demeanor as well.  But now McCain goes and brings in Palin, which totally weakens the argument about experience being tied to the number of years that one has served in Washington.  John F. Kennedy, Bill Clinton, and even George Bush were short on years in Washington. But the people made the decision, which was primarily based on the desire for change and the "comfort" with the judgement of the candidate.


----------



## Mider T (Aug 29, 2008)

SwordKing said:


> If I vote Republican, I'm racist...
> 
> If I vote Democrat, I'm sexist...
> 
> ...



Can you really not tell which is worse?


----------



## Orochimaru (Aug 29, 2008)

Lord Yu said:


> Don't forget anti-abortion.



You mean pro-life?


----------



## Sugar&Spice (Aug 29, 2008)




----------



## Mr. Stud Muffin (Aug 29, 2008)

I'm calling it...I wanted Obama to win but now I am sure that McCain will win unless a scandal emerges...


----------



## LayZ (Aug 29, 2008)

SwordKing said:


> If I vote Republican, I'm racist...
> 
> If I vote Democrat, I'm sexist...
> 
> Oh no...


I know.  This is why you should only have white males on the ticket.


----------



## Bender (Aug 29, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> I would think the right term would be experience, which is silly because he is campaigning on change and often blasted Washington's inability to fix problems.








> She still holds a lot of the same positions as McCain and have known to have high approval ratings.  Besides, can you really blame him?  The VC pick is pretty much the single most important decision they can make; why wouldn't they pick someone who could help them get their points across and capture more voters?






> You are aware George W. Bush went to Yale, right?


Yes.. his daddy got him a ticket in.. One of his professors was on the radio and said that George was a very poor student.





			
				Lord Genome said:
			
		

> Just wanted to mention that picking out colleges is a poor comparison for how smart people are.



Yes..  Book learnin is weigh over estimeted.  Are you kidding me?  The competition to even get in to a school like Harvard is fierce.  It shows a high level of personal discipline.


----------



## Sawako (Aug 29, 2008)

And this is where all the Clinton supporters' votes will go to. 

Smart move for McCain though, because people will look past her inexperience and just see that she's a woman.


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 29, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> Yes.. his daddy got him a ticket in.. One of his professors was on the radio and said that George was a very poor student.



Proof?  

And what was the point of quoting those two parts of my post?   Marking the hypocrisy in naming a VP who lacks experience?  I'm already aware of it, although having an inexperienced Vice President is much less harmful than having an inexperienced President.


----------



## sadated_peon (Aug 29, 2008)

sexta espada said:
			
		

> Why is he lying? If comes back to experience, then Obama has the same problem. If it's because she's a woman, I'll just let the women here take care of it. If it's something else, elaborate.


Obama doesn't lack experience, she does. 

Her only real political career is being governor for 18 month. 



			
				Trov said:
			
		

> The VP of a man that had a doctor say he is in great condition.


from your own article. 
"The doctors described a number of health issues faced by McCain, many of them typical for a man of his age but at least one of them potentially serious."



			
				Trov said:
			
		

> If you don't think she's ready, then you most certainly have to say the same thing about Obama, Who is on equal ground with Palin and you can make a good argument that she is above him in experience since she has actually served in executive office instead of legislative.


They are in no way on equal ground. It is ludicrous to think she has anywhere near the qualifications as Obama. Her executive experience is nothing in comparison Obama's contribution at the national level. 

She has absolutely no experience in foreign policy or any experience with foreign relations. 

If you want to say that only executive gives you experience to be president, then McCain and Obama are in the same boat as NEITHER have served in the executive capacity in our government.



			
				Trov said:
			
		

> However, if you believe that Obama's experience matters little, than Palin's should also matter little too. And like I said before. She's running as VP not President. She may have to take over IF McCain passed away but experience wise, it would not be all that difference than Obama.


I believe that Obama's experience matters a lot, because he has the necessary experience to be president of the United States. She on the other other hand hasn't even finish her first term at the *state* level of government. 

If you are under the misguided position she is ANYWHERE NEAR as qualified as Obama then you are delusional. A delusion based solely on a bias so strong that no amount of sanity can penetrate it. 

Look at it this way, in a debate do you think that Obama is going to hold his own with McCain? What about Obama vs Palin? No one thinks she has a chance against Biden because she has no fucking clue what she is doing.


----------



## ShangDOh (Aug 29, 2008)

After reading more about her and reading various blogs on the net belonging to both sides of the aisle, I can safely I am very pleased that McCain picked her as running mate. Sure you can talk about her 'record' and her 'executive experience' but let's be serious for a minute here; the majority of her so called experience comes from sitting on a city council and then being mayor of a town with _slightly_ more people than the freaking high school I attended. She then went on to run a state that has more moose than people. That's not much National experience, much less International experience; McCain should've gone with Romney, an experienced governor(not to mention an economics expert) of a more populous state than Alaska. Her record is pretty decent, but she's nothing more than a 'safety' pick and a lure for those fanatical Clintonistas who hate Obama.


----------



## Mr. Stud Muffin (Aug 29, 2008)

*@ McCain (the candidate)*


----------



## Zephos (Aug 29, 2008)

Orochimaru said:


> Obama is so old news to the female voters right now. Sarah is everything an American Woman wants to be. Cute, successful, honest, powerful, mother of kids, happy wife, and comes from a blue collar family. What's not to like! pek



I just threw up in my mouth a little.


----------



## lava (Aug 29, 2008)

SeventhDan said:


> *You know, one could easily raise the question that how in the world could a governer new to the stage and extremely young lead the nation.*
> 
> How can Obama lead the nation under the same concept?
> 
> Good pick though.



My guess is that McCain is trying to say that

. If the Obama supporters think that he can be a president with out having much xp, then so can she .  Kinda like the eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth LOL


----------



## Simulacrum (Aug 29, 2008)

VP isn't the position that requires great experience. The VP only has to two do things: 1) promote the policies that the president sets out and 2) have the integrity to not be a partisan insider so she'll fight corruption at need. 

Sarah Palin brings these two factors to the ticket, and she has them in spades. This is exactly the kind of person that McCain needed to put on the bottom of his ticket. I reject the obtuse argument that she's going to have to be able to take on the reigns of the presidency herself because out of the scores of presidents that we've had only a handful have ever had to shift their responsibilities to the VP, temporarily or otherwise, and her record shows that she's exactly the kind of person that can be trusted in that type of situation. 

But it's good to know that liberal hacks have already started up their BAWWW machines. They're going to have to be in top shape come November.


----------



## lava (Aug 29, 2008)

yea im totaly with  with ^


----------



## Kira U. Masaki (Aug 29, 2008)

oh dear God, when i first saw this i was like you gotta be kidding, people where complaining about Huckabee because he wouldnt get you any additional votes, well at least he wouldnt lose you any either


----------



## Zephos (Aug 29, 2008)

Kira U. Masaki said:


> oh dear God, when i first saw this i was like you gotta be kidding, people where complaining about Huckabee because he wouldnt get you any additional votes, well at least he wouldnt lose you any either



Huckabee would alienate the hell out of any Republicans not socially far-right. Let alone Clintonite liberals and independants.
What are you talking about.

It would have been political suicide to pick Huckabee as VP.


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 29, 2008)

It's amazing how everyone immediately goes and claims this is all to steal voters.  Is it McCain's fault that Obama couldn't find someone with the ability to draw in women and believe in his policies at the same time?  Other than Clinton, at least.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 29, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> It's amazing how everyone immediately goes and claims this is all to steal voters.  Is it McCain's fault that Obama couldn't find someone with the ability to draw in women and believe in his policies at the same time?  Other than Clinton, at least.



I don't think you thought this post through at all.
It's not saying anything.


----------



## Kyuubi Whisker (Aug 29, 2008)

*ALL HAIL !*


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 29, 2008)

Zephos said:


> I don't think you thought this post through at all.
> It's not saying anything.



It would have been far too late to edit it in to my reply to Blaze, but seeing stud_muffin22's recent post, I think it was worthy to comment on.


----------



## Sasori-puppet#66 (Aug 29, 2008)

All I know about this girl is that she's the governor of Alaska, a mother of 5 and anti-gay marriage. I'm not liking the sound of that.


----------



## Harmonie (Aug 29, 2008)

Sasori-puppet#66 said:


> All I know about this girl is that she's the governor of Alaska, a mother of 5 *and anti-gay marriage*. I'm not liking the sound of that.



*sighs*

Well I guess we can't expect anything better, right? McCain's also anti gay marriage and pretty much anti anything that would help LGBT people.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 29, 2008)

her daughter got nice titties.  mccain following obama's formula step for step, now tell me who's the leader? it's like obamas a honda and mccains a hyundai :LS


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 29, 2008)

Palin at least doesn't seem fully anti-gay rights. Just opposed to marriage, as one might expect in an evangelical Christian.

@ dreams lie,
...choosing a vice president is always about winning voters over.


----------



## Lord Genome (Aug 29, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> Yes..  Book learnin is weigh over estimeted.  Are you kidding me?  The competition to even get in to a school like Harvard is fierce.  It shows a high level of personal discipline.


There are far more factors into something like that. Money scholorships, personal prefrence, etc.

Just because someone goes to one school doesnt mean they couldnt get into another.


----------



## drache (Aug 29, 2008)

Tsukiyomi said:


> Did she just say she doesn't know what the VP does? And she accepted this position?


 
Yes she did and yet Sim and Radical want you to believe that this woman is qualified to be VP.

Me I'm just trying not to laugh too much


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 29, 2008)

drache said:


> Yes she did and yet Sim and Radical want you to believe that this woman is qualified to be VP.
> 
> Me I'm just trying not to laugh too much



before u laugh i suggest obama supporters take this shit serious. 

This falls into that catergory of "it's so stupid it just might work" or "you are either crazy or genius" type of thing.


----------



## TruEorFalse_21 (Aug 29, 2008)

Sasori-puppet#66 said:


> All I know about this girl is that she's the governor of Alaska, a mother of 5 and anti-gay marriage. I'm not liking the sound of that.



Okay, so what are you saying here that you don't like a) Alaska b) her 5 children and c)people who are anti-gay marriage. Well I don't see what the first 2 have to do with politics, but with regards to the third I doubt it will matter much as the US is for the most part anti-gay marriage, which is why so many gay marriage proposals were knocked down in 2004.


----------



## drache (Aug 29, 2008)

narutosimpson said:


> before u laugh i suggest obama supporters take this shit serious.
> 
> This falls into that catergory of "it's so stupid it just might work" or "you are either crazy or genius" type of thing.


 
If this really is the difference maker I will have lost all respect for both my fellow citziens and the GOP. I mean the hypocrisy, disrepect and outright stupidity is so balantly apparent that this should be laughed down.

We're talking the least experienced VP in at least  45 years.



Orochimaru said:


> You mean pro-life?


 

No he meant anti abortion, go play word games else where. McCain is against Roe v Wade COMPLETELY



Simulacrum said:


> VP isn't the position that requires great experience. The VP only has to two do things: 1) promote the policies that the president sets out and 2) have the integrity to not be a partisan insider so she'll fight corruption at need.
> 
> Sarah Palin brings these two factors to the ticket, and she has them in spades. This is exactly the kind of person that McCain needed to put on the bottom of his ticket. I reject the obtuse argument that she's going to have to be able to take on the reigns of the presidency herself because out of the scores of presidents that we've had only a handful have ever had to shift their responsibilities to the VP, temporarily or otherwise, and her record shows that she's exactly the kind of person that can be trusted in that type of situation.
> 
> But it's good to know that liberal hacks have already started up their BAWWW machines. They're going to have to be in top shape come November.


 

You seriously have issues and need professional help.

Or maybe you're just too partisan to admit it.....

But you seriously are going to say that it's okay for the next in line for President to have thier best qualifacation be 18 months in the 47th smallest state? A person's who until a couple years ago biggest probelm were moose and enough snow for the Idterad?

You're just a hack now because if the situation were refused you'd be screaming your head off about how this is so wrong and stupid.


----------



## Casyle (Aug 29, 2008)

Well, that pick certainly came outta left field for me.  *Laughs*

Should be interesting come voting time.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 29, 2008)

drache said:


> If this really is the difference maker I will have lost all respect for both my fellow citziens and the GOP. I mean the hypocrisy, disrepect and outright stupidity is so balantly apparent that this should be laughed down.



i'm not talking about respect for anybody (i lost that after bushes reelection), but respect their stupidities ability to hurt you.


----------



## Garlock (Aug 29, 2008)

Okay guys, some new facts have appeared, First off, she is a Dwarf. Secondly, she is not a governor, she runs the Mines of Moria.
Confirmed and PROOF: Art Book

Gimli:  Soon, master Elf, you will enjoy the fabled hospitality of the dwarves.  Roaring fires, malt beer, red meat off the bone!  This, my friend,  is the home of my cousin *Palin*, and they call it a mine.  A mine!

and 

Art Book

Gimli:  If anyone was to ask for my opinion, which I note, they're not.  I'd say we were taking the long way round.   Gandalf, we could pass through the Mines of Moria.  My cousin *Palin* would give us a royal welcome.

Gandalf:  No, Gimli.  I would not take the road through Moria unless I had no other choice.

I hate dwarfs, greedy little bastards without a sense of sharing.


----------



## Bender (Aug 29, 2008)

dreams lie said:
			
		

> Proof?







> At Andover, Bush never got his name on the honor roll, even one term. The published record shows that on his very first essay assignment, the future president's grade was zero. "Disgraceful," the teacher wrote in bright red ink.




The experience of the VP is super critical.  Given that Palin will be a heart beat away from the Presidency, and the fact that McCain has had cancer 4 times and is 72 years old.  Her experience is seriously relevant.


----------



## Cyrizian (Aug 29, 2008)

Wow! She hunts moose and is married to an eskimo... How cool is that?! McCain's pick is very bizarre but strangly... a perfect fit for him. McCain certainly knows how to surprise people.


----------



## Cold (Aug 29, 2008)

I'm just saying, it's rather obvious what he's trying to do, and I wouldn't fault him for it if he actually changed his policies to court the ladies instead of throwing a random woman at them to suggest that they vote with their vagina.  It's insulting.  It's like buying their vote by making one woman the VP, while the rest of them that have fought for things such as equal pay for equal work and Roe vs. Wade are sent back a few decades.  She's literally a trojan horse, and a damn obvious one at that.

All that said, as a person, she seems very cool and admirable.  To do what she's done with 5 kids is amazing.  I just disagree too strongly with her and McCain's policies.


----------



## Lord Genome (Aug 29, 2008)

Lord Genome said:


> There are far more factors into something like that. Money scholorships, personal prefrence, etc.
> 
> Just because someone goes to one school doesnt mean they couldnt get into another.


Blaze i was going to ignore the fact that you ignored me but that neg made me sad.

Mind rebuting or prove that you just negged out of spite cause you were wrong?


----------



## drache (Aug 29, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> It's amazing how everyone immediately goes and claims this is all to steal voters. Is it McCain's fault that Obama couldn't find someone with the ability to draw in women and believe in his policies at the same time? Other than Clinton, at least.


 
This isn't about stealing, just like baseball there's no crying in politics.

But normally when you're trying to be clever, you are well clever and not so naked about your ambitions.

That's what is pissing alot of people off.



narutosimpson said:


> i'm not talking about respect for anybody (i lost that after bushes reelection), but respect their stupidities ability to hurt you.


 
fair enough


----------



## Bender (Aug 29, 2008)

Bear Walken said:


> Nice choice by McCain but Biden should have no problem with her in a debate. Then again, if he comes on too strong. Motherfuckers are going to cry out bully. And if the media treats her like so & so, the same motherfuckers are going to cry unfair treatment because she's a woman.



If people do that is just plain fucking sad.

Though that is highly unlike since 1. He's far more mature and not as ditzy as her dumbass is and 2. She has no fucking chance and the chances of it happening is ridiculous.

It's an old man who is only 21 fucking years older than her and people are going to cry bully?  Oh, bully because he's smarter than her and has more knowledge of the world of politics and how to command the country in case McCain dies of a heart attack or is shot? She would fucking pass out due to the amount stress placed on her.


----------



## Bender (Aug 29, 2008)

Lord Genome said:
			
		

> There are far more factors into something like that. Money scholorships, personal prefrence, etc.
> 
> Just because someone goes to one school doesnt mean they couldnt get into another.



True. However the fact is that the competition at those top schools is significant.  That's why graduates from Harvard, Yale, Princeton are highly sought for top jobs and are become presidents of corporations and the USA.


----------



## Lord Genome (Aug 29, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> True. However the fact is that the competition at those top schools is significant.  That's why graduates from Harvard, Yale, Princeton are highly sought for top jobs and are become presidents of corporations and the USA.


I know, im just saying that theres more factors than just being smart.

For example the reasons that got Bush getting into Yale.

My point is that just because someone gets into a better college doesnt necessarly mean that that person is smarter and that there are other factors.


----------



## Most_Valuable_Playa (Aug 29, 2008)

She has foreign issues experiences.
She's from Alaska which is next to Russia...

But seriously, McCain had short-term vision with this choice. He picked her for the campaign, not for actually being a qualified VP.


----------



## Robotkiller (Aug 29, 2008)

It's official; McCain doesn't care about the Independent vote.

They are totally courting the clinton feminist vote. Their message is : Vote for the GOP, 'cause if McCain DIES then you get a women as president.

The only question is how much power will she really have?


----------



## Superrazien (Aug 29, 2008)

Wasn't she a former beauty queen like his wife? Shows how much McCain thinks of Woman.


----------



## Bender (Aug 29, 2008)

> My point is that just because someone gets into a better college doesnt necessarly mean that that person is smarter and that there are other factors.



I agree.


----------



## Lord Yu (Aug 29, 2008)

Most_Valuable_Playa said:


> She has foreign issues experiences.
> She's from Alaska which is next to Russia...
> 
> But seriously, McCain had short-term vision with this choice. He picked her for the campaign, not for actually being a qualified VP.



Just because her state is next to Russia doesn't mean she's dealt with them directly.


----------



## Cold (Aug 29, 2008)

Watching MSNBC right now.  A Republican Representative just said that Palin has more executive experience than Obama.  But, by the same token, she also has more than McCain.  We really just need to get off the experience argument.


----------



## Most_Valuable_Playa (Aug 29, 2008)

Superrazien said:


> Wasn't she a former beauty queen like his wife? Shows how much McCain thinks of Woman.



You can't forget she's a self proclaimed hockey mom.
That goes far.


----------



## Most_Valuable_Playa (Aug 29, 2008)

Lord Yu said:


> Just because her state is next to Russia doesn't mean she's dealt with them directly.



I know. I heard that statement on Fox News earlier today.
lol.


----------



## drache (Aug 29, 2008)

Most_Valuable_Playa said:


> You can't forget she's a self proclaimed hockey mom.
> That goes far.


 
Yes mostly in circles


----------



## Garlock (Aug 29, 2008)

Putin would enslave her and torture her relentlessly. Im sure she would be the one who would deliver his blowjobs during all main meals throughout the day, complete with a request to swallow and a threat to not deliver meals if she does not supply the request.

Oh Vladimir.


----------



## Lord Yu (Aug 29, 2008)

Most_Valuable_Playa said:


> I know. I heard that statement on Fox News earlier today.
> lol.



First rule of the debate: NEVER listen to fox news.


----------



## Trov (Aug 29, 2008)

Cold said:


> While I don't totally disagree, she's more susceptible to the experience argument than Obama because Obama won his position while she was appointed hers.  We've seen how Obama performs under pressure, and we've seen how he carries himself with foreign nations.  We've seen his ability to organize, inspire, and lead just by looking at the campaign he ran against Clinton.  He may not have had the title of governor, but we've definitely seen Obama lead on the national level first hand, and that's more than can be said of Palin who runs a state with such a small population.


I doubt that she's more suspectible, because in the end. Obama was still chosen. And if the democratic party thought that experience didn't matter, they can not make the argument that it matters with Palin, period(Granted, Clinton Backers would have a better leg to stand on when arguing that Palin has little experience.)
And personally, I think compared to McCain, he's horrible on foreign matters, he realized this himself with picking Biden. If Georgia wasn't enough of a clue.



Blaze of Glory said:


> Please elaborate? people say she can do the job when she's only been governor for 1 1/2 frickin years that's hardly experienced. What's more is how much of a cornball she is as well as the fact it's a panic choice for all the retarded Hillary Clinton fans. He doesn't care about women he's doing it because he think he's being cunning about it not to mention it's offensive since he's trying to take advantage of women's vulnerability at the moment since Hillary's lost. There is no logic behind it. Compared to Obama she has the experience of a Elementary school teacher. It's pathetic.
> 
> Also she's inspirational because she has five children?  Pleaaaase my  dad's mom had to take care of eleven children (this is true swear on my mother's grave) and my mom's mom had to take care of seven children.
> 
> ...


Lets be honest her. I highly doubt McCain is putting her in place because of her gender, I have seen and heard Palin, and she is a remarkable woman(It's not that she had five kids, he was pregnant, found out her child to be would have Downs syndrome, choose not to abort that child.) And that was just one of the examples. She fits McCain's theme of a Maverick and reformer. She fought against her own party's corruption in Alaska, and quit a job on the Ethics committee because of said corruption.



ShangDOh said:


> I can't wait to watch the VP debates, Biden is going to thrash her. This election is going to be so lulzworthy.


I doubt that, but we will see.



Tsukiyomi said:


> The point is that MCCAIN was the one who made experience such a central part of the campaign, then he picks a VP with almost no experience whatsoever.  It totally goes against what he was supposed to be running on and makes it totally seem like just a ploy to grab women voters who would have otherwise voted for Hillary.


Technically, it was Hillary(and a few other democrats). McCain capitalized on that theme though. But like I said, VP =/= P. You should give SOME leeway with this since she isn't running for the highest like Obama, she's the vice. I doubt you'd hear much argument from me if Hilary was the nominee and Obama was VP. (Of course, I'd probably would have considered the election lost to Clinton if that happened.)



Blaze of Glory said:


> She did but who would? Honestly, tell me who would?  Obama has plenty to rely on Biden for since he has more knowledge. This pick of McCain's is insulting and utterly fucking pathetic and all of you who are eating this shit up I fucking pity each and every last one of you. As I,ve said before she's a tool for McCain to use to pick up all the Hillary supporters. If he's really going to choose a woman as a stand in for McCain choose someone *smarter*. Sarah Palin went to Idaho University Hillary Clinton went to *Harvard *University.


BULL FUCKING SHIT. She is no tool. Why do you people pick at her like this?

Okay, I should say it's only BoG for the most part. But I mean come on. She has alot of integrity, and would not have chosen to be VP if she was just a tool or window dressing. 



Cold said:


> Which it clearly is.  If it was about the economy, which they are trying to use as the actual reason for her being picked, they would have picked Romney, who has been governor of a considerably bigger state for a longer period of time



I would prefer Palin over Romney when it comes to the economy, but thats just me.
I mean, Romney's ok... but then there was that healthcare mess in Mass... I mean, Palin isn't exactly a shining beacon above Romney, but I just think she's better, despite her own mistakes. But hey, if you have examples on why Romney is better and Palin isn't, you are welcome to show them.




> So you're saying Obama wasn't responsible for his campaign winning, while you blame the Clinton's for losing? Are they responsible for their campaigns or not?


Honestly, Clinton fucked up royally. I don't think even Obama thought he was gonna win the primaries. I think he just wanted to run to get his name out there and officially try to run years later. likely 2012 or 2016. If the Clinton's had took this seriously, they would have won. but they took it seriously too late. And for that, I'm grateful, since I think they would have rolled over McCain otherwise.


----------



## Batman (Aug 29, 2008)

lol What a classic political tactic. I found myself, for once, not surprised.


----------



## Trov (Aug 29, 2008)

sadated_peon said:


> Obama doesn't lack experience, she does.
> 
> Her only real political career is being governor for 18 month.


And Obama has only been senator since 2005, and since early 2007, he's been running for president. Almost half the time he's been in office has been him running for president.
And yes, Obama lacks experience. He admits that himself. Thats why he makes that argument that he has the Judgment to lead.



> from your own article.
> "The doctors described a number of health issues faced by McCain, many of them typical for a man of his age but at least one of them potentially serious."


From my own article:
_""Sen. McCain *enjoys excellent health and displays extraordinary energy*, and, while it is impossible to predict any person's future health, *I and my colleagues can find no medical reason or problem that would preclude Sen. McCain from fulfilling all of the duties or obligations of the president of the United States,"* said Dr. John D. Eckstein, an internist who has been overseeing McCain's treatment for 16 years at the famed research center's campus in Scottsdale, Arizona."​_


> They are in no way on equal ground. It is ludicrous to think she has anywhere near the qualifications as Obama. Her executive experience is nothing in comparison Obama's contribution at the national level.
> 
> She has absolutely no experience in foreign policy or any experience with foreign relations.
> 
> If you want to say that only executive gives you experience to be president, then McCain and Obama are in the same boat as NEITHER have served in the executive capacity in our government.


Says a supporter for Obama(atleast I think you are), who also lacks just that, and choose Biden because he acknowledged such a weakness.

It's laughable to attack Palin of lack of experienced when Obama lacks the same. Like I said before, the only people who have a leg to stand on here are Hillary supporters and only if they acknowledge that Obama lacks that same experience(because he does, atleast Hillary had her various trips outside the country during her Husband's presidency, McCain's is obvious).
What's Obama's foreign policy cred? Did he do ANYTHING prior to running? I mean, atleast Palin worked with Canadian businesses to bring work to Alaska. 
Now, I'm not saying She's all too experienced, don't mistake what I'm trying to say, I wish she could be nurtured abit more. But I just can't help but laugh whenever someone attacks Palin of lack of experience when they are for Obama.

As for being executive. I never said that only executive experience is needed. I said the argument could be made that her experience is better because she has the right kind of it. Kinda like trying to run for a job dealing with computer hardware when you are a hardware specialist or when you are a software specialist. Both deal with computers, and those dealing with software will obviously have some knowledge on hardware. But a Hardware specialist would likely know more since thats their forte.
Same with our current running senators and governor.
Also, It's likely that while the Software specialists may lack knowledge on hardware, the longer they've dealt with computers, the more likely they know more about the hardware through experience with the software. In this case, McCain would likely know how to handle said executive experience better than Obama, and with an actual executive(hardware specialist) on the ticket, this would help McCain.



> I believe that Obama's experience matters a lot, because he has the necessary experience to be president of the United States. She on the other other hand hasn't even finish her first term at the *state* level of government.
> 
> If you are under the misguided position she is ANYWHERE NEAR as qualified as Obama then you are delusional. A delusion based solely on a bias so strong that no amount of sanity can penetrate it.
> 
> Look at it this way, in a debate do you think that Obama is going to hold his own with McCain? What about Obama vs Palin? No one thinks she has a chance against Biden because she has no fucking clue what she is doing.


Wait, isn't Obama in his first term himself, most of which was spent campaigning?

Personally, I think she's much more capable than Obama... But I guess now that Palin's the pick, experience SUDDENLY MATTERS TO OBAMA SUPPORTERS. Too bad she's the VP nominee, not President. I mean, it would be nice if she was experienced as McCain, but she doesn't need to be. Especially when McCain has more than enough to cover for her. Oh... unless he dies(which seems to be what many on the left hope for, which is sad. ATTENTION BoG: SHUT UP, pre-emptive warning because I have the feeling you'll comment on this and prove my point. I rather not have this win so easily.)

Personally, I think she will wipe the floor with Biden, Obama, and even McCain on many matters. But I find McCain and Palin to be pieces of a puzzle, one makes up for the other. Obama and Biden are the same, although Obama was never supposed to be a puzzle piece in the first place. He was supposed to be beyond that.


----------



## Xion (Aug 29, 2008)

Batman said:


> lol What a classic political tactic. I found myself, for once, not surprised.



Read about it in my political science class...called:

"The Pull the Candidate Out of Your Ass"

trick.


----------



## chikmagnet7 (Aug 29, 2008)

SeventhDan said:


> *Barack Obama's Blueprint for Change*
> 
> Read it, what a load of bile.
> 
> Like his plan to take tax breaks away from companies who ship jobs overseas. You do that and they will ship them twice as fast!



Your backwards logic is only surpassed by your ignorance. 

If you give tax breaks to companies that ship jobs over seas, what have you accomplished? They will know that they have power over you. They will know that if they only threaten to weaken the American economy by shipping jobs over seas, you will lower their taxes to satisfy them. You will be giving in. Yes, they may ship jobs faster over seas, but you will tax them into oblivion for it. In time, they'll learn....

If you, however, act intelligently, and punish them for shipping jobs overseas, they might understand that the benefits of keeping jobs here outweigh the disadvantages. They will see you giving tax breaks to the companies that keep jobs here, and they will follow suit if they know what's good for them. 

I see that your backwards thought process has affected your position on a number of similar issues, but some people just don't get it.


----------



## Trov (Aug 29, 2008)

chikmagnet7 said:


> Your backwards logic is only surpassed by your ignorance.
> 
> If you give tax breaks to companies that ship jobs over seas, what have you accomplished? They will know that they have power over you. They will know that if they only threaten to weaken the American economy by shipping jobs over seas, you will lower their taxes to satisfy them. You will be giving in. Yes, they may ship jobs faster over seas, but you will tax them into oblivion for it. In time, they'll learn....
> 
> ...



Or better yet, find out why they are leaving... Which is likely because of our high corporate tax rate(up to second highest, which Japan leading, and it's debating whether they should lower it.). Why do business here in America when you'll be taxed to death because of it?

Obama plans attack at both fronts with taxes with companies, and it's only going to hurt the workers, shareholders and consumers on the companies.


----------



## Superrazien (Aug 29, 2008)

Most_Valuable_Playa said:


> You can't forget she's a self proclaimed hockey mom.
> That goes far.



Wow to bad shes doesnt live in Canada where people actually care about Hockey.


----------



## strongarm85 (Aug 29, 2008)

Lord Yu said:


> First rule of the debate: NEVER listen to fox news.



No no no. The first rule is NEVER listen to any part of the NBC family because they don't know how to act objective anymore. It is not the role of the press to openly support one side of the election and not the other.


----------



## Nemesis (Aug 29, 2008)

Trov said:


> And Obama has only been senator since 2005, and since early 2007, he's been running for president. Almost half the time he's been in office has been him running for president.
> And yes, Obama lacks experience. He admits that himself. Thats why he makes that argument that he has the Judgment to lead.



Now i'm not arguing but doesn't Obama's role in state senate and any other political roles before that count as well to his experience.  Also i guess her role as mayor of a village/town/city or what ever she was mayor of should count to so bit way off from both sides i guess.


----------



## Trov (Aug 29, 2008)

Nemesis said:


> Now i'm not arguing but doesn't Obama's role in state senate and any other political roles before that count as well to his experience.  Also i guess her role as mayor of a village/town/city or what ever she was mayor of should count to so bit way off from both sides i guess.



If you want to count Obama in the state senate, thats fine. But like you said, you have to count Palin's career as mayor as well.

*EDIT: UPDATE:*
Appearantly, I was wrong. Clinton supporters  going crazy over the choice McCain made, in a good way for McCain.


----------



## Bender (Aug 29, 2008)

Trov said:
			
		

> Lets be honeshjt her. I highly doubt McCain is putting her in place because of her gender, I have seen and heard Palin, and she is a remarkable woman(It's not that she had five kids, he was pregnant, found out her child to be would have Downs syndrome, choose not to abort that child.) And that was just one of the examples. She fits McCain's theme of a Maverick and reformer. She fought against her own party's corruption in Alaska, and quit a job on the Ethics committee because of said corruption.



I think she is a great mom and woman but give me a break.  If God forebid McCain died in office (not to far fetched). Do you feel comfortable about her being responsible for our country who is in two wars and on the verge of collaspe?  A former mayor of an 8000 people town and now in charge of a state the size of Austin, TX?  There is a BIG and nasty world outside of beautiful Alaska.




			
				Trov said:
			
		

> BULL FUCKING SHIT. She is no tool. Why do you people pick at her like this?
> 
> Okay, I should say it's only BoG for the most part. But I mean come on. She has alot of integrity, and would not have chosen to be VP if she was just a tool or window dressing.



I agree she probably does have a lot of integrity but the best person that the Republican party could offer up to run this great country?  Give me a Break.


----------



## strongarm85 (Aug 29, 2008)

Nemesis said:


> Now i'm not arguing but doesn't Obama's role in state senate and any other political roles before that count as well to his experience.  Also i guess her role as mayor of a village/town/city or what ever she was mayor of should count to so bit way off from both sides i guess.



She's not just a mayor, she's the Govener of the State who successfully removed corruption in her local government by removing the incumbent Govener and the Atourny General, both of which are not only being prosecuted, but are also members of the Republican party. Unlike Obama she actually has a clear record of curruption from government, an actual reformer as opposed to Obama.


----------



## Bender (Aug 29, 2008)

> Unlike Obama she actually has a clear record of curruption from government, an actual reformer as opposed to Obama.




If that's so then why is she under investigation for trying to get her sister's husband fired? 

Also Obama barely has any corruption and the corruption that he DOES have is barely rather he has stupid associates William Ayers some dumb neighbor Jeremiah Wright an angry bitch and Rezko as some friend I don't give a shit about. 

Yet, the one who she's playing VP for is scum and was *THIS* close to going to jail.


----------



## Cold (Aug 29, 2008)

Trov said:


> I doubt that she's more suspectible, because in the end. Obama was still chosen. And if the democratic party thought that experience didn't matter, they can not make the argument that it matters with Palin, period(Granted, Clinton Backers would have a better leg to stand on when arguing that Palin has little experience.)
> And personally, I think compared to McCain, he's horrible on foreign matters, he realized this himself with picking Biden. If Georgia wasn't enough of a clue.



As regards foreign policy, I think the complete opposite.  McCain handled the Georgia crisis poorly IMO.  Our troops are stretched between two wars, one of which need not be fought in the first place, and he wants to play hardball with Russia?  Are you serious?  Then he makes the US look like a hypocrite by claiming that in this day and age, nations don't invade other nations, as if the Iraq situation doesn't exist.  Not to mention the numerous gaffes he's made on foreign matters, or that Obama was proven right on his idea for a timetable out of Iraq by the Iraq government and Bush.  

Obama's picked the best person in foreign matters for his VP.  I honestly don't know what Palin brings to McCain that other VP picks couldn't have done better.

EDIT:  Just saw that you responded to more of my posts.  Hold a sec, will respond to the rest.

EDIT 2:  Right.  So as regards why I felt Romney would have been a better pick, from the info I have on the two of them, Romney looks much more impressive on economics.  Just looking at his business career, his track record shows he knows how to turn a company in the red to a company well into the black (Even though that issue with Bain admittedly would have eventually come up).  As governor of Mass., he faced a deficit of a few billions, and turned it into a surplus.  He seems like a good person to use for turning around the economy.

Now, that isn't to say that Palin's accomplishments are weak, it's just that when I look at what Romney has done, and I look at what Palin was doing, Romney has simply done more, be it due to talent or simply more time.  And if the issue was strictly about the economy, I don't see Palin's accomplishments outshining Romney's.

Of course, Palin can do far more for McCain in the actual campaign than Romney ever could, or at least that's the theory behind it.  But her coming out plainly stating that she was going after Hillary's 18 million cracks tells me that she was chosen because she was a woman, and not because her economic credentials were the best, unlike Obama picking Biden because he was the best choice for foreign policy.


----------



## Trov (Aug 29, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> I think she is a great mom and woman but give me a break.  If God forebid McCain died in office (not to far fetched). Do you feel comfortable about her being responsible for our country who is in two wars and on the verge of collaspe?  A former mayor of an 8000 people town and now in charge of a state the size of Austin, TX?  There is a BIG and nasty world outside of beautiful Alaska.


Yup. More confident than Obama, Biden and even McCain in some respects.

Although one of our wars is in name only now.



> I agree she probably does have a lot of integrity but the best person that the Republican party could offer up to run this great country?  Give me a Break.



Certainly. If she was running for President, I would have likely agreed that she just didn't have enough experience to run a big country. But since she's VP. And if McCain goes the one term route(Which I think he will). She'll be better equipped after four years. In the end, I'm happy. McCain did something I never thought he would do, make me happy voting for him.


----------



## strongarm85 (Aug 29, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> If that's so then why is she under investigation for trying to get her sister's husband fired?



Also Obama barely has any corruption and the corruption that he DOES have is barely rather he has stupid associates William Ayers some dumb neighbor Jeremiah Wright an angry bitch and Rezko as some friend I don't give a shit about. 
[/quote]

Allegations, nothing has been proven yet. Some people are just incompetent and a lot of times incompetent people like to blame their problems on someone else. 

Point is, she actually as record of being a reformer, and Obama does not. Associations can get you into a lot of trouble. The fact of the matter is Obama has associations to a slum lord, a radical preacher, and a domestic terrorist, granted the terrorist has less to do with Obama than the others.



> Yet, the one who she's playing VP for is scum and was *THIS* close to going to jail.



Oh really? Where is your evidence of this? Its nice to throw around allegations, but unless you've got real proof, its just hot hair. If John McCain was really "*THIS* close to going to jail" he wouldn't be able to hide from that kind of story. Everyone in the media, especially dogmatic liberals at NBC would be shoving that story down everyone's throats so hard that you'd never hear the end of it. I don't see it anywhere, so it must not be anything that has any concrete meaning to it.

John McCain in reality, is known as the Mavorik of the Republican party. The only reason why he doesn't attack George Bush right now is because if he does he'll alienate himself from the rest of the Republican party.


----------



## Trov (Aug 29, 2008)

Cold said:


> As regards foreign policy, I think the complete opposite.  McCain handled the Georgia crisis poorly IMO.  Our troops are stretched between two wars, one of which need not be fought in the first place, and he wants to play hardball with Russia?  Are you serious?  Then he makes the US look like a hypocrite by claiming that in this day and age, nations don't invade other nations, as if the Iraq situation doesn't exist.  Not to mention the numerous gaffes he's made on foreign matters, or that Obama was proven right on his idea for a timetable out of Iraq by the Iraq government and Bush.
> 
> Obama's picked the best person in foreign matters for his VP.  I honestly don't know what Palin brings to McCain that other VP picks couldn't have done better.
> 
> EDIT:  Just saw that you responded to more of my posts.  Hold a sec, will respond to the rest


Disagree. It didn't matter our state. McCain was going to call on Russia and they folded. Russia isn't going to fight us. They don't want to. If we had not messed with Russia, they would have went further. There are differences between Iraq and Georgia(Namely, Iraq failing to completely follow through with U.N. inspectors. And as I recall, U.S. was incharge with enforcing it. Basically, we were the muscle. and as well as evidence that they were a threat, no matter if the evidence was true or false years after declaration of war. I doubt Georgia was a threat to Russia.)

I think Obama picked the worse, since it was Biden's plan to segregate Iraq based on their sects(glad that didn't happen). Of course, the image that he's good at foreign policy helps.
EDIT: as for what Palin brings. Conservatism. She keeps the base happy, even crazy for him. furthermore. she adds to his' maverick issue without pissing us off. She has her ups and downs, like all the other choices, but I'm happy. I thought it would be up against Pawlenty and Romney. I wasn't too thrilled with that choice. But Palin, helps alot in making us wanting to vote for McCain.


----------



## Superrazien (Aug 29, 2008)

I cant wait for this girl to debate Biden. Debate wise she will probably get pwned( then again her and McCain are so bad on the issues I could probably pwn them). But the media will either play it off as bullying or biased coverage.


----------



## muishot (Aug 29, 2008)

Denji said:


> Wow.
> 
> McCain may very well have thrown the election with this pick. If I were a woman, I would be insulted at this transparent and obvious ploy to try and convert Hillary supporters. She has no real qualifications, certainly not to be President were something to happen to McCain.
> 
> This election is now Obama's and Biden's to win. I think they have this in the bag now.



Unfortunately as we speak, the Evangelicals are very happy about McCain's VP.  Damn it all, I really really despise evangelicals.  They helped elect Bush twice and now this?  And also, most women especially Hillary supporters will become too emotion and stupid to see the blatant sexism and manipulation of women to be offend by it.  They will however praise McCain for putting a woman on the ticket.  

It is really sad  I am sadden at the mere thought of this and wondering where will our country be 10 -20 years down the road.  Will we be strong and respected around the world again?  Will the world look to us for leadership and praise our country as the beacon for democracy, hope, and justice for all?  Or is it going to be worse than now that more and more countries hate us.  Some of our allies are deserting us.


----------



## strongarm85 (Aug 29, 2008)

By the way, Biden being good in foreign affairs is pointless. Its the President that sets the agenda in matters of foreign affairs, not the vice president.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 29, 2008)

strongarm85 said:


> By the way, Biden being good in foreign affairs is pointless. Its the President that sets the agenda in matters of foreign affairs, not the vice president.



Where the hell were you the last 8 years?

Joke aside this is a really dumb statement.
What do you think Vice President's do exactly?


----------



## sadated_peon (Aug 29, 2008)

Trov said:
			
		

> And Obama has only been senator since 2005, and since early 2007, he's been running for president. Almost half the time he's been in office has been him running for president.
> And yes, Obama lacks experience. He admits that himself. Thats why he makes that argument that he has the Judgment to lead.


He has been a Illinois state senator since 1997, the same state level as Palin, he won an Illinois senate race in 2004. 

Obama was talking before the last election, so you must have him confused with McCain who said. 
 ?The issue of economics is not something I?ve understood as well as I should,?


			
				Trov said:
			
		

> From my own article:


Which doesn't change the fact that he has many health problems. He has had skin cancer and has have 4 tumors removed. 

His health is a major issue, no matter how much you try and sweep it under the rug. 



			
				Trov said:
			
		

> Says a supporter for Obama(atleast I think you are), who also lacks just that, and choose Biden because he acknowledged such a weakness.


Biden was chosen because of his record with womens rights, and his actual capability to be president. 



			
				Trov said:
			
		

> It's laughable to attack Palin of lack of experienced when Obama lacks the same. Like I said before, the only people who have a leg to stand on here are Hillary supporters and only if they acknowledge that Obama lacks that same experience(because he does, atleast Hillary had her various trips outside the country during her Husband's presidency, McCain's is obvious).
> What's Obama's foreign policy cred? Did he do ANYTHING prior to running? I mean, atleast Palin worked with Canadian businesses to bring work to Alaska.
> Now, I'm not saying She's all too experienced, don't mistake what I'm trying to say, I wish she could be nurtured abit more. But I just can't help but laugh whenever someone attacks Palin of lack of experience when they are for Obama.


No matter how many time you repeat that "Obama lacks the same" it will not make it true. Obama's political Career is 5 times as long as Palins, and has more related experience and education before his political career. 

Obama's foreign policy experience starts early where he has actual LIVED in other countries. It continued when he got a degree in international relations in college, While in the senate he was joined the Foreign relations comity, and is currently chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on European affairs. In this comity he has made trips to Eastern Europe, Middle East, Asia, and Africa. 

And you think that hitting up a few Canadian business compares to this? You obviously have no clue as to the relationship between Canadian business with the US. 



			
				Trov said:
			
		

> As for being executive. I never said that only executive experience is needed. I said the argument could be made that her experience is better because she has the right kind of it. Kinda like trying to run for a job dealing with computer hardware when you are a hardware specialist or when you are a software specialist. Both deal with computers, and those dealing with software will obviously have some knowledge on hardware. But a Hardware specialist would likely know more since thats their forte.
> Same with our current running senators and governor.
> Also, It's likely that while the Software specialists may lack knowledge on hardware, the longer they've dealt with computers, the more likely they know more about the hardware through experience with the software. In this case, McCain would likely know how to handle said executive experience better than Obama, and with an actual executive(hardware specialist) on the ticket, this would help McCain.


What did you miss here, if you apply that argument, then it applies to McCain. You cannot claim that executive experience is more vital without saying that Palin is MORE experienced than McCain to be president. 

The hypocrisy is staggering, you are trying to use the old bush vs kerry line which no longer works because McCain has no executive experience. 



			
				Trov said:
			
		

> Wait, isn't Obama in his first term himself, most of which was spent campaigning?


He is not in the first term of is actual political career, like Palin. 



			
				Trov said:
			
		

> Personally, I think she's much more capable than Obama... But I guess now that Palin's the pick, experience SUDDENLY MATTERS TO OBAMA SUPPORTERS. Too bad she's the VP nominee, not President. I mean, it would be nice if she was experienced as McCain, but she doesn't need to be. Especially when McCain has more than enough to cover for her. Oh... unless he dies(which seems to be what many on the left hope for, which is sad. ATTENTION BoG: SHUT UP, pre-emptive warning because I have the feeling you'll comment on this and prove my point. I rather not have this win so easily.)


I think you are biased hypocrite. 
You speak of her state executive experience as mattering over senate experienced and then claim that McCain is more experience even though all he has is senate experience. You can not get your rhetoric straight and blatantly contradict your own argument. 

She does need to be because she is a heartbeat away from the presidency. IF McCain dies she will have to take over, if she is not qualified to be president, then she is not qualified to be vp. 



			
				Trov said:
			
		

> Personally, I think she will wipe the floor with Biden, Obama, and even McCain on many matters. But I find McCain and Palin to be pieces of a puzzle, one makes up for the other. Obama and Biden are the same, although Obama was never supposed to be a puzzle piece in the first place. He was supposed to be beyond that.


lol, you seem to be the only one. Even the republican pundits on fox said she was outmatched, and how Biden was going to have to be careful not to beat her so badly that people felt sorry for her. 

But this only confirms for me your complete delusion about this woman. It is Harriet Miers all over again.


----------



## Trov (Aug 29, 2008)

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEUG0XZ9OpY[/YOUTUBE]
Palin on sexism and Hillary's run.

Awesome. I can't believe I'm this excited...


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 29, 2008)

^ Is she trying to say to just accept sexism as a natural part of society? Marvellous.



muishot said:


> Unfortunately as we speak, the Evangelicals are very happy about McCain's VP.  Damn it all, I really really despise evangelicals.  They helped elect Bush twice and now this?  *And also, most women especially Hillary supporters will become too emotion and stupid* to see the blatant sexism and manipulation of women to be offend by it.  They will however praise McCain for putting a woman on the ticket.



Quit it with the groundless misogyny.


----------



## strongarm85 (Aug 29, 2008)

Zephos said:


> Where the hell were you the last 8 years?
> 
> Joke aside this is a really dumb statement.
> What do you think Vice President's do exactly?



The Vice President's primary function is to be the tie breaking vote in the senate. The VP is basically the president's own personal senator, but only gets to vote in order to break ties in the senate. Of course in the event that the President dies or is unable to continue being president the Vice President becomes the President. That pretty much sums up her job very well.

But if you think Joe Biden is on the ticket because he can help Obama with foreign policy you've got another thing coming. Its the Secretary of State's job to help the President in matters of Foreign Policy. Biden there to reasure voters in case something where to happen to Obama while he's president which is not surprising because there are already a few gun toting hill billies that are suspected of trying to kill him.


----------



## strongarm85 (Aug 29, 2008)

Rhaella said:


> Quit it with the groundless misogyny.



What I find funny about this is that most of the people who are acting this way are misogynist democrats who are upset because McCain picked a woman.


----------



## Cold (Aug 29, 2008)

She honestly makes an admirable point in that video.

I need to research her position on equal pay for equal work.  If she's against that it will ruin what she just said for me, but perhaps she's for it.

EDIT: Actually never mind, even if she's for it I don't see that getting past McCain and his new justice appointments.  I will have to take that back about being admirable, especially considering that she's being used as a trojan horse.

EDIT: Strongarm85 people aren't upset because McCain picked a woman.  People are upset because he's trying to use her to woo Clinton supporters, but the woman is against the policies Clinton championed.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 29, 2008)

strongarm85 said:


> The Vice President's primary function is to be the tie breaking vote in the senate. The VP is basically the president's own personal senator, but only gets to vote in order to break ties in the senate. Of course in the event that the President dies or is unable to continue being president the Vice President becomes the President. That pretty much sums up her job very well.



That sums up their official duties. It does not however cover what Presidents tend to do with their VPs. Which can be anything from irrelevant yes man to a trusted advisor. Such as a more seasoned elder, this is exactly the relationship Cheney and Bush had.



> But if you think Joe Biden is on the ticket because he can help Obama with foreign policy you've got another thing coming. Its the Secretary of State's job to help the President in matters of Foreign Policy.



And yet Vice President's have and will continue to play an Advisory role to the president in any given matter on hand. 
What. Do you think there's some clause that dissallows Biden to help Obama with his policies?


----------



## Zephos (Aug 29, 2008)

strongarm85 said:


> What I find funny about this is that most of the people who are acting this way are misogynist democrats who are upset because McCain picked a woman.



Quit it with the groundless partisan bullshit.


----------



## Lord Yu (Aug 29, 2008)

Would it be spam to say I love this thread? It really is too damn entertaining. God this campaign is better than anything that's been on TV for years.


----------



## Bender (Aug 29, 2008)

> Oh really? Where is your evidence of this? Its nice to throw around allegations, but unless you've got real proof, its just hot hair. If John McCain was really "THIS close to going to jail" he wouldn't be able to hide from that kind of story. Everyone in the media, especially dogmatic liberals at NBC would be shoving that story down everyone's throats so hard that you'd never hear the end of it. I don't see it anywhere, so it must not be anything that has any concrete meaning to it.
> 
> John McCain in reality, is known as the Mavorik of the Republican party. The only reason why he doesn't attack George Bush right now is because if he does he'll alienate himself from the rest of the Republican party.



People like trying to ignore what they want to hear because they can't accept the truth?





> It goes well beyond the Keating Five
> By: Steve Benen on Wednesday, April 23rd, 2008 at 5:30 AM - PDT When considering John McCain?s history of unethical behavior, the list usually starts (and ends) with the Keating Five scandal in the 1980s, for which McCain was rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for having shown, at a minimum, poor judgment. In the aftermath, McCain helped improve his public image, and bury the scandal, by becoming an advocate of campaign-finance reform.
> 
> But the notion that McCain cleaned up his act may not be entirely true. Take, for example, Donald Diamond, a wealthy Arizona real estate developer and generous McCain contributor, who wanted some coastal land in California freed up by an Army base closing.
> ...


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 29, 2008)

strongarm85 said:


> What I find funny about this is that most of the people who are acting this way are misogynist democrats who are upset because McCain picked a woman.



With some exceptions, I haven't really gotten that impression at all.


----------



## Superrazien (Aug 29, 2008)

Does it really matter who McCain picked? They both suck on the issues that matter, once that's made clear who really cares.

Though you can't under estimate the amount of stupid people.


----------



## strongarm85 (Aug 29, 2008)

Zephos said:


> Quit it with the groundless partisan bullshit.



What? How many of you guys out here that are complaining about McCain choosing a woman can honestly say that your not already jumped on the Obama bandwagon. I've been watching a lot of you guys for a while, and so far everyone I've seen here thats complained about his choice has done so is already fully supporting Obama. 

By the way, not only am I non partisan, but I still havn't made up my mind who to vote for yet. Why? Because both candidates look so damn good that no matter who wins this election I'm going to end up with someone I like in the White House.

And no, McCain is not the second comming of George Bush, like the Dems are trying characterize him as. It is a fact that John Karry's first choice for VP back in 2004 was not John Edwards, it was John McCain, and McCain turned him down deciding that it would be better for him to run for president in 08 than to play second fiddle for John Karry.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 29, 2008)

Rhaella said:


> With some exceptions, I haven't really gotten that impression at all.



Yeah, it's more of the obvious pandering. It's basically: "Look angry Hilary supporters I chose a women for VP and Obama didn't! Vote for me!" That and probably trying to rake in a good number of female voters in general I guess.

My aunt and mother seemed somewhat insulted by it.


----------



## chaosakita (Aug 29, 2008)

I was really surprised that John McCain had chosen Palin for his VP. Like most people here, I had never heard of her before. All that I know now is that she's been governor of Alaska, looks badass with a gun (yes, that's right), and supports creationism in schools.


----------



## Simulacrum (Aug 29, 2008)

Rhaella said:


> ^ Is she trying to say to just accept sexism as a natural part of society? Marvellous.


No, you doof. She's saying that whining about it only hurts the cause (of women reaching higher office). It's better to promote solid policies with which to earn votes than to try and garner pity.


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 29, 2008)

strongarm85 said:


> What? How many of you guys out here that are complaining about McCain choosing a woman can honestly say that your not already jumped on the Obama bandwagon. I've been watching a lot of you guys for a while, and so far everyone I've seen here thats complained about his choice has done so is already fully supporting Obama.
> 
> By the way, not only am I non partisan, but I still havn't made up my mind who to vote for yet. Why? Because both candidates look so damn good that no matter who wins this election I'm going to end up with someone I like in the White House.
> 
> And no, McCain is not the second comming of George Bush, like the Dems are trying characterize him as. It is a fact that John Karry's first choice for VP back in 2004 was not John Edwards, it was John McCain, and McCain turned him down deciding that it would be better for him to run for president in 08 than to play second fiddle for John Karry.



You can be a supporter of Obama and still, objectively, find this offensive. There is no inherent misogyny in being irritated at McCain for attempting to use the manipulation of an important social issue in _this way_ to win votes. As a feminist, I find using a cause I feel strongly about as bribery in such a manner is extremely aggravating.

I liked Obama, yes, but I was never opposed to McCain until now.


----------



## strongarm85 (Aug 29, 2008)

Actually I've been thinking that McCain might pick Palin for the last few weeks. She got my attention the first time a few months ago when she filled suit against the Federal Government to allow drilling in Anwar. As soon as McCain started talking about drilling it just seemed kind of an obvious pick for me.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Aug 29, 2008)

strongarm85 said:


> Actually I've been thinking that McCain might pick Palin for the last few weeks. She got my attention the first time a few months ago when she filled suit against the Federal Government to allow drilling in Anwar. As soon as McCain started talking about drilling it just seemed kind of an obvious pick for me.



Yeah...sure.


----------



## Bender (Aug 29, 2008)

> What I find funny about this is that most of the people who are acting this way are misogynist democrats who are upset because McCain picked a woman.



You know what I find funny? Is that all the Republicans who are endorsing McCain don't at all acknowledge what McCain is trying to do by making a woman his VP and is contradicting his theme of experience and trading it by trying to be slick by making a woman his VP to earn all of the emotionally distraught Hillary supporters votes. It's fucking sexist to think that he chooses some random chick that hardly anyone knows about as his VP because all of the women liked Hillary Clinton and are pissed off that she wasn't picked by Obama.


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 29, 2008)

Simulacrum said:


> No, you doof. She's saying that whining about it only hurts the cause (of women reaching higher office). It's better to promote solid policies with which to earn votes than to try and garner pity.



"Fair or unfair, it is a given, it's a part of reality, so be it..."

Till then, it was fine, but that particular comment sounds a lot more like accepting something and trying to succeed for yourself anyway, rather than addressing and facing a problem, and inciting social change at a basic level. But I guess that's what conservatism is about.

Not that I'm particularly happy with Clinton's approach too feminism, since stressing your husband's success is rather... a setback to the cause, I think. =/

Also, lol doof? XD


----------



## strongarm85 (Aug 29, 2008)

No seriously, I did, I thought Romney and Liberman would have also made some choices, but Palin has actually been in back of mind as a possible choice since back when Hillary was still in primaries against Obama. Of course back then I thought an Obama/Clinton ticket was a sure thing.

I've been keeping track of McCain since he lost the Primary to Bush back in 2000. As soon as the suit was filled and hit national news I was thinking about her. Especially right after that happened McCain started promoting his "all of the above" approach to the energy solution.


----------



## Gooba (Aug 29, 2008)

Don't be insulted by it.  He isn't saying all women are dumb enough to be tricked, or even most.  He is just saying that there are _some _women who are stupid enough, which after hearing some of the anti-Obama Hillary supporters rant I'm 100% sure is correct.  Aiming at the bottom 1% isn't a bad move seeing how close most elections are.


----------



## muishot (Aug 29, 2008)

Rhaella said:


> ^ Is she trying to say to just accept sexism as a natural part of society? Marvellous.
> 
> 
> 
> Quit it with the groundless misogyny.



groundless but true.  They are too emotional.  They are too stupid to make a rational decision.  Supporting McCain out of spite or hatred of Obama because he beats Hillary in the Primary is the very definition of emotionally stupid.


----------



## Simulacrum (Aug 29, 2008)

Rhaella said:


> "Fair or unfair, it is a given, it's a part of reality, so be it..."
> 
> Till then, it was fine, but that particular comment sounds a lot more like accepting something and trying to succeed for yourself anyway, rather than addressing and facing a problem, and inciting social change at a basic level. But I guess that's what conservatism is about.
> 
> Not that I'm particularly happy with Clinton's approach too feminism, since relying on your husband's success is rather... a setback to the cause, I think. =/


 Accepting the reality is not the same thing as approving of the misogyny. When Clinton complained about the apparent sexist treatment she made herself look feeble, and that's not a good way to promote anything. It would be better for her to have simply focused on the issues at hand and fight over them. (granted, it's hard to fight when your opponent agrees with +90% of everything you say) 



> Also, lol doof? XD


----------



## strongarm85 (Aug 29, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> You know what I find funny? Is that all the Republicans who are endorsing McCain don't at all acknowledge what McCain is trying to do by making a woman his VP and is contradicting his theme of experience and trading it by trying to be slick by making a woman his VP to earn all of the emotionally distraught Hillary supporters votes. It's fucking sexist to think that he chooses some random chick that hardly anyone knows about as his VP because all of the women liked Hillary Clinton and are pissed off that she wasn't picked by Obama.



Um, theres a big difference between Palin running for VP and Obama running for P. If McCain is elected, and something happens to McCain Palin will have be able to spend some time as the Vice President to get the experience needed to be president. If Obama is elected President than he's got hit the ground running on Day 1.

What McCain has done here is changed tactics. The Experience card has been played out now, and McCain knows he can't use it until election day forever, especially not after this last week. So now by doing this he puts Obama in a position where everyone can say "Oh really" when his campaign starts to say that Palin is not qualified to be Vice President. So now when Obama attacks Palin he can fire right back because the same thing can be said about him.

LOOK people. I understand how McCain's thinking about this. I know a lot of you think this is just a political stunt, but no, this is not stunt. McCain knows that Palin is going to come under a lot of fire when at first, and if he did not think that Palin could easily handle it he would not have picked her. Its as simple as that. She is known for being a tough lady, for McCain to pick her means that there is at least some truth to that.


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 29, 2008)

Gooba said:


> Don't be insulted by it.  He isn't saying all women are dumb enough to be tricked, or even most.  He is just saying that there are _some _women who are stupid enough, which after hearing some of the anti-Obama Hillary supporters rant I'm 100% sure is correct.  Aiming at the bottom 1% isn't a bad move seeing how close most elections are.



Not insulted; I just don't like it when people claim things without thinking about what exactly they're saying. "Most women... are stupid" falls into that category. :3



muishot said:


> groundless but true.  They are too emotional.  They are too stupid to make a rational decision.  Supporting McCain out of spite or hatred of Obama because he beats Hillary in the Primary is the very definition of emotionally stupid.



True, perhaps, though I'm not sure exactly how many of her supporters fall into that crowd, and how many more won't support Obama for other reasons. Keep in mind that not all women, and even all feminists, are supporters of Clinton.



Simulacrum said:


> Accepting the reality is not the same thing as approving of the misogyny. When Clinton complained about the apparent sexist treatment she made herself look feeble, and that's not a good way to promote anything. It would be better for her to have simply focused on the issues at hand and fight over them. (granted, it's hard to fight when your opponent agrees with +90% of everything you say)



I'm not about to defend Clinton, but I think gender needed to be discussed at some point (like race did, with Obama). No, not whining, but ignoring the issue altogether isn't the answer. I can't say how Palin would address such things, though, since there was little extra context.


----------



## muishot (Aug 29, 2008)

strongarm85 said:


> What? *How many of you guys out here that are complaining about McCain choosing a woman can honestly say that your not already jumped on the Obama bandwagon.* I've been watching a lot of you guys for a while, and so far everyone I've seen here thats complained about his choice has done so is already fully supporting Obama.
> 
> By the way, not only am I non partisan, but I still havn't made up my mind who to vote for yet. Why? Because both candidates look so damn good that no matter who wins this election I'm going to end up with someone I like in the White House.
> 
> And no, McCain is not the second comming of George Bush, like the Dems are trying characterize him as. It is a fact that John Karry's first choice for VP back in 2004 was not John Edwards, it was John McCain, and McCain turned him down deciding that it would be better for him to run for president in 08 than to play second fiddle for John Karry.



I can.  I am not upset.  I just hate the fact that women are being use like some rag dolls and they choose to believe that they are being treated with the utmost respect, when it is the complete opposite.  If Obama's campaign does this right by pointing out the obvious without being too harsh because some women might get offended by it, he could be very well become the President.  In my mind, this is a race for McCain to loose because I believe Race still play a major role.  But now with this VP pick by McCain, Obama might have a chance.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 29, 2008)

is it true it took her 20 years to get her undergrad?


----------



## Simulacrum (Aug 29, 2008)

Rhaella said:


> I'm not about to defend Clinton, but I think gender needed to be discussed at some point (like race did, with Obama). No, not whining, but ignoring the issue altogether isn't the answer. I can't say how Palin would address such things, though, since there was little extra context.


 True enough (although Obama has been race baiting). I'm sure it'll be brought up eventually (by the media trying to poke a hole in the reasoning behind McCain's choice of her) so we'll see what she'll make of it.


----------



## strongarm85 (Aug 29, 2008)

muishot said:


> I can.  I am not upset.  I just hate the fact that women are being use like some rag dolls and they choose to believe that they are being treated with the utmost respect, when it is the complete opposite.  If Obama's campaign does this right by pointing out the obvious without being too harsh because some women might get offended by it, he could be very well become the President.  In my mind, this is a race for McCain to loose because I believe Race still play a major role.  But now with this VP pick by McCain, Obama might have a chance.



Race does play a major role in this campaign, but not in the way you might think. There are a lot of white people out there that honestly believe that if they don't vote Obama everyone is going to call them a racists. If you thought the Exits polls in the 2000 election where off wait till you see this one. They might as well not even do exit polling because the white people in a lot of places are going to be too embarrassed to not say they voted for Obama on poll even if they voted for McCain.


----------



## strongarm85 (Aug 29, 2008)

narutosimpson said:


> is it true it took her 20 years to get her undergrad?



No its not true.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 29, 2008)

obama supporters are doing good, 280 posts in here, the biden thread only had 130.  I'm sure it's obama supporters thrashing that nomination.   Keep it up, 10 weeks to go, we don't have a minute to waste


----------



## muishot (Aug 29, 2008)

Rhaella said:


> Not insulted; I just don't like it when people claim things without thinking about what exactly they're saying. "Most women... are stupid" falls into that category. :3
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I never said all women.  I was referring to most of Hillary's supporters.  I see why you get offended when I use the word "most".  The reason I didn't clarify it because I thought that people would understand base on the context being discuss and the many posts about Hillary and her supporters.  If I said most, then I would be also insulting those millions of women who supported Obama.  And that is just wrong.  My apology for not being clear enough.


----------



## strongarm85 (Aug 29, 2008)

narutosimpson said:


> obama supporters are doing good, 280 posts in here, the biden thread only had 130.  I'm sure it's obama supporters thrashing that nomination.   Keep it up, 10 weeks to go, we don't have a minute to waste



Thats because Biden is boring old white man. Theres a damn good reason why Biden never won the Presidental Nomination in his party. I think Joe Biden is probably one of the worst choices Obama could have made. Biden is also a Plagiarizer.


----------



## Bender (Aug 29, 2008)

strongarm85 said:


> Um, theres a big difference between Palin running for VP and Obama running for P. If McCain is elected, and something happens to McCain Palin will have be able to spend some time as the Vice President to get the experience needed to be president. If Obama is elected President than he's got hit the ground running on Day 1.



How is it Obama gonna get hit when he's already presidential-like? 

The man has bigger rally's than McCain's old ass does and is able to look better than he does too. The chance of assassination is very unlikely.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 29, 2008)

strongarm85 said:


> Thats because Biden is boring old white man. Theres a damn good reason why Biden never won the Presidental Nomination in his party. I think Joe Biden is probably one of the worst choices Obama could have made. Biden is also a Plagiarizer.



that's why he's vp duh   boring is good in a VP, like i said before , nobody really cares about vp.  Unless they are gonna run for pres, like gore, or they are evil supervillains, like cheney.


----------



## drache (Aug 29, 2008)

strongarm85 said:


> She's not just a mayor, she's the Govener of the State who successfully removed corruption in her local government by removing the incumbent Govener and the Atourny General, both of which are not only being prosecuted, but are also members of the Republican party. Unlike Obama she actually has a clear record of curruption from government, an actual reformer as opposed to Obama.


 
You mean she removed the corruption *after* she campaigned with 'Tubes' Stevens to get elected and then stabbed him in the back.

Yeah nothing like a reformer with no ethics.



strongarm85 said:


> What? How many of you guys out here that are complaining about McCain choosing a woman can honestly say that your not already jumped on the Obama bandwagon. I've been watching a lot of you guys for a while, and so far everyone I've seen here thats complained about his choice has done so is already fully supporting Obama.
> 
> By the way, not only am I non partisan, but I still havn't made up my mind who to vote for yet. Why? Because both candidates look so damn good that no matter who wins this election I'm going to end up with someone I like in the White House.
> 
> And no, McCain is not the second comming of George Bush, like the Dems are trying characterize him as. It is a fact that John Karry's first choice for VP back in 2004 was not John Edwards, it was John McCain, and McCain turned him down deciding that it would be better for him to run for president in 08 than to play second fiddle for John Karry.


 

Do you have a memory probelm? I already showed you earlier that McCain *DOES NOT LIKE WOMEN*, he treats them worse then crap (and frankly I've got more ammo if I need it) and yet you're going to pull this bull shit of 'oh it's just the dems fault because they're upset McCain choose a woman'.

No you moron 95%+ of the people here are upset because Palin is a*  show piece* she's something to distract people from McCain's abysmal attitude (and the GOP as a whole) towards women and minorities and basically trying the same crap that Bush pulled.

That's the probelm.

If McCain wanted a republican that was qualified but was also a woman why not Olympia Snow? She's been a senator for *14 years* in the deep blue state of Maine which proves she knows at least how to deal with the other side. But no, McCain went for the show piece, what will probably be a useless pick outside of the fact that she has boobs and therefore that proves McCain is a nice guy.

Give me a fucking break, he should have gone for Snow; at least then I'd actually be worried.


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

drache said:


> You mean she removed the corruption *after* she campaigned with 'Tubes' Stevens to get elected and then stabbed him in the back.
> 
> Yeah nothing like a reformer with no ethics.
> 
> ...



Better believe dat


Pull out the ammunition anyways I'm curious to see McCain's history with woman


----------



## drache (Aug 30, 2008)

strongarm85 said:


> Thats because Biden is boring old white man. Theres a damn good reason why Biden never won the Presidental Nomination in his party. I think Joe Biden is probably one of the worst choices Obama could have made. Biden is also a Plagiarizer.


 

Oh no, not a plagiarzier!

I hate to break this to you but McCain stole from freaken Wikapedia and Barack Obama's website (how pathetic is that?) and Cindy McCain (or one of her staffers as that is who got scape goated) got caught stealing cooking recipes from Food Network and Toll House Cookies.

Do you really want to continue this line?



Blaze of Glory said:


> Better believe dat
> 
> 
> Pull out the ammunition anyways I'm curious to see McCain's history with woman


 
Oh gods, it'd take me at least an afternoon of research for all of it, but off the top of my head:

He cheated on his first wife and had an affair with his future second wife while married to the first

His first wife who waited for him while he was a POW, yeah he dumped her as soon as he got home.

He proposed adding Cindy to a topless biker 'beauty' contest which includes such gems as 'banana shallowing' (and I mean whole banana)

He once told a 'joke' about Chelesa Clinton being so ugly because Janet Reno was her father

He's also told a number of other 'jokes' that if they're not sexist they are at least a dumb idea to say out loud involving Sen Clinton and her daughter

He voted against a bill for equal pay for equal work

He's voted consitently against women's health

He's for viagra (funded by the goverment) but against birth control being funded by the goverment

In his attempt to stop women from recieving contraceptives, he also cut funding to breast cancer screening and research

And I'm sure if I was motivated I could come up with more.


----------



## muishot (Aug 30, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> How is it Obama gonna get hit when he's already presidential-like?
> 
> The man has bigger rally's than McCain's old ass does and is able to look better than he does too. The chance of assassination is very unlikely.



No, he is not talking about Obama being assassinated.  He is talking about Obama's experience to run the Presidency from the get go or day 1 of his Presidency if he get elected.  In the context of that post, he is talking about experience.  He is trying to say that Palin although she lacks the experience, she is not a President.  She is only a VP so she does not need the experience to be the commander in chief from day 1.  She would have that time to learn and gain experience.

A better argument is what if something happen to McCain 1 day after he sworn in?  Would she still be qualifies to take over the Presidency?  *What does this say about McCain's judgment and hypocrisy?*  He always talk about picking a VP who can step in on day 1 if something is to happen to him.  That means he or she has to be as experience as he is.  Experience is the theme of his campaign and his attack against Obama and now he pick someone who could be completely inexperience when it comes to foreign relations as his VP? 

And Obama's campaign should use this to attack John McCain on *two fronts:  One is to attack McCain's judgment and hypocrisy or flip flop.  And the other is to point out the blatant sexism, manipulating, insulting their intelligence, and using them like rag dolls or worse.*  I hope that they could pull this off.  Who am I to say this because most of them are obviously smarter than me.  I am sure if most of us on this forum are able to through this, they would see this a mile ahead of us.

Edit:  I still don't know anything about this woman only that she lacks the experience needed.


----------



## drache (Aug 30, 2008)

^

well and the cold truth is there are *alot* of things that can strike the elderly that even if it doesn't kill them it would leave them unable to fulfill the duties of president.

I mean I could probably build a list just as long as the one I have on why McCain hates women only this time it would be the things that would leave Palin as president. And frankly that should be a scary thought for any rational person becuase Palin has absolutely no experience.

Maybe she does fine, maybe she screws up; but that's a huge risk with alot of lives in the balance.


----------



## chaosakita (Aug 30, 2008)

> drache is Luminarydrache is Luminarydrache is Luminarydrache is Luminarydrache is Luminarydrache is Luminarydrache is Luminarydrache is Luminarydrache is Luminarydrache is Luminarydrache is Luminary
> 
> Default
> Quote:
> ...



If I ever had any sympathy for McCain before, I don't now.


----------



## drache (Aug 30, 2008)

of course that builds on my earlier list (you can find it here Zeche) 

So that's what? Almost 20 things that show McCain does not like women. I'm going to have to conslidate and now count (becuase I am curious)


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

drache said:


> Oh gods, it'd take me at least an afternoon of research for all of it, but off the top of my head:
> 
> He cheated on his first wife and had an affair with his future second wife while married to the first
> 
> ...



LOL

I'm already liking what I see

Funny-ass shit


----------



## chikmagnet7 (Aug 30, 2008)

Trov said:


> Or better yet, find out why they are leaving... Which is likely because of our high corporate tax rate(up to second highest, which Japan leading, and it's debating whether they should lower it.). Why do business here in America when you'll be taxed to death because of it?
> 
> Obama plans attack at both fronts with taxes with companies, and it's only going to hurt the workers, shareholders and consumers on the companies.



Like you said, it may well be because our corporate taxes are too high, but think about what your'e saying. 

Why reward the companies who ship jobs over seas? Again, you are essentially saying "You win. Come back to help our economy, please." These American companies should support our economy anyways as a show of support for our country. The fact that they're greedy and want to squeeze out as much money as possible (so find the lower taxes) isn't reason enough to lower their taxes. Why reward them for it? 

If the economy is booming here, which is would if some of these companies didn't ship their jobs over seas, it won't matter that we tax more. They'll still be making as much money as their greedy asses desire. 

If we, instead, act logically and support the companies that support us with tax breaks and tax more heavily those that don't, we will see a gradual shift towards more jobs here in the states, both because companies will learn that the punishment for shipping jobs is too much and because the benefits they gain by keeping jobs here is too great.

It's a carrot and stick method that both philosophers and economists would tell you is very effective.


----------



## ZeroBlack (Aug 30, 2008)

Someone (coughMcBushcough) obviously wants to crazied Hillary fan voters . Psh, McBush better not start yapping about Obama's experience now though. =/


----------



## strongarm85 (Aug 30, 2008)

drache said:


> Oh no, not a plagiarzier!
> 
> I hate to break this to you but McCain stole from freaken Wikapedia and Barack Obama's website (how pathetic is that?) and Cindy McCain (or one of her staffers as that is who got scape goated) got caught stealing cooking recipes from Food Network and Toll House Cookies.
> 
> Do you really want to continue this line?



I sure do, because its very obvious that you have no idea what your talking about.

First of all, its only Plagerism if you take someone else's work and claim that its your own. Which is something Joe Biden did while he was in College. The first time he ran for President he lied about his credentials to everyone and when he was exposed he dropped out of the race in disgrace.

Now what McCain has done is not Plagerism. He has gone after those places as a means to search for information about Obama and showed how his opinions where changing at the moment. He never qouted the information he found there and claimed it to be his own. That is not Plagerism.

So no, its not the same thing. When Joe Biden was in school he was caught plagerizing and managed to get away with he. He had the bottom grades in his class, he was a bigger failure than Bush as far as school is concerned. In general Joe Biden has a history of being a rather incompetant guy. To be honest the guy also has a very low self esteem for an elected official.



> Oh gods, it'd take me at least an afternoon of research for all of it, but off the top of my head:
> 
> He cheated on his first wife and had an affair with his future second wife while married to the first
> 
> His first wife who waited for him while he was a POW, yeah he dumped her as soon as he got home.



Ahh, but I did a little research of my own, including an interview with Carol McCain, John McCain's first wife, earlier this year.

While your first statement is true, your second statement is completely false. In Carol's own words.



> Carol insists she remains on good terms with her ex-husband, who agreed as part of their divorce settlement to pay her medical costs for life. ?I have no bitterness,?
> 
> she says. ?My accident is well recorded. I had 23 operations, I am five inches shorter than I used to be and I was in hospital for six months. It was just awful, but it wasn?t the reason for my divorce.
> 
> ?My marriage ended because John McCain didn?t want to be 40, he wanted to be 25. You know that happens...it just does.?



source: 

The fact of the matter is McCain got out of the POW camp in 1973 and stayed with his wife 7 years until he deviorced her in 1980. The reason that she stated for their devorce is essentially a mid-life crisis. In her own words he did not leave her because she was crippled. 



> He proposed adding Cindy to a topless biker 'beauty' contest which includes such gems as 'banana shallowing' (and I mean whole banana)



It was a joke, he was talking a motor cycle rally and a lot of the people there where going to a Kid Rock concert. He wasn't being serious, he was playing to the crowd.




> He once told a 'joke' about Chelesa Clinton being so ugly because Janet Reno was her father


 
And its a good joke too. People have joked about Chelsea Clinton looks for the past 16 years now. He's not serious about it, he's playing to the crowd.



> He's also told a number of other 'jokes' that if they're not sexist they are at least a dumb idea to say out loud involving Sen Clinton and her daughter



So what? Saturday Night Live has been making fun of Senator Clinton and her Daughter 1991.



> He voted against a bill for equal pay for equal work



Which is a very Republican thing to do, although not for the reasons you might think. The Democrats are in favor of Federal Government major aspects of people's lives and that is a fact. There are lots of factors go into people's wages sometimes, like experience, seniority, training. Had he signed the bill not only would have been ineffective and quite literally impossible to enforce, because you can't legally tell someone how much to pay each employee that works for them.

Besides, there is a system where everybody gets paid the same amount regardless of race, gender, age, or any other factor. Its called communism. In essence, thats what communism is.



> He's voted consitently against women's health



Name one time he has passed a bill the specifically denies women health care. You wont find it because what he has voted against is Government funded abortions, which makes sense seeing as how he's a pro-life candidate.



> He's for viagra (funded by the goverment) but against birth control being funded by the goverment



Wrong, the vote was about forcing Health Insurance companies covering Birth Control. There is no bill that would allow for the Government to fund either Viagra or Birth Control. 



> In his attempt to stop women from recieving contraceptives, he also cut funding to breast cancer screening and research
> 
> And I'm sure if I was motivated I could come up with more.



I'm going to let you in on a secret. McCain always votes no on any bill that has an earmark attached to it. You see a lot of times these Senators drum up support to a bill and when it looks like everyone is behind it, last minute additions are added to the bill to send government money different places which often end up in the pocket books of Senators and relatives of Senators.

For instance, it was revealed that in 2007 Barack Obama attempted to pass $3.4 million dollars in Earmarks to pay the Clients of Joe Biden's son who is a Washington Lobbyist. Why havn't you heard about this on the major networks? Because the media was too busy covering Democratic National Convention when the story broke.


----------



## Trov (Aug 30, 2008)

sadated_peon said:


> He has been a Illinois state senator since 1997, the same state level as Palin, he won an Illinois senate race in 2004.
> 
> Obama was talking before the last election, so you must have him confused with McCain who said.
> ?The issue of economics is not something I?ve understood as well as I should,?


Palin has also been Mayor since 1996, before that, she was on city council since '92, and was elected governor in '06.

And while it was stupid for McCain to say that. Atleast he admits his faults. Obama, never(or rarely) admits, even when evidence and foresight give him the obvious answer(Mr. Even thought the surge likely helped the Awakening, I still would have opposed Obama.)



> Which doesn't change the fact that he has many health problems. He has had skin cancer and has have 4 tumors removed.
> 
> His health is a major issue, no matter how much you try and sweep it under the rug.


And it doesn't change the fact that he has been cleared of anything bad and doctors say that it will not truly hinder him.

Everyone has health problems. Get off this.



> Biden was chosen because of his record with womens rights, and his actual capability to be president.


To cover Obama's lack of the latter right?



> No matter how many time you repeat that "Obama lacks the same" it will not make it true. Obama's political Career is 5 times as long as Palins, and has more related experience and education before his political career.
> 
> Obama's foreign policy experience starts early where he has actual LIVED in other countries. It continued when he got a degree in international relations in college, While in the senate he was joined the Foreign relations comity, and is currently chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on European affairs. In this comity he has made trips to Eastern Europe, Middle East, Asia, and Africa.
> 
> And you think that hitting up a few Canadian business compares to this? You obviously have no clue as to the relationship between Canadian business with the US.


Despite what he says, living in other countries does not make you an expert, nor even adds much to his record. Wow, he lived in Indonesia as a kid. Thats great, except I doubt when he was kid that he is all to interested in the political atmosphere at the time there. But hey, I guess that's his argument. Further more. Palin has had 13 years of a political career, starting in 1992(5 years earlier than Obama). As Mayor, As an Ethics Committee member, and as Governor.

(Mind you, I'm not saying Palin is all that experienced on Foreign matters, but it's a joke to say Obama is all that experienced and you... should... know that.)



> What did you miss here, if you apply that argument, then it applies to McCain. You cannot claim that executive experience is more vital without saying that Palin is MORE experienced than McCain to be president.
> 
> The hypocrisy is staggering, you are trying to use the old bush vs kerry line which no longer works because McCain has no executive experience.


It most certainly does apply to McCain. however, McCain has Palin to compliment him. So it's not bad. Furthermore, I CAN say that. It's not as simple as her having executive experience meaning she's automatically better. It's a plus. But not an official requirement. I thought I went over this when I said this:
_"Also, It's likely that while the Software specialists may lack knowledge on hardware, the longer they've dealt with computers, the more likely they know more about the hardware through experience with the software."​_
In other words, McCain could be more experienced that Palin, or Palin more than McCain. However, it depends on McCain know how and Palin's.
In the end, this doesn't matter, since they are on the same ticket and will complement each other instead of compete.

(Note that I'm not saying she is or isn't.)


> He is not in the first term of is actual political career, like Palin.


I said first term of senate. and Palin is not in her first term of political career either.



> I think you are biased hypocrite.
> You speak of her state executive experience as mattering over senate experienced and then claim that McCain is more experience even though all he has is senate experience. You can not get your rhetoric straight and blatantly contradict your own argument.
> 
> She does need to be because she is a heartbeat away from the presidency. IF McCain dies she will have to take over, if she is not qualified to be president, then she is not qualified to be vp.


Uh, senate experience isn't bad, Just like software experience isn't bad, but somewhere, you want the opinion of the hardware specialist, since you are dealing with hardware. And Palin brings that to McCain. It's their combination that works well IMO. I went over this earlier.(And honestly, I think Obama would have made a better choice with Bayh or Kaine, as they are more likely to complement him than Mr. I've-been-in-the-senate-longer-than-McCain Biden)

Quite honestly though, I just find the attack on her experience hilarious, since many of Obama's supporters have been excusing it saying he has judgment and so forth. 
Granted, McCain said experience, But this is going to turn up a wash for both sides to argue. It effectively ends, or should end, the debate of experience.



> lol, you seem to be the only one. Even the republican pundits on fox said she was outmatched, and how Biden was going to have to be careful not to beat her so badly that people felt sorry for her.
> 
> But this only confirms for me your complete delusion about this woman. It is Harriet Miers all over again.


Suddenly! FOX is credible to cite!(I don't get my news from FOX since sometimes they piss me off, but ok.) Well, I'm not the only one. But like I said before, we will see when they actually debate. I won't hold my breath for a Biden blow out though. And I'm sure you won't do so for Palin.


----------



## Trov (Aug 30, 2008)

chaosakita said:


> I was really surprised that John McCain had chosen Palin for his VP. Like most people here, I had never heard of her before. All that I know now is that she's been governor of Alaska, looks badass with a gun (yes, that's right), and supports creationism in schools.



She doesn't necessarily support creationism. She said that it shouldn't be brought up by the teacher, but if the student brings it up, it should be .

_    In an interview Thursday, Palin said she meant only to say that discussion of alternative views should be allowed to arise in Alaska classrooms:

    ?I don?t think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn?t have to be part of the curriculum.?

*She added that, if elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add such creation-based alternatives to the state?s required curriculum.*

    Members of the state school board, which sets minimum requirements, are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Legislature.

*?I won?t have religion as a litmus test, or anybody?s personal opinion on evolution or creationism,? Palin said.*
_​


Cold said:


> She honestly makes an admirable point in that video.
> 
> I need to research her position on equal pay for equal work.  If she's against that it will ruin what she just said for me, but perhaps she's for it.
> 
> ...



Equal pay is really really stupid. trust me on this. The often quoted statistic is that women earn some 70 cents compared to a man's dollar. Butthats only so because of the choices men and women make. Men choose riskier, more involved jobs on average, and those jobs tend to make more money. Women choose more flexible(in time) jobs that have more benefits. So their pay isn't much as a man who may and chosen less benefits and may work more hours. A good example is female engineers who actually earn more than their male counterparts.

As for him choosing her to woo Clinton supporters. I think while it was a plus when picking her, it wasn't the main reason. Palin is not someone that would become a trophy for McCain, and McCain is not someone that pick her for that reason either. She was obviously chosen because of her history in Alaska. She fits McCain's theme of Maverick.




Rhaella said:


> ^ Is she trying to say to just accept sexism as a natural part of society? Marvellous.


She's basically saying instead of whining about it, you should overcome it, Do harder and make those that put you down because of your sex eat the dirt.



chikmagnet7 said:


> Like you said, it may well be because our corporate taxes are too high, but think about what your'e saying.
> 
> Why reward the companies who ship jobs over seas? Again, you are essentially saying "You win. Come back to help our economy, please." These American companies should support our economy anyways as a show of support for our country. The fact that they're greedy and want to squeeze out as much money as possible (so find the lower taxes) isn't reason enough to lower their taxes. Why reward them for it?
> 
> ...


Cutting the corporate tax rate is not some reward to companies. There is a long established rule among many economists that corporations don't truly pay taxes. They just collect them, whether it's through workers, consumers or shareholders. a higher corporate tax, or a new one on companies, will affect those three groups regardless when it's placed on companies. 

If the companies had to pay a new tax, all that would happen is that companies would pass it down to one of the three groups. Imagine if it all passed down to the consumer. You'd pay the higher tax on, for example, computers, because that computer company had jobs overseas, and you wouldn't notice it thanks to it being factored into the cost. It's an extremely stupid policy, along with the Windfall profits tax, and Cap and Trade(This last one is something McCain sadly supports as well. But appearantly, Obama supports a tougher version, I'll recheck it again.)


----------



## drache (Aug 30, 2008)

strongarm85 said:


> I sure do, because its very obvious that you have no idea what your talking about.


 
Says the person who forgot that just earlier today I already proved McCain doesn't like women and that I showed I can back up what I say.

But hey I'm bored so let's play.



strongarm85 said:


> First of all, its only Plagerism if you take someone else's work and claim that its your own. Which is something Joe Biden did while he was in College. The first time he ran for President he lied about his credentials to everyone and when he was exposed he dropped out of the race in disgrace.


 
Jimmy freaken crickets how is copying Obama's website not plagerizing? McCain certainly didn't credit him for the design or color scheme.

And McCain also didn't credit Wikapedia, so really look at that already you're all talk no substnace.

And remind me, that Biden stuff was what? 20 years ago? About right don't you think? And when was the last time McCain got caught plagerizing? That's right less then a month ago.

I'll let people decide which they think is more revelent.



strongarm85 said:


> Now what McCain has done is not Plagerism. He has gone after those places as a means to search for information about Obama and showed how his opinions where changing at the moment. He never qouted the information he found there and claimed it to be his own. That is not Plagerism.


 
What in the bloody hell are you talking about? McCain plagerized the Wikapedia article on Georgia (which I find hilarious really).



strongarm85 said:


> So no, its not the same thing. When Joe Biden was in school he was caught plagerizing and managed to get away with he. He had the bottom grades in his class, he was a bigger failure than Bush as far as school is concerned. In general Joe Biden has a history of being a rather incompetant guy. To be honest the guy also has a very low self esteem for an elected official.


 
You really want to bring up school? Let's talk about McCain who scored the *4th* lowest in the class and who despite having an admiral for a father got stuck commanding a fighter replacement flight wing. 

Now I don't know Biden's history so I won't comment on your accuracy but at the very least McCain is as worse if not worse.



strongarm85 said:


> Ahh, but I did a little research of my own, including an interview with Carol McCain, John McCain's first wife, earlier this year.
> 
> While your first statement is true, your second statement is completely false. In Carol's own words.
> 
> ...


 
Yes it's very nice that she is defending McCain, however others who were there see it differently  about midway down it talks about that.

(look I beat you with your own source)



strongarm85 said:


> It was a joke, he was talking a motor cycle rally and a lot of the people there where going to a Kid Rock concert. He wasn't being serious, he was playing to the crowd.


 
And I'd accept that, but McCain has an appealing tendency to tell these 'jokes' then act like all should be forgiven. Well you know what? It's not, and maybe McCain should learn what consequences are for once.

Once is a mistake, twice is on purpose and McCain is on at least his 4th time with this 'mistaken joke' thing.

Or would you rather I go to 'fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me'?



strongarm85 said:


> And its a good joke too. People have joked about Chelsea Clinton looks for the past 16 years now. He's not serious about it, he's playing to the crowd.


 
Are you fucking sick?

You're going to insult a *teenage* girl on national TV and say it's all good? Maybe you need a lesson in apporiateness too because no that wasn't apporiate and no it wasn't funny. Hell not even 'the crowd' laughed at it.




strongarm85 said:


> So what? Saturday Night Live has been making fun of Senator Clinton and her Daughter 1991.


 
And noone takes SNL seriously because you're not supposed to. McCain, maybe he's serious maybe not but again it's about apporiateness and about knowing when to shut the hell up. 



strongarm85 said:


> Which is a very Republican thing to do, although not for the reasons you might think. The Democrats are in favor of Federal Government major aspects of people's lives and that is a fact. There are lots of factors go into people's wages sometimes, like experience, seniority, training. Had he signed the bill not only would have been ineffective and quite literally impossible to enforce, because you can't legally tell someone how much to pay each employee that works for them.


 
You don't know a damn thing about the bill do you?

The bill simply said 'all things being equal if a man was paid x then a woman would be paid x too'. There was no wiggle room there and McCain blew it badly (and I hope people tell others about this). There is no excuse or justification for what McCain did, he sincerely thinks that people get paid what they should and if you get screwed over cause you're a woman well tough I guess.



strongarm85 said:


> Besides, there is a system where everybody gets paid the same amount regardless of race, gender, age, or any other factor. Its called communism. In essence, thats what communism is.


 


What part of equal pay for equal work makes that communism? I mean besides this being a gaint strawman (which I will now light on fire) because this bill never said that people would get paid the same *across* jobs. 

So basically this arguement of yours is useless and a waste of time.



strongarm85 said:


> Name one time he has passed a bill the specifically denies women health care. You wont find it because what he has voted against is Government funded abortions, which makes sense seeing as how he's a pro-life candidate.


 
Please make sense, or please make this make sense, becasue right now niether apply



strongarm85 said:


> Wrong, the vote was about forcing Health Insurance companies covering Birth Control. There is no bill that would allow for the Government to fund either Viagra or Birth Control.


 
No it's exactly what I said, McCain is for the goverment picking up the tab for sex but not for contraceptives and what pathetic excuse for logic is that? I mean come on it's pretty balant that he doesn't care about the consequences.

But hey that's the GOP for you, who cares about any one else so long as I get my fun.....



strongarm85 said:


> I'm going to let you in on a secret. McCain always votes no on any bill that has an earmark attached to it. You see a lot of times these Senators drum up support to a bill and when it looks like everyone is behind it, last minute additions are added to the bill to send government money different places which often end up in the pocket books of Senators and relatives of Senators.


 
Bull shit and bullshit squared.

First McCain's earmark thing is just a smokescreen because true pork isn't that prevelant.

McCain isn't that pure he's had earmarks before: 

FYI I love the Stevens quote.



strongarm85 said:


> For instance, it was revealed that in 2007 Barack Obama attempted to pass $3.4 million dollars in Earmarks to pay the Clients of Joe Biden's son who is a Washington Lobbyist. Why havn't you heard about this on the major networks? Because the media was too busy covering Democratic National Convention when the story broke.


 

Maybe because there is no credible source that 1) it happened and 2) there was anything untoward.

But please stop changing the subject, we're talking about McCain and his hatred of women and I expect you to keep up (and if you can't to give up)

*edit: *looking back I realize you never really contested any of the facts I've presented other then some lame exuse of 'it's just a joke' which I guess means you can't.

Further you never refuted my orginal list which again I guess means you couldn't refute that.

So I guess that means you can't refute that McCain really seems to have a hatred for women.

Now that wasn't so hard was it?


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtilB1teksc[/YOUTUBE]

The more I replay it the more I laugh at this bitches incompetence


----------



## Deamiel (Aug 30, 2008)

Trov said:


> Cutting the corporate tax rate is not some reward to companies. There is a long established rule among many economists that corporations don't truly pay taxes. They just collect them, whether it's through workers, consumers or shareholders. a higher corporate tax, or a new one on companies, will affect those three groups regardless when it's placed on companies.
> 
> If the companies had to pay a new tax, all that would happen is that companies would pass it down to one of the three groups. Imagine if it all passed down to the consumer. You'd pay the higher tax on, for example, computers, because that computer company had jobs overseas, and you wouldn't notice it thanks to it being factored into the cost. It's an extremely stupid policy, along with the Windfall profits tax, and Cap and Trade(This last one is something McCain sadly supports as well. But appearantly, Obama supports a tougher version, I'll recheck it again.)




Shift the cost to the consumer?  The consumer will find a company that costs less.

Shift the cost to the workers?  The worker will find a company that pays more.

Shift the cost to the shareholders?  The shareholders will find a more profitable company.

That's what a free market is.  Removing the tax breaks simply means the companies will actually have to find a way to make more money that doesn't involve cutting American jobs and shifting money that could benefit the American economy overseas.

Also, about the VP pick:  Palin has some credentials that make her appealing, but she lacks nearly the same experience as Obama.  Her executive experience is almost irrelevant due to her short executive career and the fact... well, it's bloody fucking Alaska we're talking about!  The only thing coming from Alaska is news about Republicans killing Polar bears for more oil money and a bridge built to nowhere.

Exciting.

So, that leaves us with McCain vs Obama and Palin vs Biden.  I'd say Palin will lose hard against Biden, make McCain look like a fool and we'll see what goes from there.

I will admit, however, that Obama needs to discredit her fast.  She certainly could be the real threat, not McCain.


----------



## Garlock (Aug 30, 2008)

Its more or less the fear of McCain somehow winning in the same way Bush did because I can call this, Florida will fuck it up (thank you incompetent rafters who just landed here and got a green card and the right to vote and want to turn this into another fucking castro run goverment... thank you...). McCain will die sometime between now and a year, and she will become the president....

We, the United States, are then Fucked.

I can imagine how fucked over the country would get.

Civil War? Terrorist Attacks? Nuclear Attacks, Threats from Overseas? She has run a little podunk state from out of nowhere, how the hell is she able to run the resources of a country this big? Fuck Canada, Im moving to England then!


----------



## drache (Aug 30, 2008)

Candlejack said:


> Its more or less the fear of McCain somehow winning in the same way Bush did because I can call this, Florida will fuck it up (thank you incompetent rafters who just landed here and got a green card and the right to vote and want to turn this into another fucking castro run goverment... thank you...). McCain will die sometime between now and a year, and she will become the president....
> 
> We, the United States, are then Fucked.
> 
> ...


 
Who needs Florida we have Ohio, CO, NM, NV, NC, VA, Iowa, Alaska, SD, ND, Montona all  in play and well over 12 ways to win *without* FL and that doesn't count states like Indiana, MO, Georgia, and even Alabama (some of these are more long shots)


----------



## Trov (Aug 30, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtilB1teksc[/YOUTUBE]
> 
> The more I replay it the more I laugh at this bitches incompetence


I like the cutting her off mid sentence. If you watched the full video, she was making the case that she would not sign on to the VP mantle if it meant being a trophy and not doing much work. Otherwise, If it did meant doing work, she would be all for it.



Deamiel said:


> Shift the cost to the consumer?  The consumer will find a company that costs less.
> 
> Shift the cost to the workers?  The worker will find a company that pays more.
> 
> ...



Now, don't get me wrong here, I'm against tax breaks in the end. I'm talking about a needed reduction of the corporate rate. Hopefully to 0% Since the corporate tax is in the end, just stupid. And removing the tax breaks, funny enough, would screw the American companies more in the end since they have to compete foreign companies that aren't taxed as much as them. There won't be much benefit toward Americans, except that 'american' companies would get screwed and imports and such would be more favorable in price. If you want to remove the tax breaks, I want it accompanied by a cut in the corporate tax rate.


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 30, 2008)

I'll take this with a grain of salt, especially seeing how it was done more or less in the style of a blog (and in an extremely liberal website nevertheless).  Still, you get the idea that colleges do not indicate intelligence very well.



> The experience of the VP is super critical.  Given that Palin will be a heart beat away from the Presidency, *and the fact that McCain has had cancer 4 times and is 72 years old.  *Her experience is seriously relevant.



Yeah, let's forget about the fact that doctors found him perfectly healthy or the fact that Reagan was nearly 70 years old himself when he took the presidency.  He's a senior citizen with a history of skin cancer, so he's bound to die within the next four years.  

According to Wikipedia, the duties of the Vice President are really limited: to become the President in case of death or resignation, to cast a Senate vote in case of a tie, and to confirm the vote count of the electoral college.  The rest are informal and depends completely on the relationship between the President and Vice President, ie more of an adviser than anything.  I mean honestly, here we're comparing the lack of experience from someone aiming for the president's seat and someone who advises him.

And as a final note, this is more directed to the thread in general, but is she really as little known as the media is pointing her out to be?  I heard about her over the summer for holding one of the highest approval records and a history of fighting against wasteful spending.  I thought this was a brilliant choice.


----------



## chikmagnet7 (Aug 30, 2008)

Trov said:


> Cutting the corporate tax rate is not some reward to companies. There is a long established rule among many economists that corporations don't truly pay taxes. They just collect them, whether it's through workers, consumers or shareholders. a higher corporate tax, or a new one on companies, will affect those three groups regardless when it's placed on companies.
> 
> If the companies had to pay a new tax, all that would happen is that companies would pass it down to one of the three groups. Imagine if it all passed down to the consumer. You'd pay the higher tax on, for example, computers, because that computer company had jobs overseas, and you wouldn't notice it thanks to it being factored into the cost. It's an extremely stupid policy, along with the Windfall profits tax, and Cap and Trade(This last one is something McCain sadly supports as well. But appearantly, Obama supports a tougher version, I'll recheck it again.)



You're partially right, but you're confused. It's true that economists say corporations don't "truly" pay taxes. But of course they do. They just find ways to compensate for those taxes. Some ways they do that include firing workers or upping the price of their goods as you mentioned. It's not that consumers will pay higher taxes on that company's goods; it's that they will pay the company's taxes for them by the increase in price of the goods. 

But again, what you're suggesting isn't logical. Cutting the corporate tax rate _is _a reward for companies. They don't have to charge as much for their goods, and their goods are therefore bought more readily because they are sold at a cheaper and more affordable price. And in the same way, you can harm companies. To tax is the power to destroy. If taxes go up on companies, they will have to fire more workers and increase the price of their goods to compensate for the taxes. And if they increase the price of their goods, less people will buy the products. And the company will make less money because in a capitalist economy of competition, comsumers will go for the least expensive product. So even though companies find ways to compensate for their taxes, they end up being affected by them either positively or negatively, and they feel that when they check their bank accounts every month. 

Ultimately, the best and most logical way to do things is to create a situation where companies are incentivized to create jobs in America. The way you can do that is by giving tax breaks to the companies that create jobs here and tax increases to the companies that don't. Then, in a prosperous economy, less workers will be fired for jobs to be shipped over seas. And even those workers who are fired will be able to find new jobs with the companies that stay in America due to a job boom (like the one we saw under Bill Clinton--22,000,000 jobs compared to Bush's 6,000,000).


----------



## Trov (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> And as a final note, this is more directed to the thread in general, but is she really as little known as the media is pointing her out to be?  I heard about her over the summer for holding one of the highest approval records and a history of fighting against wasteful spending.  I thought this was a brilliant choice.


I don't know about everyone else, but I've been hearing about her none stop since she was first brought up. granted, it died down in August, but, it was a pretty big thing among many conservatives. Almost as big as Jindal.

She's a good choice, the only issue many conservatives have is her experience, but since she wasn't on the top, it wasn't really an issue.



chikmagnet7 said:


> You're partially right, but you're confused. It's true that economists say corporations don't "truly" pay taxes. But of course they do. They just find ways to compensate for those taxes. Some ways they do that include firing workers or upping the price of their goods as you mentioned. It's not that consumers will pay higher taxes on that company's goods; it's that they will pay the company's taxes for them by the increase in price of the goods.
> 
> But again, what you're suggesting isn't logical. Cutting the corporate tax rate is thus a reward for companies. They don't have to charge as much for their goods, and their goods are therefore bought more readily because they are sold at a cheaper and more afordable price. And in the same way, you can harm companies. To tax is the power to destroy. If taxes go up on companies, they will have to fire more workers and increase the price of their goods to compensate for the taxes. And if they increase the price of their goods, less people will buy the products. And the company will make less money.
> 
> Ultimately, the best and most logical way to do things is to create a situation where companies are incentivized to create jobs in America. The way you can do that is by giving tax breaks to the companies that do and tax increases to the companies that don't. Then, in a prosperous economy, less workers will be fired for jobs to be shipped over seas. And even those workers who are fired will be able to find new jobs with the companies that stay in America.



They have to compensate, a corporation has to take the money that goes to the tax from somewhere. Shareholders, Workers, or consumers. Shareholders through profit, workers through that same profit(which could go toward development and research, and cost), and consumers through an increase in product price. Shareholders would receive less, and they are already taxed through capital gains and dividends, workers may get laid off, receive less benefits and lesser pay, and obviously consumers may get less of a quality product, or a more costly one. There are no other ways but these.

What I'm suggesting is logical, get rid of the rate. Guess what happens when companies aren't taxed? Companies come here, to America. What happens when they are taxed to death? They run. To create business in other countries. Chrysler did this years ago. When merging with another company, they had to decide where their base of operations would be. they chose Germany because of the lower tax burden. A company moved outside to avoid a bad tax. Maybe we should lower our rate and make companies WANT to invest here. if it cost more to do business here, they are less likely to want to do business here. you say we need to incentivized them, but that MEANS rewarding them. And thats what a corporate cut does.


----------



## chikmagnet7 (Aug 30, 2008)

Trov said:


> They have to compensate, a corporation has to take the money that goes to the tax from somewhere. Shareholders, Workers, or consumers. Shareholders through profit, workers through that same profit(which could go toward development and research, and cost), and consumers through an increase in product price. Shareholders would receive less, and they are already taxed through capital gains and dividends, workers may get laid off, receive less benefits and lesser pay, and obviously consumers may get less of a quality product, or a more costly one. There are no other ways but these.



It's like you didn't even read what I wrote. Look, I get that these are the things that companies do to compensate. But when the shareholders realize that they're making less money (the ones who contorl the company), what will they do? And when the company itself is making less money (because the prices of the products went up and so the rate of consumers buying those products goes down), what will the company do? 



Trov said:


> What I'm suggesting is logical, get rid of the rate. Guess what happens when companies aren't taxed? Companies come here, to America. What happens when they are taxed to death? They run. To create business in other countries. Chrysler did this years ago. When merging with another company, they had to decide where their base of operations would be. they chose Germany because of the lower tax burden. A company moved outside to avoid a bad tax. Maybe we should lower our rate and make companies WANT to invest here. if it cost more to do business here, they are less likely to want to do business here. you say we need to incentivized them, but that MEANS rewarding them. And thats what a corporate cut does.



That's wrong and illogical, and I'll explain why. It begins with a backwards way of thinking. 

Companies don't begin to invest in foreign markets by running to avoid a "bad tax." They begin to invest in foreign markets because somewhere around the world, there is "better tax." At a certain point, it doesn't matter whether we lower the taxes on companies that ship jobs over seas, because there will always be markets that they can take advantage of.

Look, the American government didn't begin this "fight" against its American companies by raising taxes. The American companies began the fight first by shipping jobs over seas. Even before the American government hiked taxes up, companies were finding ways to increase their profits through other markets with less taxes. 

I never said that we "should reward them." What I said was that we should reward the companies that keep jobs here, not those that begin by shipping jobs over there. Incentivizing calls for rewards as well as punishments, carrots as well as sticks. If companies are to invest here as you said, higher or lower taxes isn't going to be what tips the scales. If they wanted to, they could all find places where the tax burden was lower than it is here. But in the end, companies will come here because of our booming economy, because even though the taxes may be higher than in other places around the world, the amount of capital we generate is so high that it doesn't even matter.


----------



## The Pink Ninja (Aug 30, 2008)

Is this incredibly shrewd or totally retarded?

I'm sure McCain is going to win... baring any October suprises.

I'm just really suprised at his choice.


----------



## Trov (Aug 30, 2008)

chikmagnet7 said:


> It's like you didn't even read what I wrote. Look, I get that these are the things that companies do to compensate. But when the shareholders realize that they're making less money (the ones who contorl the company), what will they do? And when the company itself is making less money (because the prices of the products went up and so the rate of consumers buying those products goes down), what will the company do?


They will find the most cost effective way to deal with the higher taxes. If it means bring them back then so be it... but there in lies the problem if you are faced with a high tax at home and an even higher tax if you leave. the consumer/worker/shareholder will not benefit from this cornering. We need to lower the tax burden, not raise it. If they moved outside to avoid the tax, when they bring it back because they want to avoid the bigger one, they will still be faced with the one they originally wanted to avoid, adding to their costs. and affecting the three groups.(Workers being the most affected appearantly, by 70%)



> That's wrong and illogical, and I'll explain why. It begins with a backwards way of thinking.
> 
> Companies don't begin to invest in foreign markets by running to avoid a "bad tax." They begin to invest in foreign markets because somewhere around the world, there is "better tax." At a certain point, it doesn't matter whether we lower the taxes on companies that ship jobs over seas, because there will always be markets that they can take advantage of.
> 
> ...



Never said or meant that they invest in foreign markets to avoid a bad tax. What I did said was that to avoid a high tax rate, they will find the cheapest logical alternative, which is what various other companies like Chrysler has done. Moved the base of operations to Germany, and avoid most of the tax costs in the U.S. thereby raising efficency. Especially against competitors.
Another example, company 3M decided to move more of its plants to low tax jurisdictions. This was reported in the WSJ Oct 10, 07. Why, obviously to reduce tax load. they expected to earn 150 to 200 million from doing it.

Although lets get into my libertarian like mode here, who the hell are you to control how companies do things? They aren't your jobs, it's the companies jobs. Government policy shouldn't be done to affect them to do your bidding.

Sorry bout that. Anyways, I'm drifting off my point. You seem to WANT to tax them to death, you want to keep  the current rate, but you also want to add an extra 'punishment' tax for companies that move out to low tax areas. This is a stupid idea. Because will american companies pay our high tax rate, foreign ones will benefit through a lower one. Foreign companies WON'T invest here as well. jobs won't be created, and money won't come from one nation to ours, we well be denying ourselves of cash from our foreign friends by doing something as stupid as the idea Obama seems to be pushing. 

I honestly want to go in further, but I deal with the whole issue tomorrow when I'm not as impatient and cranky and unwilling to write a truly coherent counter argument. This is a mess.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Aug 30, 2008)

This is a disaster in the making for Obama. 

McCain now drawing in more ""moderates"" and former clinton supporters while her relative experience wont really be an subject seeing she is the VP. He also seems more different from the ""Bush"" era. 


It should be impossible...but I actually see the republicans win a third time in a row now.


----------



## fieryfalcon (Aug 30, 2008)

chikmagnet7 said:


> Companies don't begin to invest in foreign markets by running to avoid a "bad tax." They begin to invest in foreign markets because somewhere around the world, there is "better tax." At a certain point, it doesn't matter whether we lower the taxes on companies that ship jobs over seas, because there will always be markets that they can take advantage of.



There are risks and expenses associated with relocating jobs to other countries with looser rule of law, less infrastructure, less skilled work forces, etc...  Companies would not incur those risks if we didn't tax and regulate them to the point where it is more profitable to do so.



> Look, the American government didn't begin this "fight" against its American companies by raising taxes. The American companies began the fight first by shipping jobs over seas. Even before the American government hiked taxes up, companies were finding ways to increase their profits through other markets with less taxes.



Actually, the government did begin the "fight."  Shipping jobs overseas is massively expensive and risky as I just noted.  It requires an ongoing expense to ship products back into the nation for sale.  We have to tax and regulate the companies to the point where it is more profitable to send jobs overseas (where the new locality also taxes them) and incur the expense of shipping rather than keep the jobs here.  A daunting task, but one that the Democrats managed to accomplish.  It would be more profitable to do business here if we eliminated the tax and regulatory state.  



> I never said that we "should reward them." What I said was that we should reward the companies that keep jobs here, not those that begin by shipping jobs over there. Incentivizing calls for rewards as well as punishments, carrots as well as sticks. If companies are to invest here as you said, higher or lower taxes isn't going to be what tips the scales. If they wanted to, they could all find places where the tax burden was lower than it is here. But in the end, companies will come here because of our booming economy, because even though the taxes may be higher than in other places around the world, the amount of capital we generate is so high that it doesn't even matter.



What better reward for people who do business in the U.S. than the elimination of taxes and unnecessary regulations?  Such a broad based measure is preferrable to some kind of targeted reward because all Americans can benefit rather than just a few powerful companies who lobby Congress for the "reward."  Abolish the income tax and the capital gains tax, replace them with a tariff on imports so that businesses located outside the U.S. are paying to sell in our market.  If you raise taxes then the economy won't be booming; we'll be a third world nation in short order.


----------



## muishot (Aug 30, 2008)

Trov said:


> I don't know about everyone else, but I've been hearing about her none stop since she was first brought up. granted, it died down in August, but, it was a pretty big thing among many conservatives. Almost as big as Jindal.
> 
> She's a good choice, the only issue many conservatives have is her experience, but since she wasn't on the top, it wasn't really an issue.
> 
> ...



I don't think either of you know anything about taxes.  Let me make this quick and simple so that you can see that taxes don't affect gross profit and operating profit.  

1) Companies make sales - Sales Revenue
2) They subtract Cost of Goods Sold from Sale Revenue = Gross Profit
3) From Gross Profit, they subtract all the Selling, General, and Administrative Expenses to get Operating Profit or Income.
4) If they have Operating income that means they are profitable and thus are require to pay Income taxes.  If they don't have operating income, they will get something call tax refunds.  In other words, the government give corporations some money back if they have an operating loss.  Taxes work both ways, if you make money, the government take some of that but you still have a profit.  If you are loosing money, the government give some back to you.

The whole point is you make it sound like if we taxes corporations at a higher rate, it would make make expenses higher for them thus making them unprofitable or something which is misleading.  As you can see from the calculation, taxes doesn't affect a corporation expenses.  

And we all know the reason why companies shifted jobs over to China and other countries.  It is because in those countries, these companies can get much lower paid and can force those workers to work for much longer hours.  And these companies don't have to adhere to the utmost employees' rights and safety standards.  Plus they don't have to give health insurance and other benefits that workers in the US rightfully deserve.  

I am not sure if higher taxes will make all those above seem less attractive to companies to shift jobs overseas, that remains to be seen.  But the whole basis of Obama's argument is why should we give companies that shifted jobs overseas tax break or incentives to do so.  Why don't we take it back and also punish them and instead giving those breaks and rewards to companies that keep jobs in the US.  

If it is less attractive meaning that because they have to pay more taxes now for the Income that they earn, and the bottom line or net income is equal to or less than the Net Income that they could have get if they keep jobs here in the US, any sensible company would choose to remain in the US.  *This is what you don't understand and you fall for the Talking Point of the Republican Side.*

If you want to talk about fair, it doesn't seem fair to the companies that keep jobs in the US under the current regulations is it?


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 30, 2008)

Zabuzalives said:


> This is a disaster in the making for Obama.
> 
> McCain now drawing in more ""moderates"" and former clinton supporters while her relative experience wont really be an subject seeing she is the VP. He also seems more different from the ""Bush"" era.
> 
> ...



it's cool that u enter the topic all late with your soundbyte opinions.  When you can think for urself join us earlier, maybe around 50 posts


----------



## Wolfarus (Aug 30, 2008)

Well, this is a bit of a shrewd move on his part. 

He'll pick up the voters who are frothing at the mouth to get any woman they can into high office. Also prob why he waited until after the democratic convention and Obama making his choice to do it. 

Really dont want another 4-8 years of McBush in the whitehouse, so here's hoping its not enough to turn the tide for him come election day


----------



## Greed990 (Aug 30, 2008)

Well, there goes the presidency for grand ol' McCain.

What a ridiculous decision! Not only is he pissing off Hillary voters which the GOP desperately want (trust me, if you go on CNN or any other news site thats lets you comment, you'll see RAGING Hillary Voters). This actually helped Obama. Now either the Hillary voters are gonna stay home in November, or go Obama. Not only that, but the whole "inexperience" argument against Barack is gone. This lady has less then 2 years of experience. She isn't known for anything...and she governs a state with 13 people and some caribou. Way to go McCain! 

Not only that, but some republicans are baffled. Most are staying home, while some are going Obama.

McCain, way to shoot yourself in the foot.

edit: I forgot to mention, if 72-year old, health issues, McCain can't serve his duties this person is going to take over? Do we really want someone with no experience to run our country. At least Obama HAS experience in one way or another. And he has the right judgment. Unlike this lady who we know nothing of.


----------



## Nodonn (Aug 30, 2008)

Up until now I was completely neutral to the whole US election.
However, since he's chosen someone who is
1)Anti-women (she calls herself pro life, but anti-women is what it really is)
2) A supporter of ID in schools ()
3) Anti same-sex marriage
4) Pro death penalty.
5) Pro everyone walking around with a bazooka.
6) Anti Marijuana.
7) A religious nut.

really made me pick the hope guy.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

Apparently women are less open to her than men.


Don't wanna say I told ya so, but...


----------



## Cyrizian (Aug 30, 2008)

The more I think about it, the more far sighted and intellegent McCain seems. I just realized that Biden has a history of sexist remarks (about his own wife, no less). McCain figured in the VP debate that if Biden says something that is even remotely sexist, there will be an epic backlash! For Biden, this is going to be like walking in a minefield. 

Also, if hes too strong with her, it will looks like hes bullying a girl. I have to apologize to McCain because he is alot smarter than I give him credit for: 

1. She will bring in alot of women votes as she is seen as a real "woman's woman" being very succesful and raising a family of five kids including one with Down's synd.

2. She will secure Alaska for the republicans

3. She will put a new face on the republican party

4. She is an outsider to Washington which is a big plus

5. She is a known reformer like McCain and is known for fighting corruption

6. She is young and energetic like Obama 

7. She has more experience than Obama and more executive experience than all the other candidates combined

8. She has an 80 percent approval rating in her state 

9. She got that for sending out $1,200.00 checks to help with energy costs in her state which will equal dollar signs and economic relief in most voter's eyes

10. She will make Joe Biden's life very difficult durring the VP debates as I mentioned above

11. She is very green thinking (like McCain) to most environmentalists

12. She just screams "tough woman" (just looking at that picture of her firing the M4 rifle) 

What a shrewd tactical decision Palin is!


----------



## Sexta Espada (Aug 30, 2008)

Palin will win McCain the gun vote at any rate.


----------



## LordSpark (Aug 30, 2008)

> 1. She will bring in alot of women votes as she is seen as a real "woman's woman" being very succesful and raising a family of five kids including one with Down's synd.



Really, so far the opinion is that most women don't like her. Anti choice, anti education, big issues for women.



> 2. She will secure Alaska for the republicans


Yes, he who wins Alaska wins the nation. It's worth three ECV. Not exactly a Florida or Ohio.



> 5. She is a known reformer like McCain and is known for fighting corruption


She's currently involved in a corruption scandal.



> 6. She is young and energetic like Obama


I thought this was a negative among R.



> 7. She has more experience than Obama and more executive experience than all the other candidates combined


lol! According to you my town mayor has more executive experience that either of them. She has little to no experience on anything.



> 8. She has an 80 percent approval rating in her state


Actually it dropped into the 60% range after her scandal. It's easy to be very popular in a deep red state with only half a million people.



> 10. She will make Joe Biden's life very difficult during the VP debates as I mentioned above


Is that a joke. Bidan is known as a pit bull when going after opponents. It'll be like watching a rabid dog bite down and shake kitten to death.



> 11. She is very green thinking (like McCain) to most environmentalists


Do you even know anything about her. She is most defiantly not. She opposed putting polar bears on the Endangered Species Protection act, supports airborne hunting of wolves. Is in deep with big oil, supports drilling in anwr, offshore oil drilling, etc, etc. Get your facts straight.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Aug 30, 2008)

narutosimpson said:


> it's cool that u enter the topic all late with your soundbyte opinions.  When you can think for urself join us earlier, maybe around 50 posts




shush little troll...grown ups are talking here.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

> The more I think about it, the more far sighted and intellegent McCain seems. I just realized that Biden has a history of sexist remarks (about his own wife, no less). McCain figured in the VP debate that if Biden says something that is even remotely sexist, there will be an epic backlash! For Biden, this is going to be like walking in a minefield.



Much like Mccain?



> 1. She will bring in alot of women votes as she is seen as a real "woman's woman" being very succesful and raising a family of five kids including one with Down's synd.



My post literally directly above yours deflates this assumption.
If women are actually less trustworthy of her only a day after the announcement, while under the haze of initial awe, what happens when the fuzz wears off and people get more analytical?



> 2. She will secure Alaska for the republicans



Alaska has a smaller population than most big cities.



> 3. She will put a new face on the republican party



You surely don't mean in terms of policy do you?



> 7. She has more experience than Obama and more executive experience than all the other candidates combined



No she does not have more experience than Obama, and this executive experience thing is getting ridiculous.
People should have shut up about it as soon as they realized they were actually putting her above Mccain.



> 8. She has an 80 percent approval rating in her state



As previously stated Alaska is small as fuck.



> 10. She will make Joe Biden's life very difficult durring the VP debates as I mentioned above



If her only advantage is playing on sexist feelings than, no, she won't.



> 11. She is very green thinking (like McCain) to most environmentalists



She's for drilling wildlife reserves?


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 30, 2008)

LINK

I guess the whole woman thing is more effective than I thought.


----------



## Biolink (Aug 30, 2008)

sadated_peon said:


> fucking lol,
> 
> All this shit about Obama's experience and he chooses a VP whose only real political career is serving 1 an a half years as governor of Alaska?
> 
> Not to mention the glaring "I know you Clinton bitches only want a woman, so here is a woman."



It's happening already.

Not sure if it was posted, but the link will be very depressing:

hAppY010

Fucking idiots


----------



## Zabuzalives (Aug 30, 2008)

Biolink said:


> It's happening already.
> 
> Not sure if it was posted, but the link will be very depressing:
> 
> ...



if there is any sexism..its coming from them really. The only thing that seems to matter to them is that she is a woman...


----------



## Biolink (Aug 30, 2008)

Zabuzalives said:


> if there is any sexism..its coming from them really. The only thing that seems to matter to them is that she is a woman...



Seriously. I didn't want to believe that anybody could possibly be this stupid, but I guess I was wrong.

Some people shouldn't have the right to vote.


----------



## Nodonn (Aug 30, 2008)

Random Clinton Voter #1: What, she is the complete polar opposite of what Hillary ever stood for? I'm not gonna vote for her!
Random Clinton Voter #2: Did you know she has a vagina?
Random Clinton Voter #1: AMAGAD I'M VOTING FOR HER!


----------



## Elim Rawne (Aug 30, 2008)

Some Moron from the Clinton site said:
			
		

> McCain has picked PALIN!!! I am THRILLED! AS for the Dums whining that she doens't have experience running things--*SHE HAS FIVE KIDS!! TRUST ME! SHE KNOWS HOW TO RUN THINGS!*
> 
> GOD BLESS MCCAIN/PALIN!!!


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

Biolink said:


> It's happening already.
> 
> Not sure if it was posted, but the link will be very depressing:
> 
> ...



And yet.

hAppY010

Hillarybots =/= Women.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

Diceman said:


>



I too believe raising 5 children is comparable to the highest seat of power in the world.

What? You say it's not?

Typical patriarchal sexism. Motherhood > Everything.


----------



## Biolink (Aug 30, 2008)

Sig on the first post of the 2nd page:

hAppY010


Women First
Country Second


----------



## Belgianrofl (Aug 30, 2008)

Shark Skin said:


> John McCain tapped little-known Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin



Forget reading the whole story, I just read this first line, big ups to him imo.


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

Biolink said:


> It's happening already.
> 
> Not sure if it was posted, but the link will be very depressing:
> 
> ...


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

Biolink said:


> Sig on the first post of the 2nd page:
> 
> KB created by sage chakra will be more powerful
> 
> ...



None of those people know what sexism is.

There's nothing I hate more than the quasi-feminists, and chivalry-robot men who perceive anything negative against a woman to be sexism.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

Belgianrofl said:


> Forget reading the whole story, I just read this first line, big ups to him imo.



Your an idiot.


----------



## Raiden (Aug 30, 2008)

Biolink said:


> It's happening already.
> 
> Not sure if it was posted, but the link will be very depressing:
> 
> ...



Oh wow, so much for Hillary Clinton die hard fans not voting for Palin just because she's a woman. I guess it's like Gooba said, McCain will manage to score only the very few who are naive enough to fall for McCains obvious plan, but the majority of Hillary Clinton fans know that Palin is no Senator Clinton.


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 30, 2008)

Biolink said:


> It's happening already.
> 
> Not sure if it was posted, but the link will be very depressing:
> 
> ...



I am... simply ashamed. :/


----------



## Biolink (Aug 30, 2008)

Zephos said:


> None of those people know what sexism is.
> 
> There's nothing I hate more than the quasi-feminists, and chivalry-robot men who perceive anything negative against a woman to be sexism.



Seriously.

It's just downright annoying.

It's hard to imagine someone this naive surviving.


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

From Hillary Clinton forum

Clinton fan



> They're trashing her on the CNN politics blog, all the Obots saying McCain just lost the eletion. Ha!
> 
> McCain just sealed it, guys. I'm sooo fricken excited!!! Of course this may not get every HRC supporter to go to McCain, but it proves he's taking us seriously and not telling us to "Get over it, we don't need you".
> 
> ...





...My god...I...I just can't handle stupidity like this

Swear to god maybe I should just register on that forum for the sake of chewing all they asses out. 

People with that amount of stupidity bring a bad name to humanity.. 



			
				belgianrofl said:
			
		

> Forget reading the whole story, I just read this first line, big ups to him imo.



....

GTFO


----------



## Killa Cam (Aug 30, 2008)

Biolink said:


> It's happening already.
> 
> Not sure if it was posted, but the link will be very depressing:
> 
> ...



Those don't represent all Hilary supporters just the most hardcore and idiotic ones.

Real post from these clowns. Talking about McCain's trip to Sturgis.


			
				Jolene said:
			
		

> Don't you think they are identifying with him?
> I am sure they consider him a true patriot and a fighter like I am sure they are.
> Besides those 50,000 bikers have a vote which is more than the 200,000 in Berlin have.
> They are the same type of people who voted and respected Hillary.



Yeah bikers would have voted for her alright.


----------



## BlueNinja44 (Aug 30, 2008)

Holy shit. Are people really falling for this lady? Holy shit... 



> 11. She is very green thinking (like McCain) to most environmentalists



*Hell no.* I'm an environmentalist, and her idea of an "environmentally safe living" is fucked up. Palin wants to drill for oil in areas that will tamper with the wildlife of Alaska, and that will only lead to more carbon emissions and encourage Americans to continue their obese consumerism of oil. Like LordSpark said, she opposed putting polar bears on the Endangered Species Protection act, and supports airborne hunting of wolves.



> She will make Joe Biden's life very difficult durring the VP debates as I mentioned above


Biden is well known for being a sharp and strong debator, and has 100 times more experience then she does. As long as he doesn't aim for any sexist remarks, he's going to rip her apart.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

People who are genuinely voting for a vagina rather than a person or policy?
Hmm, sounds sexist to me maybe?
That these people would be up in arms at any other treatment of someone for having a vagina over who they are?

None of them would be voting for Obama to begin with. Nothing gained, nothing lost.


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 30, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> Swear to god maybe I should just register on that forum for the sake of chewing all they asses out.



 I think I will. Hmmm. ...damn, don't like the thought of being registered on a Hillary Clinton website. =/

[eta]



			
				someone from the HC website said:
			
		

> What I really like about this choice is that Palins' IDEALS are so much like Hillarys'. And, I would gesture to say HILLARY is very proud at this moment. Also, she is a critical thinker in that she put money in folks pockets in Alaska through the oil companies, and action which Hillary was using in her campaign speechs'.
> 
> This pretty much is a no-brainer for me. McCain/Palin '08.



Now I'm just confused.


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

Btw guys I was thinking about joining the forum for chewing those lil retarded supporters out..Should I although I'm scared I,ll be called condescending bully and sexist 

Really, I just hate stupidity like this... ESPECIALLY the stupidity of bitter over angsty Hillary supporters...


----------



## Adonis (Aug 30, 2008)

Zephos said:


> People who are genuinely voting for a vagina rather than a person or policy?
> Hmm, sounds sexist to me maybe?
> That these people would be up in arms at any other treatment of someone for having a vagina over who they are?
> 
> None of them would be voting for Obama to begin with. Nothing gained, nothing lost.



Well, if that article you linked is indicative, most women aren't falling for this Dog-and-Pony show.


----------



## Biolink (Aug 30, 2008)

Biden vs Palin is going to be hilarious. 

She is going to be ripped apart.


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

> I think I will.



I,ll start in a little while 



> Howard Wolfson just said that by this pick (Palin), that MAC knows how important the 18 million Hillary voters are to winning this election.
> 
> He also said that many prochoice folk/anti-gun Hil supporters will NOT vote for Mac/Palin based on just these two issues
> 
> ...



Hell hath no fury like a Hillary supporter scorned


----------



## Harmonie (Aug 30, 2008)

Biolink said:


> It's happening already.
> 
> Not sure if it was posted, but the link will be very depressing:
> 
> ...



Dear lord. 

I saw in one signature this:



> Q. Obama agrees with Sen. Clinton on most issues. Why not vote for him?
> A. If agreeing with Sen. Clinton is all that is required then there would be 18 million of us running for president.


I can not believe there are Hillary supporters that would actually vote for McCain over Obama. 
It's like "Forget that McCain disagrees with Clinton on so many issues. I just don't want Obama in office. Even though he's much closer on things to Hillary than McCain is. Forget about it. We are just angry."

Geez. Get over it already. -_-


----------



## BlueNinja44 (Aug 30, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> Btw guys I was thinking about joining the forum for chewing those lil retarded supporters out..Should I although I'm scared I,ll be called condescending bully and sexist
> 
> Really, I just hate stupidity like this... ESPECIALLY the stupidity of bitter over angsty Hillary supporters...


I would so love to Barack Roll them.


----------



## Killa Cam (Aug 30, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> Btw guys I was thinking about joining the forum for chewing those lil retarded supporters out..Should I although I'm scared I,ll be called condescending bully and sexist
> 
> Really, I just hate stupidity like this... ESPECIALLY the stupidity of bitter over angsty Hillary supporters...



They probably monitor the shit out of their board. Notice how it's only a big circle jerk over there? No way that's only coincidental.


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 30, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> Btw guys I was thinking about joining the forum for chewing those lil retarded supporters out..Should I although I'm scared I,ll be called condescending bully and sexist
> 
> Really, I just hate stupidity like this... ESPECIALLY the stupidity of bitter over angsty Hillary supporters...



I look forward to being called sexist.



			
				Basoonist said:
			
		

> I can not believe there are Hillary supporters that would actually vote for McCain over Obama.
> It's like "Forget that McCain disagrees with Clinton on so many issues. I just don't want Obama in office. Even though he's much closer on things to Hillary than McCain is. Forget about it. We are just angry."



....I loved the part in that signature where she said that Woe v. Wade didn't matter. =/


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

Killa Cam said:


> They probably monitor the shit out of their board. Notice how it's only a big circle jerk over there? No way that's only coincidental.


----------



## Raiden (Aug 30, 2008)

Biolink said:


> Biden vs Palin is going to be hilarious.
> 
> She is going to be ripped apart.



Biden has to be careful though, it's fairly easy to critisize Palin using attacks that could be comdemned as apart of the "same old politics" Obama is attempting not to use. 

For example, saying that McCain chose her just to target Hillary Clinton voters and others inspired by messages of change can be considered to be a personal attack.

 What Biden has to focus on is dismissing this argument put up by the McCain campaign that she has more experience than Obama, he has more or less point out that even though Obama doesn't have much experience, he has the judgement necessary to become President.

Another thing Biden needs to attack her on are here "interesting" stances on certain issues. Take for example how she didn't want to place Polar Bears on the endangered species list. Then, he needs to top it all off by reassuring voters that Palin's positions make it clear that she's not for change.

You know, I could tell by the look on his face when Obama was asked about Palin that he direly wanted to say something, but realized that it's best he keeps his comments to himself.

That's partly a good thing, I listened to a McCain spokeswoman/supporter on CNN, and what she pretty much said led me to believe that the Republicans and the McCain campaign are hoping for Biden to "say too much" in the debates.

He is well aware of his weaknesses though and has more than enough time to prepare for the debates, so I doubt that will happen.


----------



## Adonis (Aug 30, 2008)

The problem with special-interest groups is that they assume any criticism of a person protected under their cause is rooted in societal bias. Sometimes, a bad candidate happens to be a woman or a black guy or whatever.


----------



## Viciousness (Aug 30, 2008)

Bassoonist said:


> Dear lord.
> 
> I saw in one signature this:
> 
> ...




I hate to say it but these idiots almost make sexism seem legitimate. I can't see males not getting over it and voting for the next qualified candidate. Thats not to say most women arent over it because most of Hillary's supporters have moved on (I think most of the females did) but such a large percentage can't and feel burned. She threw everything at Obama but the kitchen sink on the other hand and  much larger percentage of his supporters said they'd vote for her, if he lost.

They say the election was stolen because the DNC turned on her. She lost 13 fucking states in a row, in one month! She shouldve thrown in the towel then but her foolish advisers convinced her to stay in with no chance of winning. Thats when they jumped ship. Not because theyre all sexist bigots with anti women agendas.


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 30, 2008)

Registration has been disabled at the site. I tried.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

> I hate to say it but these idiots almost make sexism seem legitimate.



No, what the hell are you talking about?



> I can't see males not getting over it and voting for the next qualified candidate.



Males are more apporoving of McCain's new VP. Also since when did you know the gender of Clinton's fringe group. Also what are you basing this on aside from tired stereotypes.


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

NOW I'm GETTING ANGRY

I saw this in someone's signature

*Women First
Country Second*

*Bangs head against wall* 


And everyone loves Sarah Palin's quote



> "we can shatter that glass ceiling"



*Bangs head against wall harder*


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

Rhaella said:


> Registration has been disabled at the site. I tried.



I get it 

They don't want anyone getting in until McCain wins or because angry sexist might come in and start bashing them


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 30, 2008)

Clinton supporters are rather extremist and deluded when it comes to women.  The funny thing is that extremists are the ones you count on to vote.


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:
			
		

> extremists are the who shouldn't vote.



*fixed

Hillary's angry bitter voters especially


----------



## Viciousness (Aug 30, 2008)

Zephos said:


> No, what the hell are you talking about?
> 
> 
> 
> Males are more apporoving of McCain's new VP. Also since when did you know the gender of Clinton's fringe group. Also what are you basing this on aside from tired stereotypes.



Read what I said not what you want to hear.

"These idiots" Not every single Hillary supporter. I already said they are in the minority. This is from polling. Did you even read my whole post or just skim through it. 

"Tired stereotypes"? theyre saying they'll vote for her and McCain who is against almost every HRC issue simply because she is another woman. This is the equivalent of if Hilllary Clinton won and didnt nominate Obama, a forum full of those in the black community saying theyd vote for him if he nominated Clarence Thomas, who is against most pro-minority issues but just so happens to be black.


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

Damn Rhallea can you get a hold of the administrator and ask why they disabled the registration?


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 30, 2008)

> *Males are more apporoving of McCain's new VP.*  Also since when did you know the gender of Clinton's fringe group. Also what are you basing this on aside from tired stereotypes.



Other than the whole lack of experience argument (which is rather silly to attach onto a Vice President while the man you want to be President fits the same category), I honestly thought this was a good pick, mostly because of her reputation for fighting corruption and wasteful programs.



> *fixed
> 
> Hillary's angry bitter voters especially



In my opinion, all citizens should be able to vote and run for government seats (convicted felons aside), and that includes neo-nazis, communists, or other extremists.  Banning them based on their beliefs is just like banning them because of the color of their skin or their sex.


----------



## Sexta Espada (Aug 30, 2008)

Shame that site won't let new members in, even though I don't agree with you guys on Obama I still hate Hillarytards more than anything else in this election. Not to mention I need an excuse to find more political cartoons


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

> Read what I said not what you want to hear.



You mean this.

"I hate to say it but these idiots almost make sexism seem legitimate."



> "These idiots" Not every single Hillary supporter. I already said they are in the minority. This is from polling. Did you even read my whole post or just skim through it.



Funny, where did I defend Hillary supporters?



> "Tired stereotypes"? theyre saying they'll vote for her and McCain who is against almost every HRC issue simply because she is another woman. This is the equivalent of if Hilllary Clinton won and didnt nominate Obama, a forum full of those in the black community saying theyd vote for him if he nominated Clarence Thomas, who is against most pro-minority issues but just so happens to be black.



So clearly sexism seems legitimate?
No?
Why are you pretending you weren't talking about women the gender? As opposed to women the few Hillary supporters?


----------



## BlueNinja44 (Aug 30, 2008)

How are we supposed to repower America with 100% clean electricity in 10 years when you have McCain and Palin in the Whitehouse? Shit, this country can't afford another 4 years of failed policies and a falling economy. If they want a fight, then we'll give them a brawl. I'm dead convinced that Obama must win this election.


----------



## Biolink (Aug 30, 2008)

What about the decision to not put Polar Bears in an Endangered Species program, and the support of offshore drilling?

I mean. Come on...


----------



## The Pink Ninja (Aug 30, 2008)

After checking I've discovered she out-Bushes Bush himself: Anti-Gay, Creationist, Pro-Life, literally married to the oil industry.

I've heard she's atheist hating too but I haven't seen evidence of it yet.

All she has in her favour is her anti-Corruption reputation (Not tight budgeting though. No Republican can have a tight budgeting reputation. They may cut taxes and funding for some thing but they cut money from things they should and overfund things they shouldn't).

Shrewd choice unless the Dmeocrats can do some amazing propergander.

McCain is the only Republican who could have won. But the Christian base of the Republican party doesn't trust him. So pow, right wing Christian... who is also a woman.

And women traditionally vote Democrat. If only women voted they'd win every time.

Of course I was already betting on McCain to win.

What most intresting though is this family drama going on over her abuse of power. Could be cool


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> Other than the whole lack of experience argument (which is rather silly to attach onto a Vice President while the man you want to be President fits the same category), I honestly thought this was a good pick, mostly because of her reputation for fighting corruption and wasteful programs.



So you don't care at all that this is contradicting McCain's original theme of *experience*? 

Not to mention she's governor of a fucking town that's population is only 8,000? That's not even a frickin lot.


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 30, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> Damn Rhallea can you get a hold of the administrator and ask why they disabled the registration?



It doesn't work like that, darling. XD They'd probably be swamped by angry liberals if they were still open; the decision makes sense.

Hopefully they'll get some sort of contact with the outside world before the election, and wake up.


----------



## Garlock (Aug 30, 2008)

Its more or less the fact that McCain could and might kick the bucket at any given moment, and then its all over for us. We have another republican nutjob running the White House.


----------



## Viciousness (Aug 30, 2008)

Zephos said:


> You mean this.
> 
> "I hate to say it but these idiots almost make sexism seem legitimate."


I mean the whole post not just the first line of it if you want to get an understanding of what I'm getting at.



> Funny, where did I defend Hillary supporters?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Funny..where did I say all women, women the gender, make sexism seem legitimate?
If all women thought like them sexism would be legitimate. In the Clarence Thomas example While I could and probably would say these dumb shits deserve to be shot, I can't say that would make racism seem legitimate when most of this country's legacy of racism included slavery, lynchings, and up until 40 years ago seperating them from society. But sexism and mainly the stereotyping that women are emotional, and shouldn't vote because they will think with their emotions and not with their brains. These women are showing just that. Even though sexism isn't legitimate and never will be and the Democratic Party would never stand a chance without so many female voters, if all women thought like these fools (which they don't) it would pretty much be legitimized. 

Do you understand what I am saying now at all?


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 30, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> So you don't care at all that this is contradicting McCain's original theme of *experience*?



It is hypocritical, but how is that any different than Obama's pick of an experienced elderly white senator while running on the theme of change?  Especially after using experience against them by attacking Washington's inability to fix problems.  Besides, one could argue McCain's theme of experience was referring to the Presidential candidates, not their VP's. 



> Not to mention she's governor of a fucking town that's population is only 8,000? That's not even a frickin lot.



Governor of a town?  What?  She's the governor of the STATE which holds over 680,000 people.


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

Rhaella said:


> It doesn't work like that, darling. XD They'd probably be swamped by angry liberals if they were still open; the decision makes sense.



I knew it! 

Jesus Christ if only for a day I was able to figure out what goes on in the mind of a gay feminist Hillary supporter who's all of a sudden for Sarah Palin. This just disgust me more than the Spongebob Squarepants re-runs.


----------



## The Pink Ninja (Aug 30, 2008)

Candlejack said:


> Its more or less the fact that McCain could and might kick the bucket at any given moment, and then its all over for us. We have another republican nutjob running the White House.



This scares me too.

Not least because Christian Wackoes would take this as a sign of devine intervention.


----------



## The Pink Ninja (Aug 30, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> I knew it!
> 
> Jesus Christ if only for a day I was able to figure out what goes on in the mind of a gay feminist Hillary supporter who's all of a sudden for Sarah Palin. This just disgust me more than the Spongebob Squarepants re-runs.



No gay person save a Log Cabin Republican would ever be for SP.


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 30, 2008)

Candlejack said:


> Its more or less the fact that McCain could and might kick the bucket at any given moment, and then its all over for us. We have another republican nutjob running the White House.



While my hopes for either one of them is low, at least it's a win-win in the standpoint of minorities all over America.  Still, you're right; if McCain wins, all of them blame would be thrown on the Republican's rule over the country instead of the problems neither party have answers for.


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> It is hypocritical, but how is that any different than Obama's pick of an experienced elderly white senator while running on the theme of change?



Biden is a resource and a sage Palin is a fucking groupie and a Clinton supporter lightning rod. 



> Governor of a town?  What?  She's the governor of the STATE which holds over 680,000 people.



Oh... 680,000 

Too bad that's still not alot


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

> It is hypocritical, but how is that any different than Obama's pick of an experienced elderly white senator while running on the theme of change?



Because "not experinced, black, and young" were never apart of what Obama means by change? Two of those things couldn't be more irrelevant.



> Besides, one could argue McCain's theme of experience was referring to the Presidential candidates, not their VP's.



One would have to be very stupid to argue that given the primary purpose of the VP.



> Governor of a town?  What?  She's the governor of the STATE which holds over *680,000 people.*



That seems like alot doesn't it.

It's not.


----------



## The Pink Ninja (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> While my hopes for either one of them is low, at least it's a win-win in the standpoint of minorities all over America.



SP is bad for gays and atheists.

Biden and McCain are only good for Christian white men who have had everything there way snce forever anyway.


----------



## Garlock (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> While my hopes for either one of them is low, at least it's a win-win in the standpoint of minorities all over America.  Still, you're right; if McCain wins, all of them blame would be thrown on the Republican's rule over the country instead of the problems neither party have answers for.



Not when the woman has the slightest clue on what defcon 4 is and what the presidential role is...

Worst case scenario is that we would be going into a second civil war or something of that similar matter once she starts fumbling the economy even much worse than it has been going, and makes some piss poor decisions that strip us of our rights, and makes the Patriot Act look like a child's rattle.


----------



## Adonis (Aug 30, 2008)

300,000,000 >>> 680,000

Four years of college preparatory school at work, here.


----------



## Biolink (Aug 30, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> So you don't care at all that this is contradicting McCain's original theme of *experience*?
> 
> Not to mention she's governor of a fucking town that's population is only 8,000? That's not even a frickin lot.



She was Mayor of a small town of 8,000, and she actually became Governor of Alaska eventually.

Still doesn't change the fact that the McCain camp has been using Obama's experience as an excuse, and then they turn around and pick her, who's experience doesn't hold a candle to what Obama has been doing since 1997.

Dear God, it's scary to imagine her in Office. She is a Republican among Republican's. Make G-Dub Jr. blush.

Creationist, Anti-Gay, Pro-Life, an NRA(National Rifle Association) member. Voted against classifying Polar Bears as Endangered, and supports off shore drilling.

Dear God. If she ever makes it into Office, I'm getting the fuck out of the United States seriously.


----------



## forkandspoon (Aug 30, 2008)

LOL this was the best possible move by Mccain and his camp, and it just shows their superiority in every possible way to the idiotic democrats. I mean Obama was on his way to win the presidential election simply because he was a black guy... then the republicans turned it around and are now going to win simply because the VP has boobs.... GG republicans. To think I was saving up all my money so I could move out of the US when Obama became president... (Though i was planning on staying long enough to watch it burn)


----------



## Nae'blis (Aug 30, 2008)

oh wow I'm surprised you actually said that.


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

Candlejack said:


> Not when the woman has the slightest clue on what defcon 4 is and what the presidential role is...



Also so she knows how to use a gun

Big deal

she's like a fucking Dick Cheney

Only she doesn't have a big head 

She has a bad hair style big mouth and dumb glasses

Shit, makes me not feel so bad whenever I wear mine anymore


----------



## Garlock (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> It is hypocritical, but how is that any different than Obama's pick of an experienced elderly white senator while running on the theme of change?  Especially after using experience against them by attacking Washington's inability to fix problems.  Besides, one could argue McCain's theme of experience was referring to the Presidential candidates, not their VP's.



When you're about to kick the bucket, your VP means everything to you, especially when battling Cancer. Its not the Korean war anymore, its chemo vs cancer, and usually those battles never work out in the patient's favor. Biden brings advisement to the table in foreign policies and also possibly an extra pair of hands to assist during several visits to international countries.



> Governor of a town?  What?  She's the governor of the STATE which holds over 680,000 people.



Charlie Crist was up for nomination of VP as well, and he is the governor of a state that has 15,982,378 (2000). That may seem like a lot, but Jacksonville and Metro Miami has about the same amount of people living there as well.


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

Forkandspoon said:
			
		

> LOL this was the best possible move by Mccain and his camp,



No 



			
				Forkandspoon said:
			
		

> I mean Obama was on his way to win the presidential election simply because he was a black guy...



No 



			
				Forkandspoon said:
			
		

> then the republicans turned it around and are now going to win simply because the VP has boobs....



No


----------



## Garlock (Aug 30, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> Also so she knows how to use a gun
> 
> Big deal
> 
> ...



Well, I will admit, I would fuck the shit out of her, and she probably gives decent head with those lips .... and everyone claims they know how to use a gun, that is until you shoot your hunting partner in the face and come up with the line "JESUS FUCK I THOUGHT YOU WERE A DUCK!"


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

Candlejack said:


> Well, I will admit, I would fuck the shit out of her, and she probably gives decent head with those lips



Of course 

I still can't get over the fact how.. *shudders* much she reminds me of my teacher from a school I went to...  But...I can't say she's hot or to give me some because then I'd say my teachers hot too 




> .... and everyone claims they know how to use a gun, that is until you shoot your hunting partner in the face and come up with the line "JESUS FUCK I THOUGHT YOU WERE A DUCK!"



I think DICK CHENEY found his SOUL MATE


----------



## Adonis (Aug 30, 2008)

Candlejack said:


> *Well, I will admit, I would fuck the shit out of her, and she probably gives decent head with those lips* .... and everyone claims they know how to use a gun, that is until you shoot your hunting partner in the face and come up with the line "JESUS FUCK I THOUGHT YOU WERE A DUCK!"



[deadpan]Your political insight is inspiring.[/deadpan]


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

^Her appearance inspires me the whole vision from the wire wear that secretary or whatever the fuck she was giving head to Clay Davis the mayor on the show.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

Yes, let's shit up a political thread with sex jokes *high fives*.

DUDE PARTY


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 30, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> Biden is a resource and a sage Palin is a fucking groupie and a Clinton supporter lightning rod.



The fuck?



> Oh... 680,000
> 
> Too bad that's still not alot



True; I'm pretty sure the area between my house and my school holds more people.  Still, this is a number dramatically higher than the one you made up.



Zephos said:


> Because "not experinced, black, and young" were never apart of what Obama means by change? Two of those things couldn't be more irrelevant.



He meant bring change to Washington... right before picking a senator who has been there for over 25 years.  Not to mention picking an elderly white senator is very traditional, so Obama is playing it rather safe.



> One would have to be very stupid to argue that given the primary purpose of the VP.



I don't think chances are high that McCain is going to die or resign.  Basically, she is just going to serve as another adviser.  



> That seems like alot doesn't it.
> 
> It's not.



I'm well aware of that; however, Blaze gave a number less than 10,000 which was a complete and total lie.  



The Pink Ninja said:


> SP is bad for gays and atheists.



While she doesn't support gay marriage, she voted for measures to prevent discrimination against homosexuals.  And where did you get the idea that she hates atheists?  



> Not when the woman has the slightest clue on what defcon 4 is and what the presidential role is...



Chances are, she was just remarking on just how little duties a Vice President really had.  The Republicans once put Teddy Roosevelt (a pretty big liberal in those days) on the slot as a political dead end once, only to have the president shot.



> Worst case scenario is that we would be going into a second civil war or something of that similar matter once she starts fumbling the economy even much worse than it has been going, and makes some piss poor decisions that strip us of our rights, and makes the Patriot Act look like a child's rattle.



The most she is really going to do is ADVISE the president.  The role of the vice president is often superfluous.


----------



## Garlock (Aug 30, 2008)

Adonis said:


> Your political insight is inspiring.



Doesn't mean I'm gonna vote for the forgetful old man and the broad come November


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

> He meant bring change to Washington... right before picking a senator who has been there for over 25 years.  Not to mention picking an elderly white senator is very traditional, so Obama is playing it rather safe.




No, the fact that he's old and white has nothing to with tradition. That's both racist and ..ageist.
What about Biden's policies are traditional?
Not to mention Obama's change is less about Washington so much as the last 8 years of Washington.



> I don't think chances are high that McCain is going to die or resign.  Basically, she is just going to serve as another adviser.



You seriously don't think a man near the lifespan limit of american males who is continually ravaged by cancer is in danger of dying within 4 years?

You severely underestimate cancer.


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 30, 2008)

> When you're about to kick the bucket, your VP means everything to you, especially when battling Cancer. Its not the Korean war anymore, its chemo vs cancer, and usually those battles never work out in the patient's favor. Biden brings advisement to the table in foreign policies and also possibly an extra pair of hands to assist during several visits to international countries.



I am so tired of this point;  doctors already confirmed McCain isn't likely to die within his first term.



> Charlie Crist was up for nomination of VP as well, and he is the governor of a state that has 15,982,378 (2000). That may seem like a lot, but Jacksonville and Metro Miami has about the same amount of people living there as well.



Like I said, Blaze gave out a number less than 10,000 and it was just too stupid to ignore.



> No, the fact that he's old and white has nothing to with tradition. That's both racist and ..ageist.
> What about Biden's policies are traditional?
> Not to mention Obama's change is less about Washington so much as the last 8 years of Washington.



Biden was willing to run WITH McCain or against him.  A number of conservatives supported Obama's decision.  As for the elderly white remark, I was just saying that Obama isn't going for anything radical. 



> You seriously don't think a man near the lifespan limit of american males who is continually ravaged by cancer is in danger of dying within 4 years?
> 
> You severely underestimate cancer.



Doctors already gave their professional opinion.


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

> I'm well aware of that; however, Blaze gave a number less than 10,000 which was a complete and total lie.



I heard from another political ally that it was 8,000 but I didn't hear it well 

A mistake 

Redardless of the change of  number I'm still not to impressed 

Also what's up with the discrimination  against aetheist? 

They have the right to be as hateful towards religion as religious folks are to be loving towards it.


----------



## Garlock (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> Chances are, she was just remarking on just how little duties a Vice President really had.  The Republicans once put Teddy Roosevelt (a pretty big liberal in those days) on the slot as a political dead end once, only to have the president shot.


Regardless of how minimal your duties are, the VP usually does help out with foreign things and other things back at home. While the VP role can be described as minimal, the VP can do a lot or a little, depending on what they wish to do with their time.


> The most she is really going to do is ADVISE the president.  The role of the vice president is often superfluous.


I was talking in the sense of "Should McCain lose the war... To cancer" and die in office, which may happen.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> Biden was willing to run WITH McCain or against him.  A number of conservatives supported Obama's decision.  As for the elderly white remark, I was just saying that Obama isn't going for anything radical.



What are Biden's policies that are contuary to Obama's.

And again, white/old has nothing to do with anything.



> Doctors already gave their professional opinion.



Which was?


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 30, 2008)

Candlejack said:


> Regardless of how minimal your duties are, the VP usually does help out with foreign things and other things back at home. While the VP role can be described as minimal, the VP can do a lot or a little, depending on what they wish to do with their time.



In other words, the VP is more or less another adviser.  The official duties of the Vice President are almost laughable; everything else is unofficial and like you said, depends on what they do with their time.



> I was talking in the sense of "Should McCain lose the war... To cancer" and die in office, which may happen.



He had a history of cancer, but doctors examined him and found him fit to run the country, at least for a single term.


----------



## Garlock (Aug 30, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> I heard from another political ally that it was 8,000 but I didn't hear it well
> 
> A mistake
> 
> ...



The 8,000 was towards the city she ran while she was a Mayor.

Every American has the right to believe and practice any religion they desire. Satanic, Atheist, Scientology, Skith, you name it, and you can worship it. So in that sense, being biased towards one religion and enacting discrimination is a violation of our first amendment. Most likely it'll happen when they pass a bill and Supreme Court overlooks its unconstitutional ways.



dreams lie said:


> I am so tired of this point;  doctors already confirmed McCain isn't likely to die within his first term.
> ...
> 
> Doctors already gave their professional opinion.


McCain is not Magic Johnson, and clearly you have no witnessed firsthand what cancer can do and how it comes and goes in stages and phases. As someone who has had 2 family members die of skin cancer and lung cancer, I can say that they always appear perfectly fine, right before they kick the critical bucket and are bedridden.


----------



## Viciousness (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> The most she is really going to do is ADVISE the president.  The role of the vice president is often superfluous.



VP is also president of the senate. And given McCain's medical condition and age it will not be surprising if she has to assume control of the executive branch at times. She is not in the senate probably has a loose understandings of the innerworkings of congress, other than lobbying them as a governor. Comparing her experience to Obama's who interacts with Congress on a daily basis, and has tried to bring change there. 

Palin is like a hermit who ran a group of outcasts in the hills somewhere for a couple weeks, being elected chief advisor on how to run New York City for a year. There's a big difference between the rest of the country and Alaska. And internationally Obama commands an audience and respect. She does not (McCain may get the respect thing from a few who remember him from the former soviet union..but not the audience of those his words may influence at all either). There is no comparison.


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

> I am so tired of this point; doctors already confirmed McCain isn't likely to die within his first term.
> ...
> 
> Doctors already gave their professional opinion.



Those doctors need to be fired

A single term and leave the next three to Palin 

I see nothing wrong with that


----------



## Raiden (Aug 30, 2008)

forkandspoon said:


> I mean Obama was on his way to win the presidential election simply because he was a black guy...



Obama is making history because he is an African American running for President, but being Black is also a great misserice to Obama. It's Obama's race that could ultimately lead to him being assassinated by some racial supremisist or a person that's just racist. That's why his VP pick is just as vital as McCain's VP choice. 

People focus more on Obama's message of change instead of his race anyway. It's not like he has a number of die hard fans like Hillary Clinton that will side with him until the end _after_ the end.


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 30, 2008)

Zephos said:


> What are Biden's policies that are contuary to Obama's.



I just skimmed over wiki and haven't found anything yet.  Still, that just backs up an earlier post of mine about how Obama and McCain's political positions overlapped at certain points and are both opposed to most of Bush's policies.



> And again, white/old has nothing to do with anything.



He isn't breaking the tradition of VP picks.  That was all I was saying.



> Which was?


corpsecunt


----------



## Viciousness (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> I am so tired of this point;  doctors already confirmed McCain isn't likely to die within his first term.



Dying and suffering the effects of dimentia at 72 aren't the same thing. Its especially likely for a man who was tortured in pow cell for 5 years, had cancer in his face and recieved treatments not chemo for it (but will need chemo for it if it recurrs which is why he is so careful in the sun:  ), and has showns signs of not being quite the same guy he was when he ran 8 years back, even though he realized to get votes he'd have to pull his views more in line with party lines, he's not the maverick he once was that they make him out to be either. 90%+ votes with Bush now is your rogue maverick??

Doctors have managed to keep the ailing Cheney alive this long, and keep him healthy enough that he still has the strength to go out shooting mufukas in the back. I won't be surprised if McCain survives his first term. But the guy is old and like most old people who have been ravaged by disease and torture his mind is beggining to slip away from him. As much as they try to cover it up with the makeup and combover, he's been through alot. He's an american Hero, like Kerry was too (though they tried to falsely discredit him), but one really needs to question his fitness to be president.


----------



## Adonis (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> He isn't breaking the tradition of VP picks.  That was all I was saying.



Picking a non-white VP just to "break tradition" is asinine. I'd call that Tokenism.


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 30, 2008)

> McCain is not Magic Johnson, and clearly you have no witnessed firsthand what cancer can do and how it comes and goes in stages and phases. As someone who has had 2 family members die of skin cancer and lung cancer, I can say that they always appear perfectly fine, right before they kick the critical bucket and are bedridden.



When you mean "perfectly fine," you meant medical examinations?  



> *VP is also president of the senate*. And given McCain's medical condition and age it will not be surprising if she has to assume control of the executive branch at times. She is not in the senate probably has a loose understandings of the innerworkings of congress, other than lobbying them as a governor. Comparing her experience to Obama's who interacts with Congress on a daily basis, and has tried to bring change there.
> 
> Palin is like a hermit who ran a group of outcasts in the hills somewhere for a couple weeks, being elected chief advisor on how to run New York City for a year. There's a big difference between the rest of the country and Alaska. And internationally Obama commands an audience and respect. She does not (McCain may get the respect thing from a few who remember him from the former soviet union..but not the audience of those his words may influence at all either). There is no comparison.



I doubt McCain would relinquish control often and even if he does, they hold many similar views.  Next, the president of the senate is only allowed to cast a vote in the event of a tie.  Don't try to mislead people as if it's actually something important. I really don't see a point in the rest of your post, as it seemed more to be a point of international popularity, which America couldn't care less about.  If you were talking about foreign policy, they will have advisers with them.


----------



## Garlock (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> When you mean "perfectly fine," you meant medical examinations?



It is what it is, you always try to read into the hidden meanings and whatnot, seriously, just take words as they are and leave it at that. Perfectly fine as in they function properly, urinate normally, can eat a meal, drink water, and shit without any problems whatsoever. 

Cancer is like the eye of a hurricane, and then the winds pick up and bash you back in the face. Only its not really wind, its a string of cancerous tumors somewhere in your body that just started acting up and have been discovered to render you in a critical and possibly terminal state.


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 30, 2008)

Adonis said:


> Picking a non-white VP just to "break tradition" is asinine. I'd call that Tokenism.



I agree, but it was still something I had expected him to do after such a huge campaign on change.



DrunkenYoshimaster said:


> Dying and suffering the effects of dimentia at 72 aren't the same thing. Its especially likely for a man who was tortured in pow cell for 5 years, had cancer in his face and recieved treatments not chemo for it (but will need chemo for it if it recurrs which is why he is so careful in the sun:  ),



I really find this tiresome;  the public may be in the opinion that he is not healthy enough to run, but medical experts disagree.  So what if he has to careful of the sun?  There should really be an end to this.



> and has showns signs of not being quite the same guy he was when he ran 8 years back, even though he realized to get votes he'd have to pull his views more in line with party lines, he's not the maverick he once was that they make him out to be either. 90%+ votes with Bush now is your rogue maverick??



Why are you telling me this?  I have not very willing to vote for either candidate.



> Doctors have managed to keep the ailing Cheney alive this long, and keep him healthy enough that he still has the strength to go out shooting mufukas in the back. I won't be surprised if McCain survives his first term. But the guy is old and like most old people who have been ravaged by disease and torture his mind is beggining to slip away from him. As much as they try to cover it up with the makeup and combover, he's been through alot. He's an american Hero, like Kerry was too (though they tried to falsely discredit him), but one really needs to question his fitness to be president.



Only medical fucking experts disagree.  



> It is what it is, you always try to read into the hidden meanings and whatnot, seriously, just take words as they are and leave it at that.



No, I was wondering if you meant appear normal as in terms that society would view as normal or normal as in *doctors* found them healthy.



> Perfectly fine as in they function properly, urinate normally, can eat a meal, drink water, and shit without any problems whatsoever. Its like the eye of a hurricane, and then the winds pick up and bash you back in the face. Only its not really wind, its a string of cancerous tumors somewhere in your body that just started acting up and have been discovered to render you in a critical and possiblyterminal state.



But were their medical exams pointing the same way or no?


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

@ dreams Lie 

That doesn't change the fact that McCain is thinking about fucking the US 

His doctor says he,ll be able to survive for ONE term


ONE TERM 

Might as well call Palin the president of the United States 

In which case she,ll fuck us harder and faster


----------



## Viciousness (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> I doubt McCain would relinquish control often and even if he does, they hold many similar views.  Next, the president of the senate is only allowed to cast a vote in the event of a tie.  Don't try to mislead people as if it's actually something important. I really don't see a point in the rest of your post, as it seemed more to be a point of international popularity, which America couldn't care less about.  If you were talking about foreign policy, they will have advisers with them.



If he has dimentia and is hospitalized for the extensive chemo he would need in the likely reccurence of his melonama she would be in charge. Even if their backwards views are identical it doesnt change the fact that unlike McCain, Clinton, Obama, Biden she is neither known or respected overseas, and many foreign leaders would probably look down on her as an inexperienced female leader. Obama may lack experience in foreign affairs and McCain may not know what he's talking about chronologically or confuse who the enemy is but foreign leaders respect them and the populace respects Obama.

As for President of the Senate. She still presides over it unless in her absence the Pro Tempore is chosen. 1 vote isn't a big deal unless it is the deciding vote, otherwise there should be no more worry in having her be a part than if she were just elected Senate. But the fact that she would be allowed a large voice in the Senate and in the event of a very possible tied agenda be the tie breaker, should be noted. To say the VP has no power and/or influence, except adding a small voice of many to the president's ear is incorrect.


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 30, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> @ dreams Lie
> 
> That doesn't change the fact that McCain is thinking about fucking the US
> 
> ...




I heard the thing about surviving one term somewhere in yahoo months ago.  In the link I provided above, it reads:  




> "At the present time, *Senator McCain enjoys excellent health and displays extraordinary energy,*" Dr. John Eckstein, McCain's primary physician at the Mayo Clinic Scottsdale, told reporters in a teleconference.
> 
> "While it is impossible to predict any person's future health, *today I can find no medical reason or problems that would preclude Senator McCain from fulfilling all the duties and obligations of president of the United States," *Eckstein said.
> 
> ...



There were this interesting little tidbit though:



> There was nothing in the records regarding mental health. When McCain last released his medical records during a 1999 bid for the presidency, documents showed that his doctors had concluded that his years in prison during the Vietnam War had not had a lasting psychological effect.
> 
> In response to a reporter's question, Eckstein said there was no evidence of memory loss in the senator, *though the records did not appear to contain any indication that McCain had undergone mental status or cognitive testing.*



However, that would have to do with his decision making abilities, not with rather or not he would die.  At least not unless he commits suicide.



> If he has dimentia and is hospitalized for the extensive chemo he would need in the likely reccurence of his melonama she would be in charge.



Which is very unlikely and gets even more unlikely as time goes on.



> Even if their backwards views are identical it doesnt change the fact that unlike McCain, Clinton, Obama, Biden she is neither known or respected overseas, and many foreign leaders would probably look down on her as an inexperienced female leader. Obama may lack experience in foreign affairs and McCain may not know what he's talking about chronologically or confuse who the enemy is but foreign leaders respect them and the populace respects Obama.



In other words, you think other leaders would underestimate her, which might be true because many in Alaska did.  Despite her little time as governor, she had beaten influential candidates and accomplished major changes.



> As for President of the Senate. She still presides over it unless in her absence the Pro Tempore is chosen. 1 vote isn't a big deal unless it is the deciding vote, otherwise there should be no more worry in having her be a part than if she were just elected Senate. But the fact that she would be allowed a large voice in the Senate and in the event of a very possible tied agenda be the tie breaker, should be noted. To say the VP has no power and/or influence, except adding a small voice of many to the president's ear is incorrect.



How is this any different from another adviser?  She would have a voice in things, but in the end, is still very limited in power or official duties.


----------



## Viciousness (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> However, that would have to do with his decision making abilities, not with rather or not he would die.  At least not unless he commits suicide.


I said in my post he could probably be kept alive. I am talking about his mental abilities and the chances of him suffering from dimentia in the next 4 years, which is likely for a normal elderly person and extremely likely for him.



> In other words, you think other leaders would underestimate her, which might be true because many in Alaska did.  Despite her little time as governor, she had beaten influential candidates and accomplished major changes.



What major changes? Claiming she fought off a bridge to no where was a lie, she supported it. They are investigating her for corruption as well, even though I doubt much will come of it, how much do you know about her?

And its not about underestimating her, its about not respecting what she has to say and just doing what they want to do. Many dont respect what Bush has to say and with her who you admit shares McCains views, who is in line with Bush 90% of the time and also happens to be a woman, they would respect her words even less. McCain has foreign experience in his corner, Obama has his world following in his, what does she have that would convince world leaders to respect her?




> How is this any different from another adviser?  She would have a voice in things, but in the end, is still very limited in power or official duties.



VP is generally cheif advisor to the president. Not just, another advisor in the cabinet. Just because Cheney went into hiding from the Public Eye largely following the Haliburton Scandal doesn't mean he doesn't have huge influence in the current administration. Gore was often in the media spotlight as VP and had a large influence as well as commanding a presence in his trips overseas etc. And in the regard to which you are speaking you could argue all senators are limited in power, and she would be the most powerful in the senate. 

The way you were talking you make it sound like she would have no more influence in a McCain administation than McCain's daughter. And maybe with her background that would be the case and they would always have a Senate Pro-tempore, and McCain would largely ignore her in his cabinet, and she'd be a puppet for him to use in the media. But it doesnt have to be that way and shouldn't be that way especially if she is expected to fill the role of the president in case something happens, which is fairly likely.


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 30, 2008)

DrunkenYoshimaster said:


> I said in my post he could probably be kept alive. I am talking about his mental abilities and the chances of him suffering from dimentia in the next 4 years, which is likely for a normal elderly person and extremely likely for him.



Dementia wouldn't keep him from doing his job; it would just make his job much harder.



> What major changes? Claiming she fought off a bridge to no where was a lie, she supported it. They are investigating her for corruption as well, even though I doubt much will come of it, how much do you know about her?



I heard of her efforts to cut down on the budget early on by getting rid of wasteful programs, once selling a private plane owned by the state to take trips instead with commercial jets.  The rest can be read here;  I have to go soon.






> And its not about underestimating her, its about not respecting what she has to say and just doing what they want to do. Many dont respect what Bush has to say and with her who you admit shares McCains views, who is in line with Bush 90% of the time and also happens to be a woman, they would respect her words even less. McCain has foreign experience in his corner, Obama has his world following in his, what does she have that would convince world leaders to respect her?



I'm sorry, but the fucking UN can't even draw respect, who says a superpower within it would?  Obama may draw a lot of support, but he isn't likely to influence any foreign leaders more than the next guy.



> VP is generally cheif advisor to the president. Not just, another advisor in the cabinet. Just because Cheney went into hiding from the Public Eye largely following the Haliburton Scandal doesn't mean he doesn't have huge influence in the current administration. Gore was often in the media spotlight as VP and had a large influence as well as commanding a presence in his trips overseas etc. And in the regard to which you are speaking you could argue all senators are limited in power, and she would be the most powerful in the senate.



Senators get to vote on everything.  The VP is only allowed to vote in the event of a tie.  Still, I suppose they are rather limited in power when compared to the President.



> The way you were talking you make it sound like she would have no more influence in a McCain administation than McCain's daughter. And maybe with her background that would be the case and they would always have a Senate Pro-tempore, and McCain would largely ignore her in his cabinet, and she'd be a puppet for him to use in the media. But it doesnt have to be that way and shouldn't be that way especially if she is expected to fill the role of the president in case something happens, *which is fairly likely.*



...  Ignoring that comment, I honestly think an adviser wouldn't affect someone much more than a domestic partner would, so yeah, the VP job isn't much.  You said it yourself; if she proved incapable, it wouldn't much matter as she just wouldn't fill in all the unofficial duties.


----------



## Fay (Aug 30, 2008)

Hmm..this news shocked me..
I'm all for Obama, too bad I can't vote >__<


----------



## drache (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> Other than the whole lack of experience argument (which is rather silly to attach onto a Vice President while the man you want to be President fits the same category), I honestly thought this was a good pick, mostly because of her reputation for fighting corruption and wasteful programs.
> .


 
Let's do some comparing Dreams.

2 years ago, Obama was helping secure loose nuclear weapons.

You know what Palin's was doing? Worrying about enough snow for the Iditarod and the moose population.

I mean come on do you really want to even compare and contrast this? 

In the last 18 months Palin went from being mayor of a town of 5,600 (and did it badly by all accounts as they're still in debt becasue she wanted a legacy) to govenoring about 680,000.

There are 46 states and 15 *cities* bigger then Alaska.

Obama over the last 18 months has put forth legistration that will effect millions and waged a grueling campaign.


----------



## Viciousness (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> Dementia wouldn't keep him from doing his job; it would just make his job much harder.



And just like his likelihood of death while in office, it should be a consideration in electing him, as to how capable of doing his job he would be. 



> I heard of her efforts to cut down on the budget early on by getting rid of wasteful programs, once selling a private plane owned by the state to take trips instead with commercial jets.  The rest can be read here;  I have to go soon.


Thanks for the links, but the second one doesnt mention any individual achievements except like you said selling a single plane on ebay, and then one  about budget cuts without getting into specifics (could very well be cutting plans to aid the state's poor and elderly). Then it mentions things shes for that Hillary was against IE Drilling in Alaska, Capital Punishment, Same Sex Marriage, etc. The wiki link explains those budget cuts were mainly on construction projects that likely wouldve been employment opportunities for the states workers. Then when the state board of Agriculture planned to end an unprofitable dairy, she had them all fired and replaced. Then was forced to support the dairy's closure later when it continued to be unprofitable...this is a bad thing, just like her support of the bridge to no where which she now tries to say she fought. The wiki link also mentions her signing into law the state's largest budget ever before making all those budget cuts..

She had some fired on corruption charges but is under investigation for corruption herself. Out of these links there are few if any real positive accomplishments. And most of what shes done in this faraway state is not relevant to what she'll be doing and who she'll be dealing with in the white house. Selling a plane on Ebay isn't going to do much for the country, and it isn't just the same thing on a larger scale.

At any rate I understand you must go..me too.




> I'm sorry, but the fucking UN can't even draw respect, who says a superpower within it would?  Obama may draw a lot of support, but he isn't likely to influence any foreign leaders more than the next guy.


The UN doesnt get respect because it doesnt have any real force to work with. UN peacekeepers are not US military, and the one who disobeys the UN the most is the US. A large reason why they don't get respect is they are just viewed as a pawn of the US. Not only is it set up here and mainly funded from here, but its seen as often being used for US interests. 

A speaker who can gather more to hear him out in a country than said country's own president, and who can't be stopped or killed without fear of retaliation from that most powerful country in the world's military, will draw respect. The US often does draw respect and has in the past far more so than since the Bush Administration took office.




> Senators get to vote on everything.  The VP is only allowed to vote in the event of a tie.  Still, I suppose they are rather limited in power when compared to the President.



True but there's is a one of many vote. hers is a tie breaker vote so she only gets to vote on issues that are so close they would go either way without her vote. These may be the most important of issues because of their controversy. Not to mention her speaking time in the senate and ability to influence and rally others votes. IMO a VP matters more than any individual senator, governor, house rep, and several administration secretaries. To say its unimportant when it really hasn't been as of late is also misleading.



> ...  Ignoring that comment, I honestly think an adviser wouldn't affect someone much more than a domestic partner would, so yeah, the VP job isn't much.  You said it yourself; if she proved incapable, it wouldn't much matter as she just wouldn't fill in all the unofficial duties.



Well its more likely than any president we've had save Reagan in his second term who really did undergo dimentia, but that can also be attributed to his being shot in the head, unlike McCain he lived a lavish lifestyle before that, was never tortured or contracted with a disease such as Melonoma: 

and I was saying VP doesnt have to be much. But it should and has been for most vice presidents since Nixon, save dan quayle the village idiot from Bush HWs administration.


----------



## Juubi (Aug 30, 2008)

with this pick, mccain just handed obama the election

she undercuts his experience argument, and no one wants some greenhorn sitting in the vp seat when mccain's saggy old ass finally kicks the bucket

obama's currently enjoying the widest lead he's had since the primaries ended, that should tell you something



SeventhDan said:


> *if I do see women that were Clinton supporters flocking to Palin I will have pretty much lost my faith in many female voters*
> 
> an outstanding example of "tollerence" as aspoused by the liberal left.



why the fuck are you bolding your sentences? that shit is annoying


----------



## BeyonderZ (Aug 30, 2008)

I'm very proud of my country and I'm very happy to see such a proud and strong willed woman on the side of such a great man as McCain. 

McCain 08 .. now more then ever.


----------



## Juubi (Aug 30, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> @ dreams Lie
> 
> That doesn't change the fact that McCain is thinking about fucking the US
> 
> ...



she could fuck me as hard and fast as she likes


----------



## BeyonderZ (Aug 30, 2008)

Juubi said:


> with this pick, mccain just handed obama the election
> 
> she undercuts his experience argument, and no one wants some greenhorn sitting in the vp seat when mccain's saggy old ass finally kicks the bucket
> 
> ...





Obama spent 8 some odd years signing papaers.. doing nothing for this country. Sarah has spent ever moment of her political life for her country. Her Deeds are 10 times that of Obama. Please don't compare the two. Sarah > Obama from the get go.


----------



## strongarm85 (Aug 30, 2008)

Anyone who believes that McCain is out of the election because of his VP pick is a whore to Liberal Democrats and NBC.


----------



## Ryan (Aug 30, 2008)

Freeze fuckers.. we came in peace!


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

BeyonderZ said:


> Obama spent 8 some odd years signing papaers.. doing nothing for this country. Sarah has spent ever moment of her political life for her country. Her Deeds are 10 times that of Obama. Please don't compare the two. Sarah > Obama from the get go.



So your argument is literally a matter of semantics.
I'm not even kidding. You seriously built your entire argument out of semantics.

Get the hell out of here.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

strongarm85 said:


> Anyone who believes that McCain is out of the election because of his VP pick is a whore to Liberal Democrats and NBC.



Quit it with the partisan bullshit.


----------



## Tsukiyomi (Aug 30, 2008)

BeyonderZ said:


> Obama spent 8 some odd years signing papaers.. doing nothing for this country. Sarah has spent ever moment of her political life for her country. Her Deeds are 10 times that of Obama. Please don't compare the two. Sarah > Obama from the get go.



You do realize that by "signing papers" he's helped enact change on a national level right? The bills he's authored and helped pass actually change things for all americans.

What exactly has she done thats "spending her life for her country"?


----------



## chikmagnet7 (Aug 30, 2008)

Trov said:


> They will find the most cost effective way to deal with the higher taxes. If it means bring them back then so be it... but there in lies the problem if you are faced with a high tax at home and an even higher tax if you leave. the consumer/worker/shareholder will not benefit from this cornering. We need to lower the tax burden, not raise it. If they moved outside to avoid the tax, when they bring it back because they want to avoid the bigger one, they will still be faced with the one they originally wanted to avoid, adding to their costs. and affecting the three groups.(Workers being the most affected appearantly, by 70%)



Absolutely 100% right, but what the fuck (excuse my French ) makes you think that once they bring their jobs back, the tax here will be  so high? Obama said he will cut taxes for companies who bring jobs over here in America. When the companies leave overseas to avoid a high tax, they will come back to have a lower one. So you're on the right track, but you missed that part. 





Trov said:


> Never said or meant that they invest in foreign markets to avoid a bad tax. What I did said was that to avoid a high tax rate, they will find the cheapest logical alternative, which is what various other companies like Chrysler has done. Moved the base of operations to Germany, and avoid most of the tax costs in the U.S. thereby raising efficency. Especially against competitors.
> Another example, company 3M decided to move more of its plants to low tax jurisdictions. This was reported in the WSJ Oct 10, 07. Why, obviously to reduce tax load. they expected to earn 150 to 200 million from doing it.)



Look, "high" is relative. Our country has to have such a "high" tax to pay for all the things we need to do and want done for the betterment of the nation (national defense/military, health care, etc). What matters is that a company's first thought is about profit. *Even if they are making outstanding profits in the United States, they will logically invest in other markets and ship jobs over seas if they can end up making more money*. It all begins with that idea of making more money. But to cut a company's taxes to incentivize them to invest back in America over somewhere else doesn't solve the problem. It creates more problems. Now other corporations realize that all they have to do is invest somewhere else and they will get tax breaks from the fed. Now the companies who shipped jobs over seas (that, true but not that likely, may have come back to America because of the tax decrease) know that they have power over the government, that they can influence them to lower taxes whenever they want them to. 




Trov said:


> Although lets get into my libertarian like mode here, who the hell are you to control how companies do things? They aren't your jobs, it's the companies jobs. Government policy shouldn't be done to affect them to do your bidding.



I have libertarian tendencies as well, but you have to recognize situations where the free market is taking advantage of the govnerment, not just the other way around. 



Trov said:


> Sorry bout that. Anyways, I'm drifting off my point. You seem to WANT to tax them to death, you want to keep  the current rate, but you also want to add an extra 'punishment' tax for companies that move out to low tax areas. This is a stupid idea. Because will american companies pay our high tax rate, foreign ones will benefit through a lower one. Foreign companies WON'T invest here as well. jobs won't be created, and money won't come from one nation to ours, we well be denying ourselves of cash from our foreign friends by doing something as stupid as the idea Obama seems to be pushing.



On this, you're completely wrong. I don't "want" to tax them to death; what I want to do is create a situation where they have an incentive to not ship jobs over seas just as much as they have an incentive to create jobs in America. I want a positive incentive to do good in America as well as a negative incentive not to do bad. You say yourself that foreign companies will benefit from such a policy, but that they won't invest here? What? They'd be nuts not to. Of course they would. But the point is, such a policy wouldn't last very long. American companies would learn that it's in their best interest financially to create jobs in America. Then their taxes would be lowered. Not the other way around.




Trov said:


> I honestly want to go in further, but I deal with the whole issue tomorrow when I'm not as impatient and cranky and unwilling to write a truly coherent counter argument. This is a mess.



That's all right. 



fieryfalcon said:


> There are risks and expenses associated with relocating jobs to other countries with looser rule of law, less infrastructure, less skilled work forces, etc...  Companies would not incur those risks if we didn't tax and regulate them to the point where it is more profitable to do so.



I 100% agree. 



fieryfalcon said:


> Actually, the government did begin the "fight."  Shipping jobs overseas is massively expensive and risky as I just noted.  It requires an ongoing expense to ship products back into the nation for sale.  We have to tax and regulate the companies to the point where it is more profitable to send jobs overseas (where the new locality also taxes them) and incur the expense of shipping rather than keep the jobs here.  A daunting task, but one that the Democrats managed to accomplish.  It would be more profitable to do business here if we eliminated the tax and regulatory state.



Illogical. The government didn't begin the "fight" by taxing so high the companies couldn't bear it. They began by taxing responsibly (to pay for the budget, not making the companies suffer relatively speaking), *yet the companies would inevitably find ways to make more money.* One important way they found of making money involved outsourcing jobs and investing in foreign markets. Companies were not going down the tubes because of American taxes; they just figured they'd make more money by shipping jobs overseas. Of course there are numerous expenses for investing elsewhere, but what do you expect? There are always going to be places where the expenses are so low, that no tax decrease is going to make a difference when a company wants to increase its profits. What they need are positive and nagative incentives to create jobs here. 





fieryfalcon said:


> What better reward for people who do business in the U.S. than the elimination of taxes and unnecessary regulations?



Well, I don't think we should totally eliminate taxes, but I'm with you on unnecessary regulations. Understand something, man. I fundementally agree with your ideas. The problem I'm having is _when_ you give that reward. Don't give it to companies when they ship jobs overseas as an incentive to come back. That's the wrong time to do it. Teach those companies a lesson by eliminating their tax breaks and possibly increasing their taxes, and give the tax breaks to companies that create jobs here--that's the best incentive for all companies everywhere to invest in America. Then, when all companies have a pure incentive to invest here and almost all are creating the jobs here at home, that's when you cut the taxes of all companies and eliminate unnessary regulation, but not before. 




fieryfalcon said:


> Such a broad based measure is preferrable to some kind of targeted reward because all Americans can benefit rather than just a few powerful companies who lobby Congress for the "reward."  Abolish the income tax and the capital gains tax, replace them with a tariff on imports so that businesses located outside the U.S. are paying to sell in our market.  If you raise taxes then the economy won't be booming; we'll be a third world nation in short order.



Not exactly. Raising taxes has its benefits just as it has drawbacks. It can be a better incentivizer than raising taxes can in some instances. I'm not sure if I'm for eliminating the income tax or the capital gains. I don't have the budget list at my finger tips, nor do I know the details of the numbers--how much money such a system would bring in and how much we would lose. Either way, we only disagree on the order of the implemenation, but that makes all the difference. That's why I stand by Obama.


----------



## Juubi (Aug 30, 2008)

BeyonderZ said:


> Obama spent 8 some odd years signing papaers.. doing nothing for this country. Sarah has spent ever moment of her political life for her country. Her Deeds are 10 times that of Obama. Please don't compare the two. Sarah > Obama from the get go.



Name these "deeds", please. As far as I know, she was mayor of a minuscule town and governor of a minuscule state...for only a year and a half. There were more people at Invesco Stadium watching Obama's acceptance speech than people who decided the margin of victory in her gubernatorial election.

Tell me, what has she done? She has ZERO foreign policy experience, and frankly, there are mayors that have to look after more people than she does



strongarm85 said:


> Anyone who believes that McCain is out of the election because of his VP pick is a whore to Liberal Democrats and NBC.



Or they just have common sense and realize that a pick of tokenism isn't gonna help John Mccain win this election, especially when the greenhorn he chose is unfamiliar to the American people and directly undercuts his central argument agains Obama.


----------



## drache (Aug 30, 2008)

BeyonderZ said:


> Obama spent 8 some odd years signing papaers.. doing nothing for this country. Sarah has spent ever moment of her political life for her country. Her Deeds are 10 times that of Obama. Please don't compare the two. Sarah > Obama from the get go.


 
Tell me, if the GOP told you unicorns were real would you believe that too?



			
				strongarm85 said:
			
		

> Anyone who believes that McCain is out of the election because of his VP pick is a whore to Liberal Democrats and NBC.


 
Out? No he's still running but this pick is ridiclous.

Even scholars agree Palin is the least qualified pick in modern history

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/13001.html


----------



## SAFFF (Aug 30, 2008)

drache said:


> Tell me, if the GOP told you unicorns were real would you believe that too?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It doesn't take a scholar to see Palin is unqualified. There might be more to her than we think or McCain has something up his sleeves. You never know.


----------



## chaosakita (Aug 30, 2008)

Now that I think about it, why in the world did he pick Palin, out of all other women? Aren't there other conservative women in the Senate, preferably ones that could attract more new voters?


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

chaosakita said:


> Now that I think about it, why in the world did he pick Palin, out of all other women? Aren't there other conservative women in the Senate, preferably ones that could attract more new voters?



Yes.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

Zephos said:


> Yes.



Seriously, why the hell did he pick Palin.
Pretty much any of these women would kick her ass.
There's a moderate republican governor from CT, and a moderate republican from Maine who has been a senator since 95 and is incredibly popular. Both could have helped his more centrist or at least less bush-like campaign image. 
And could really pull the independants, centrist democrats, two entire important north eastern blue states, and the Clintonites.

Why the hell did he pick Palin.


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 30, 2008)

...yes, but Palin is the prettiest.

[eta] Also, several of those choices are pro-abortion, one is Jewish, another is unmarried, one only has a HS diploma, etc.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

Olympia Snowe sounds pretty awesome all things considered.

If she ran for pres down the line I might cast myself a republican vote.

EDIt: And she's totally winking in that picture.
It's all "Hell yhea I am the best".

EDIT: her story is helluva drama too. Mad people died, her parents when she was 8, and her husband later. But she kept rolling with the punches and rising up in the ranks. Tell me how you shoot a hole in a character story like that.

First US female president. Calling it right now.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 30, 2008)

governor and mayor is greater than senator, this is how we pick our presidents now.  Palin should be pres and mccain vp.  anything else doesn't make sense.  At least the dems put two senators on a ticket, not an upside down  ticket like repubs.


----------



## Biolink (Aug 30, 2008)

Supreme Alchemist Fan said:


> It doesn't take a scholar to see Palin is unqualified. There might be more to her than we think or McCain has something up his sleeves. You never know.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

I've heard McCain only met her once prior to this as well.
Trivial maybe, but adds to my suspicions.

Of course my suspicions are hurt because if he just wanted a female candidate he had a pool of not only better but genuinely good hopefuls.

No I don't even know what to think.


----------



## Silvermyst (Aug 30, 2008)

WalkingMaelstrom said:


> Oh good.  Someone else has cheap trickery Spider Sense like I do.  I swear if I do see women that were Clinton supporters flocking to Palin I will have pretty much lost my faith in many female voters.





SeventhDan said:


> *if I do see women that were Clinton supporters flocking to Palin I will have pretty much lost my faith in many female voters*
> 
> an outstanding example of "tollerence" as aspoused by the liberal left.



People who voted for Hilary just because she was a woman weren't voting for the right reasons in the first place.


----------



## Juno (Aug 30, 2008)

Does anyone actually believe for a second that McCain has an iota of respect for this woman, or even women? This is a man who cheated on his first wife, who called his second wife misogynistic names in public, who _voted against_ equal pay for equal work, and who now hires a woman for no other reason than because she has tits and a vagina.

This is a fucking insult. I am utterly ashamed that unlike the first black presidential candidate whose gotten where he has by hard campaigning and boundless charisma, the first female VP candidate was put there to be used by a man to further his own ends. Dear god I hope more women see this for what it is. This is the worst attack against feminism in years.


----------



## Tasmanian Tiger (Aug 30, 2008)

If all the stupid women in America voted for Mccain because of her, I'm goona lose hope in this country.


----------



## BeyonderZ (Aug 30, 2008)

Seabear said:


> Does anyone actually believe for a second that McCain has an iota of respect for this woman, or even women? This is a man who cheated on his first wife, who called his second wife misogynistic names in public, who _voted against_ equal pay for equal work, and who now hires a woman for no other reason than because she has tits and a vagina.
> 
> This is a fucking insult. I am utterly ashamed that unlike the first black presidential candidate whose gotten where he has by hard campaigning and boundless charisma, the first female VP candidate was put there to be used by a man to further his own ends. Dear god I hope more women see this for what it is. This is the worst attack against feminism in years.



Nice, so it's ok that the Democratic Party uses a no name Black man has their poster child but the Republicans can't do a similar trick with a woman VP? 


It is VERY clear that this makes you nervous. You see Obama the tool does not hold all the cards and McCain is VERY popular. 

You should take a deep breath and relax. Now we get to see Obama being out shined by someone who is 10 times the political figure and has 10 times the American values. 

Sarah > Obama ... he never stood a chance.


----------



## BeyonderZ (Aug 30, 2008)

Tasmanian Tiger said:


> If all the stupid women in America voted for Mccain because of her, I'm goona lose hope in this country.



If all of the stupid generation in America votes for Obama because he is black, I'm gonna .. well nothing since he isn't gonna be the next president. Sorry to pop your balloon so early right after you got it and all. lol


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 30, 2008)

Seabear said:


> Does anyone actually believe for a second that McCain has an iota of respect for this woman, or even women? This is a man who cheated on his first wife, who called his second wife misogynistic names in public, who _voted against_ equal pay for equal work, and who now hires a woman for no other reason than because she has tits and a vagina.
> 
> This is a fucking insult. I am utterly ashamed that unlike the first black presidential candidate whose gotten where he has by hard campaigning and boundless charisma, the first female VP candidate was put there to be used by a man to further his own ends. Dear god I hope more women see this for what it is. This is the worst attack against feminism in years.



She's actually the second female VP.

And yes, this is disgusting.



BeyonderZ said:


> Nice, so it's ok that the Democratic Party uses a no name Black man has their poster child but the Republicans can't do a similar trick with a woman VP?
> 
> 
> It is VERY clear that this makes you nervous. You see Obama the tool does not hold all the cards and McCain is VERY popular.
> ...



Where are you getting this from?

Obama chose to ran, worked a campaign, won over the majority of the Democratic voters during the primary season. This isn't a trick the Democratic Party used. He got there on the power of his charisma, his ideals, his eloquence, and his supporters. He wasn't _given_ a free ticket here. Sure, he'll win minority votes, but his presence isn't some ploy.

Palin was, basically, appointed. Out of nowhere.

There's absolutely no comparison to be made in the methods in which they reached this position.


----------



## BeyonderZ (Aug 30, 2008)

Tsukiyomi said:


> You do realize that by "signing papers" he's helped enact change on a national level right? The bills he's authored and helped pass actually change things for all americans.
> 
> What exactly has she done thats "spending her life for her country"?




He only did what the people paying his bills told him to do. 

Obama never once in his career created a single item/deed to help this country he ONLY .. and I mean ONLY but his name to something someone else created. They told him to sign it.. and he did. End all be all.. Obama is a tool.. and nothing more. 

oohh did you hear that.. it's your balloon popping.. and you just got it a few days ago to


----------



## BeyonderZ (Aug 30, 2008)

Rhaella said:


> She's actually the second female VP.
> 
> And yes, this is disgusting.
> 
> ...



Obama said three years ago he would NOT run for president. He was forced to run by the Democratic party. He admitted he never wanted to run.. but he wouldn't dare say that now. 

Obama - a tool with some Kennedy Spice with a dash of Martin Luther Jr. 

A simple tool used to capture the Young kids .. he is a joke and you are a fool for putting your trust in someone for no other reason then he is black.


----------



## Juno (Aug 30, 2008)

BeyonderZ said:


> Nice, so it's ok that the Democratic Party uses a no name Black man has their poster child but the Republicans can't do a similar trick with a woman VP?



I'm sorry, but nothing you have said in this thread has convinced me that you have even the slightest grasp of what's being spoken of.

That you would call Obama a no-name after spending the last two years hearing NOTHING but his name, is nothing short of stupidity. No one had heard of this woman two days ago until McCain fast-tracked her into the vice presidency after 20 months as a governor. This is incomparable to Obama's 11 years as a senator. 



> It is VERY clear that this makes you nervous. You see Obama the tool does not hold all the cards and McCain is VERY popular.



On the contrary, I'm angry that McCain has shot himself in the foot. I thought he had a chance. Now I think he's made a move that makes it clear what he thinks of the intelligence of female voters, and he didn't even pick a woman who might have been credible. He picked a beauty queen with little experience over much more qualified men and women.



> You should take a deep breath and relax. Now we get to see Obama being out shined by someone who is 10 times the political figure and has 10 times the American values.
> 
> Sarah > Obama ... he never stood a chance.



Bless you for your continued wanking of the republican party. I doubt you have any appreciation of the ramifications of a man seeking to exploit feminism by ironically employing the most anti-feminist woman available to him. Do you?


----------



## Rhaella (Aug 30, 2008)

BeyonderZ said:


> Obama said three years ago he would NOT run for president. He was forced to run by the Democratic party. He admitted he never wanted to run.. but he wouldn't dare say that now.
> 
> Obama - a tool with some Kennedy Spice with a dash of Martin Luther Jr.
> 
> A simple tool used to capture the Young kids .. he is a joke and you are a fool for putting your trust in someone for no other reason then he is black.



Sorry, I'm not in the Cafe enough. I'm going to need a legitimate source for that, and a recent one, since you _can_ change your mind in three years. Also, was under the impression that the Democratic Party was pretty set on Clinton running, so I can't really understand that.

Not putting my trust in someone who's black. I'm putting my trust in someone who's not opposed to every value I hold dear, and has enough international support to fix our image worldwide simply by _existing._


----------



## Tasmanian Tiger (Aug 30, 2008)

BeyonderZ said:


> If all of the stupid generation in America votes for Obama because he is black, I'm gonna .. well nothing since he isn't gonna be the next president. Sorry to pop your balloon so early right after you got it and all. lol



their loss if they vote for McCain. Well not only them, but Russia, China and the Middle East too.

He's gonna fuck up the economy too, and his dependence on foreign oul.


----------



## dreams lie (Aug 30, 2008)

drache said:


> Let's do some comparing Dreams.
> 
> 2 years ago, Obama was helping secure loose nuclear weapons.
> 
> ...



Well obviously;  Obama is a senator while Palin is a governor.  He handles far more national projects and helps enact legislation for the country.  Palin is just at the head of seat of the executive department in a state.  However, that doesn't mean Obama is very experienced himself;  he has only been in the US senate for three and a half years.  



> In the last 18 months Palin went from being mayor of a town of 5,600 (and did it badly by all accounts as they're still in debt becasue she wanted a legacy) to govenoring about 680,000.
> 
> There are 46 states and 15 *cities* bigger then Alaska.
> 
> Obama over the last 18 months has put forth legistration that will effect millions and waged a grueling campaign.



20 months, actually, but yeah.  I'm not trying to suggest she has much experience; I'm just saying that Obama doesn't either.  He himself has only held a Senate seat for around 42 months.  

And just like his likelihood of death while in office, it should be a consideration in electing him, as to how capable of doing his job he would be. 



> Thanks for the links, but the second one doesnt mention any individual achievements except like you said selling a single plane on ebay, and then one about budget cuts without getting into specifics (could very well be *cutting plans to aid the state's poor and elderly*).



I would hope it were so, but I doubt it.  These days, the people can't live without the government and her ratings would have plummeted if she had tried to do anything about it.



> Then it mentions things shes for that Hillary was against IE Drilling in Alaska, Capital Punishment, Same Sex Marriage, etc. The wiki link explains those budget cuts were mainly on construction projects that likely wouldve been employment opportunities for the states workers. Then when the state board of Agriculture planned to end an unprofitable dairy, she had them all fired and replaced. Then was forced to support the dairy's closure later when it continued to be unprofitable...this is a bad thing, just like her support of the bridge to no where which she now tries to say she fought. The wiki link also mentions her signing into law the state's largest budget ever before making all those budget cuts..



The fact is, she tried to shut down on a number of pork barrel projects and has a reputation for making the government slimmer and more efficient.  Not everything is listed, but major changes have been undergoing in Alaska while she was a governor.  



> She had some fired on corruption charges but is under investigation for corruption herself.



It will be resolved before the election begins, so we will have to wait and see.  

Out of these links there are few if any real positive accomplishments. 

I found one about her before the job as a government in wiki, but yeah, not a lot is listed about her as compared to giants like Obama or McCain.



> Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission
> Governor Murkowski appointed Palin Ethics Commissioner of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission,[19] where she served from 2003 to 2004. She resigned in protest over what she called the "lack of ethics" of fellow Alaskan Republican leaders, who ignored her whistleblowing complaints of legal violations and conflicts of interest.[20][3] After she resigned, Palin exposed the state Republican Party's chairman, Randy Ruedrich, one of her fellow Oil & Gas commissioners, who was accused of doing work for the party on public time and supplying a lobbyist with a sensitive e-mail.[21] Palin filed formal complaints against both Ruedrich and former Alaska Attorney General Gregg Renkes, who both resigned. Ruedrich also paid a record $12,000 fine.[3]





> And most of what shes done in this faraway state is not relevant to what she'll be doing and who she'll be dealing with in the white house. Selling a plane on Ebay isn't going to do much for the country, and it isn't just the same thing on a larger scale.



The stuff she did was more symbolic than anything; it shows that she would cut down on corruption and is creative when it comes to the budget.  



> The UN doesnt get respect because it doesnt have any real force to work with. UN peacekeepers are not US military, and the one who disobeys the UN the most is the US. A large reason why they don't get respect is they are just viewed as a pawn of the US. Not only is it set up here and mainly funded from here, but its seen as often being used for US interests.



Name one time that the US actually demanded something and they listened unconditionally post Cold War.  



> A speaker who can gather more to hear him out in a country than said country's own president, and who can't be stopped or killed without fear of retaliation from that most powerful country in the world's military, will draw respect. The US often does draw respect and has in the past far more so than since the Bush Administration took office.



Appealing to the global populace isn't going to help domestic affairs.  Bush may have messed up, but pissing them off was a symptom, not the cause.



> True but there's is a one of many vote. hers is a tie breaker vote so she only gets to vote on issues that are so close they would go either way without her vote. These may be the most important of issues because of their controversy.





> Since 1789, 244 tie-breaking votes have been cast.





Amazing; every year, our vice president doesn't even get to vote twice on average.  Not to mention, people are speaking of how the democrats are going to take over the Senate in such big numbers that they would become immune to filibusters.  I don't think we're going to see her exercise that power a lot, assuming she actually ascended to the office.



> Not to mention her speaking time in the senate and ability to influence and rally others votes.



Which, like I said, is just as great as any other adviser or senator.  



> IMO a VP matters more than any individual senator, governor, house rep, and several administration secretaries. To say its unimportant when it really hasn't been as of late is also misleading.





It has been seen as insignificant for much of its history and like I said, Republicans treated it as a political dead end even back around the 1900's.



> For much of its existence, the office of Vice President was seen as little more than a minor position. John Adams, the first vice president, described it as "the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived or his imagination conceived."



During the modern era, most people use the VP role to launch future presidential bids; the main reason it has actually started gathering attention.



> Well its more likely than any president we've had save Reagan in his second term who really did undergo dimentia, but that can also be attributed to his being shot in the head, unlike McCain he lived a lavish lifestyle before that, was never tortured or contracted with a disease such as Melonoma:



If the medical _experts_ say he's fine, I'm taking their word for it.  



> and I was saying VP doesnt have to be much. But it should and has been for most vice presidents since Nixon, save dan quayle the village idiot from Bush HWs administration.



What?  Name three significant events that involved the vice presidents since Nixon.  Honestly, the role of VP is more or less just a stepping stone to becoming a president nowadays, and while holds some influence, is nothing more than an adviser.


----------



## Xyloxi (Aug 30, 2008)

Thats one VPILF


----------



## drache (Aug 30, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> Well obviously; Obama is a senator while Palin is a governor. He handles far more national projects and helps enact legislation for the country. Palin is just at the head of seat of the executive department in a state. However, that doesn't mean Obama is very experienced himself; he has only been in the US senate for three and a half years.


 
And before that Obama was a state senator for almost 9 years.

So again Obama has alot more experience then Palin, especially in getting things done. Please go look at his 9 years in the state senate it's full of bipartisan agreements where he found a compromise or something that both sides could agree on that achieved what each wanted. 

I wish people would stop spreading this lie that Obama just suddenly one day decided to run for the National Senate and happened to win. It didn't happen like that.



dreams lie said:


> 20 months, actually, but yeah. I'm not trying to suggest she has much experience; I'm just saying that Obama doesn't either. He himself has only held a Senate seat for around 42 months.


 
And before that he has almost 72 months in the State Senate. And before that he was an organizer.

So again counting up all the years of service Obama has been helping others for almost half his life.

Palin hasn't and most certainly not in a political capacity.


Also, I'm not going to get too much into this medical stuff but the truth is things you don't see coming happen. My grandfather was active and aware even at 80 years old and then one day he fell and broke his leg. He died 3 months later in the hosptial as he never fully recovered from that break and later got a bone infection.

You may think that McCain's choice is fine but most people don't think so, in fact only something like 29% think she's ready for the office (compared to 39% at a similair point when Biden was introduced) and Biden's spent his life in the Senate.



Supreme Alchemist Fan said:


> It doesn't take a scholar to see Palin is unqualified. There might be more to her than we think or McCain has something up his sleeves. You never know.


 
I'm just saying that people with degrees *cough* and too much free time *cough* have done a comparison of past VPs with Palin and thus there's proof for saying she's the least qualified VP in modern history.



Zephos said:


> Olympia Snowe sounds pretty awesome all things considered.
> 
> If she ran for pres down the line I might cast myself a republican vote.
> 
> ...


 
If McCain was smart he should have picked Snow, of course he'd have lost 2 Senate seats (as both AZ and Maine have democrat govenors) but I would have seriously thought he could have won with Snow.

Because even if she was picked for tokensim she is so well qualified you couldn't make that arguement without sounding paranoid and crazy.

Thankfully McCain isn't smart nor couragous enough to buck his 'base' (ie the evangalical right and the crazies).


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

Rhaella said:


> ...yes, but Palin is the prettiest.



Bleh,

I have a hundred teachers I'd rather do than Palin's mashed big-ass headed self.  God, she's like what would happen if Bush and McCain had a baby....  

*vomits*


----------



## Ters (Aug 30, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> Bleh,
> 
> I have a hundred teachers I'd rather do than Palin's mashed big-ass headed self.  God, she's like what would happen if Bush and McCain had a baby....
> 
> *vomits*



Where have you been?


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

Ters said:


> Where have you been?


----------



## Silvermyst (Aug 30, 2008)

BeyonderZ said:


> He only did what the people paying his bills told him to do.
> *
> Obama never once in his career created a single item/deed to help this country he ONLY .. and I mean ONLY but his name to something someone else created. They told him to sign it.. and he did. End all be all.. Obama is a tool.. and nothing more. *
> 
> oohh did you hear that.. it's your balloon popping.. and you just got it a few days ago to



What about the work he did helping the poor?

Augh. Whatever. At least people can longer say that Obama's unqualified due to lack of experience, since the VP for the Republican party is just as inexperienced.



Seabear said:


> Bless you for your continued wanking of the republican party. I doubt you have any appreciation of the ramifications of a man seeking to exploit feminism by ironically employing the most anti-feminist woman available to him. Do you?



Did not see this post.


----------



## azngamer87 (Aug 30, 2008)

Mcsame choice of Palin totally destroy his experience argument. Palin has only been in office for 2 years before she was added to the ticket. Even Obama was in office longer then her. Also Palin will not attract Clinton supporters, due her extreme right wing views. She is way to pro life to attract any women that voted for Clinton.


----------



## Superrazien (Aug 30, 2008)

The experience between Obama and Palin shouldn't even be debated. About 18 million people decided that Obama had the experience, the talent, and intelligence to run our Country. That is democracy the people decide.

Palin was chose by 1 person, who happens to come off as pretty dam sexist, he did this only to get votes of stupid Woman. Had Hillary never run for president, was the nominee, or her voters were not sore losers he would of never picked her. 

In short about 18 million people think Obama is what this country needs, 1 sexist man thought Palin was good enough because he needs votes bad. Also he had to do something drastic because Obamas speech pretty much pwnd him and the Republicans, he needed the headlines.

I also cant wait for this chick to get pwns by Biden. Its gonna be a good laugh.


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

Superrazien said:


> I also cant wait for this chick to get pwns by Biden. Its gonna be a good laugh.



It's gonna suck cause he's going to have to use kid gloves or else it's going to be called bullying..


----------



## Superrazien (Aug 30, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> It's gonna suck cause he's going to have to use kid gloves or else it's going to be called bullying..



Yeah thats sad. Man I can't stand how many stupid people are in American, im starting to believe what Bill Mahr said "America is to stupid to be governed"


----------



## Link (Aug 30, 2008)

Did anyone else LOL when they heard this?


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

BeyonderZ said:


> He only did what the people paying his bills told him to do.
> 
> Obama never once in his career created a single item/deed to help this country he ONLY .. and I mean ONLY but his name to something someone else created. They told him to sign it.. and he did. End all be all.. Obama is a tool.. and nothing more.
> 
> oohh did you hear that.. it's your balloon popping.. and you just got it a few days ago to



You have no idea whatsoever what Obama did as senator do you.
I don't think you even know he was a senator.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 30, 2008)

BeyonderZ said:


> Obama said three years ago he would NOT run for president. He was forced to run by the Democratic party. He admitted he never wanted to run.. but he wouldn't dare say that now.
> 
> Obama - a tool with some Kennedy Spice with a dash of Martin Luther Jr.
> 
> A simple tool used to capture the Young kids .. he is a joke and you are a fool for putting your trust in someone for no other reason then he is black.



In case you don't understand the election process (and you don't) the party picks a candidate through a thing called "primaries" wherein various hopefuls have to work to get the parties attention and their votes. The party in fact only refers to the delegates voting, not a shadow organization such as the one your pretending exists because your stupid.

Obama, unlike McCain actually had real competition on his way into the nominee position. In the form of Hillary Clinton. At the outset no one actually thought he would even win.

So the real answer as to why he ended up running is because he *changed his fucking mind*.

You are the worst poster on this thread bar none. If Diamed and Beleive It combined to form a megazord of delusional fallacious posts, you would still be the worst poster on this thread.

Get the fuck out of here you vapid walking cliche.


----------



## Bender (Aug 30, 2008)

Link said:


> Did anyone else LOL when they heard this?



I ROLed when I heard it


----------



## ♠Mr.Nibbles♠ (Aug 30, 2008)

McCain's choice pleases me w/o bounds


----------



## azngamer87 (Aug 31, 2008)

I think Palin views are to far right to attract main stream Americans. Her views on life is just to far to the right. She is against abortion even if the person was rape and gotten pregnant. She is even against i*c*st abortion. I think Biden will opwn her when they have their debate.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 31, 2008)

If this backfires, and I do believe it is in the process of doing just that.
Than McCain has only one more hope barring unforseen scandals/assassination.

And that is the debates.

Not for Palin, whom will likely be bulldozed by Biden.
But between Obama and himself.

The final battle really. And a very important one. If Obama chokes, it could be devestating.


----------



## AbnormallyNormal (Aug 31, 2008)

this really does demonstrate a shocking lack of maturity on the part of mr. mccain

he is so crass and transparent when he attempts to woo the hillary supporters solely on the basis of gender


----------



## ♠Mr.Nibbles♠ (Aug 31, 2008)

Zephos said:


> If this backfires, and I do believe it is in the process of doing just that.
> Than McCain has only one more hope barring unforseen scandals/assassination.
> 
> And that is the debates.
> ...



I do agree that a mess up from Obama in the debates would be devastating but I really don't perceive this happening b/c I would say that Obama got a little better from debating Hillary so often.

This was an extremely risky move by McCain and honestly I don't see how McCain plans to make this work other than as pandering to the bitter Hillary voters that did not care about the issues and wanted a woman in the White House. If that was the case he could've choose another female republican with more experience. I just don't know what McCain plans with this. I'm curious to see how this turns out.


----------



## AbnormallyNormal (Aug 31, 2008)

mccain's goal wasnt just to try to get the hillary supporters solely to vote along a sexist line. but actually he wanted to try to get his own conservative base's support, since they dont like or trust him. sarah palin is a far right nutcase


----------



## ♠Mr.Nibbles♠ (Aug 31, 2008)

AbnormallyNormal said:


> mccain's goal wasnt just to try to get the hillary supporters solely to vote along a sexist line. but actually he wanted to try to get his own conservative base's support, since they dont like or trust him. sarah palin is a far right nutcase



That may be true Abnorm but I think he could choose another conservative female like Hutchinson. Palin may be super far right but that doesn't help McCain if the only ppl that he can get is still part of the conservative base.


----------



## SAFFF (Aug 31, 2008)

Wait, she actually supports someone being raped against their will and being forced to take care of an unwanted child? 

Guess we'll see more babies in dumpsters if McCain wins.


----------



## AbnormallyNormal (Aug 31, 2008)

mccain got millions of dollars in online fundraising since announcing sarah palin as his choice. so in the short term maybe it has worked out well for him. but i think she will make some terrible blunders during this campaign and probably do terrible agaisnt joe biden in their debate


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Aug 31, 2008)

AbnormallyNormal said:


> mccain got millions of dollars in online fundraising since announcing sarah palin as his choice. so in the short term maybe it has worked out well for him. but i think she will make some terrible blunders during this campaign and probably do terrible agaisnt joe biden in their debate



it makes sense, out of the 4 people on the 2 tickets, only one is an obvious religious zealot, and that's palin.  The evangelicals have to put their dollars where the church tells em to, and mccain's ticket is the only one that fulfills that obligation now.


----------



## Nodonn (Aug 31, 2008)

I hope she gets raped by Biden.


----------



## Superrazien (Aug 31, 2008)

Nodonn said:


> I hope she gets raped by Biden.



And she wont be able to get an abortion if she gets pregnant .


----------



## chikmagnet7 (Aug 31, 2008)

I already sent an email to Biden telling him that when an opportunity arises where Palin is comparing herself to Hilary, Biden ought to say "Governor, I know Hilary Clinton, and I work with Hilary Clinton. I'm friends with Hilary Clinton. *Governor, you're no Hilary Clinton." *

Epik win would be complete.


----------



## Bender (Aug 31, 2008)

^

 

And then she,ll be like "How dare you!" 

I complimented her and mentioned her in my speech


----------



## strongarm85 (Aug 31, 2008)

chikmagnet7 said:


> I already sent an email to Biden telling him that when an opportunity arises where Palin is comparing herself to Hilary, Biden ought to say "Governor, I know Hilary Clinton, and I work with Hilary Clinton. I'm friends with Hilary Clinton. *Governor, you're no Hilary Clinton." *
> 
> Epik win would be complete.



That's just it, Palin is not going to compare herself to Hillary, she never has and she never will. All she has said so far is that where Hillary Clinton has failed she going to succeed. There is a lot more to picking Palin than trying to get digruntled Hillary voters.


----------



## chikmagnet7 (Aug 31, 2008)

strongarm85 said:


> That's just it, Palin is not going to compare herself to Hillary, she never has and she never will. All she has said so far is that where Hillary Clinton has failed she going to succeed. There is a lot more to picking Palin than trying to get digruntled Hillary voters.



Did you not see her acceptance speech? Do I have to find the very lines she spoke for you?

She made several references to Hilary Clinton, not the least of which was the "highest, hardest glass cieling, and the women of America aren't finished yet!" remark. 

You're just wrong.


----------



## drache (Aug 31, 2008)

strongarm85 said:


> I'm not partisan at all, thats the thing. I'm just smart enough to realize the information that they are receiving actively being manipulated. The best way to get a good idea of whats really going on in the world is to scout for multiple channels of reliable information.


 
A wise man told me you believe a person's actions over thier words and you have pretty much consistently acted like a partisan.

You refuse to even consider as a hypothetical her negatives.

You persist in repeating yourself even after your points have been countered.

You never respond to those counters, you simply ignore them and hope those people will go away.

Thus you are either a partisan or an idiot or a troll and because you seem to be capbable of some thought and can string sentences together I'm going with partisan or troll.

I'm not even going to bother refuting you for the third time because this is tiring. 

I've *REPEATEDLY*  countered your so called postives and you refuse to deal with that.

Thus Mr Partisan/Troll if you can't deal with someone countering your agruement you should either concede the arguement or just not post, but your spamming is getting tiresome.


----------



## Botzu (Aug 31, 2008)

AbnormallyNormal said:


> this really does demonstrate a shocking lack of maturity on the part of mr. mccain
> 
> *he is so crass and transparent when he attempts to woo the hillary supporters solely on the basis of gender*


that is exactly what I thought when I heard about who he picked for VP. Though I haven't read all her policies yet. sounds like she doesn't have much experience either :/


----------



## Hitomi_No_Ryu (Aug 31, 2008)

It's official. I really don't want McCain to win...

I cannot trust that Palin at all! She's anti-gay, pro-life, and an Intelligent Design supporter. 

She almost signed a bill which got rid of partnership benefits for gay state employees. It took the Supreme Court AND the Attorney General to tell her it was unconstitutional. Even when she vetoed the bill, she publicly disagreed with the decision.

She shouldn't be vice-president...especially to a president whose in his 70s and had cancer 4 times!


----------



## Glued (Aug 31, 2008)

This is all I have to say, pipeline with Russia. More oil. Cheaper gas. Cheaper food.

Perhaps, her being a woman is not the only thing McCain is after.

PS: I support Obama, but I am kind of in a bind at the moment.


----------



## Pilaf (Aug 31, 2008)

And here are some actual posts from Hillary Clinton's website from rabid, idiotic apolitical feminazis:



> Our house is rocking on it's foundation! We are doing cheering laps around the living room. I kissed Johnnie's face on our big screen TV. I called the McCain headquarters and said "God Bless John McCain and God Bless the Republican Party!"
> 
> This is a joyful day in our history. Our debt of gratitude is to Hillary Rodham Clinton, 18 million prayers, without which none of this would be possible.
> 
> ...





> I AM SO EXCITED, I'M HEADING TO ALASKA,
> 
> YES YES YES YES YES
> 
> ...





> McCain has picked PALIN!!! I am THRILLED! AS for the Dums whining that she doens't have experience running things--SHE HAS FIVE KIDS!! TRUST ME! SHE KNOWS HOW TO RUN THINGS!
> 
> GOD BLESS MCCAIN/PALIN!!!



Congratulations, you slack jawed yokels...

Yes, it has a vagina.

But it still hates women and women's rights. But it had a vajayjay so completely forget you're democrats and that it's evil and fucking throw your vote away.

I'd like to kick you in the ovaries you cunts.


----------



## Harmonie (Aug 31, 2008)

Yes, Pilaf... I really thought this country was better than this, but oh my I was wrong.

I would love to see a woman get into such a high office, but she is not the one. The fact that she is a woman can not be put over how much I disagree with her on so many issues.


----------



## Juubi (Aug 31, 2008)

To be honest, Palin looks more presidential than McCain does

She should've just waited to run herself in 2012 or 2016


----------



## muishot (Aug 31, 2008)

This just in, even the Alaskan's newspapers and Palin's own mother doesn't trust her and think that McCain is making a mistake.  

I have another point to make about McCain's decision to pick Palin as a running mate other than the blatant sexism, manipulating of women, insulting their intellingece, and using them like like rag dolls for political purposes - and it question decision making skills and judgment.  

This other point is also important.  Throughout this campaign against Obama, McCain is attacking Obama's experience, which leads to questions like whether Obama has the right skills, judgment, and leadership to *PROTECT OUR COUNTRY.*  So basically his campaign's theme is about National Security and Protecting America/Americans.

As pointed out by the Alaskan's newspapers, McCain's pick is highly politically motivated but at the expense of our National Security because she has no foreign policies credential or experience.  

*WHAT DOES THIS SAY ABOUT McCain's PATRIOTISM?  HE OBVIOUSLY DOESN'T CARE ABOUT THE COUNTRY AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BECAUSE HE PUT POLITICS AHEAD OF THE GREATER GOODS OF THE NATION.* 

Wasn't his campaign often criticizing Obama's patriotism?  Wasn't McCain's always talked the good talk about how he is putting America ahead of Politics?  So what does this say about the man?


----------



## Superrazien (Aug 31, 2008)

muishot said:


> This just in, even the Alaskan's newspapers and Palin's own mother doesn't trust her and think that McCain is making a mistake.
> 
> I have another point to make about McCain's decision to pick Palin as a running mate other than the blatant sexism, manipulating of women, insulting their intellingece, and using them like like rag dolls for political purposes - and it question decision making skills and judgment.
> 
> ...



It says hes gonna be just like Bush or Channey maybe even worse. But it also says the old man knows the people of America because this pick for Palin will probably work. He knows people are stupid and he is taking advantage of it.


----------



## SAFFF (Aug 31, 2008)

You can't let a few retarded soccer moms on a forum discourage you. I'm sure the intelligent women that can see McCain's plans from a mile away outnumber the few retarded women  on a message board who are supporting her just because she has tits and a pussy.


----------



## ZeroBlack (Aug 31, 2008)

Supreme Alchemist Fan said:


> You can't let a few retarded soccer moms on a forum discourage you. I'm sure *the intelligent women that can see McCain's plans from a mile away outnumber the few retarded women*  on a message board who are supporting her just because she has tits and a pussy.



Oh thank god.


----------



## Zephos (Aug 31, 2008)

When did "Rabid Clinton Supporters" become all women?

Listening to you people it's like watching a snowball roll down a mountain made of bullshit.

It's like you think there were maybe 2 or 3 women on the Obama campaign.


----------



## drache (Aug 31, 2008)

you know the more I found out about this woman the more convinced I become that McCain just royally screwed up.

It seems the governor was almost recalled when she was mayor ()

why you ask? well it seems she decided to fire the police chief and the director for not fully supporting her when she was up for reelection ()

Now I'm sure one of her defenders will rush in and say 'but she learned her lesson or something like that'.

And you know what? She did, she learned that stating outloud 'because I say so' isn't politically acceptable but that you can still do and thus she learned to at least try and have an excuse even if it's flimsy.


----------



## Biolink (Aug 31, 2008)

No rabid Clinton supporters aren't all Women. I'd say they are mostly Women, with some Soft ass "Yes" Men thrown into the mix, that probably all get bullied around by their wives.


----------



## BlueNinja44 (Aug 31, 2008)

As an environmentalist, I'm very afraid to have both McCain and Palin in the Whitehouse. How can we repower America with 100% clean electricity in 10 years when you have two conservatives who want to push for more drilling and more of the same? What's even scarier is that if McCain kicks the bucket, Palin would take the seat. That cannot happen.


----------



## ANBUONE (Aug 31, 2008)

I just leave it at this, I don,t know much about her ,but the bit of info i have been gathering tells me she an intellengent woman, but as much as she maybe likeable, I don,t see it. By it i mean what i would call the (knack). There are those who learn to become good leaders thru trail and error. Then there are those who threw some twist of fate are born leaders. They have an in born ability to lead and inspire. 

This is an gift that both parties have had in there leaders at one  president  or another. Obama, is certainly on the latter , mccain is on the former. I might have voted for mccain at any other time. but I feel that at this time where he wants to take the nation is not were we need to go. But as for mccain  VP choose, I feel it was a wrong one, she is neither, a born leader, or like mccain tempered by time. If mccain should win  and some thing should happen to him , then she would be the default leader of our nation. What happens if were facing a national emergeny.

 I would take comfort in mccain experince, or obama national ability to rally people both young and old, black and white, gay and straight in those troubling, times, but something tells me deep in my core that this woman(while a good person) would be quickely over whelm, by the viaing factions that some time pop up during those times.

 Bush was neither , born leader or  experenced, he was the govenor of texas, when he ran. He is the ulimate example  of what not too do. One national problem after another , he failed, from the experence stand point, he just made bad choices, in how to act, from the  born ability part he could,nt   unite people in troubled times again he failed, and casued more division than unity

. Like i said in any other time in this nation history i would vote mccain, but like i said before  , I would be a mccain man, but i feel right now at this time , he,s not the right man. That why his choose scares me, if he should win and suffer say a heart attack , then she is our leader. At best those in her own parties would use her to push there own agenda, at worse a puppet, whos strings or beening pulled. Remember she has no washington experince. you can,t out fox someone if you don,t even know how the game is beening played.

 So how can she as president out move washington lobbiest if she has,nt even seen there play book, that like me taking on a chess master , when i have never even played chess


----------



## Shibo (Aug 31, 2008)

well, thats a surprise O_o interesting


----------



## Descent of the Lion (Aug 31, 2008)

Predictable............


----------



## Auron (Aug 31, 2008)

hahaha...dumbest pick ever. Quite pathetic to pick someone completely on the basis of pandering to butthurt Hillary supporters. I mean seriously this chick's been running a frozen tundra where the number of moose outnumber the actual number of people living there and she's gonna be one step away from the presidency LOL.   If McCain wins America deserves whatever it gets.


----------



## mayumi (Aug 31, 2008)

Auron said:


> hahaha...dumbest pick ever. Quite pathetic to pick someone completely on the basis of pandering to butthurt Hillary supporters. I mean seriously this chick's been running a frozen tundra where the number of moose outnumber the actual number of people living there and she's gonna be one step away from the presidency LOL.   If McCain wins America deserves whatever it gets.



don't worry she is trying to resolve the moose > people thing with her expert hunting skills. i am sure dick cheny would love it if she showed him how to use a weapon.


----------



## BlueNinja44 (Sep 1, 2008)

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBt_gX0gwXs[/YOUTUBE]​


----------



## ♠Mr.Nibbles♠ (Sep 1, 2008)

BlueNinja44 said:


> [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBt_gX0gwXs[/YOUTUBE]​



That was rich


----------



## Nodonn (Sep 1, 2008)

I think Stewart is way funnier than he is, but that was awesome


----------



## Bender (Sep 1, 2008)

@ Blueninja video

     :rotf


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Sep 1, 2008)

Nodonn said:


> I think Stewart is way funnier than he is, but that was awesome



great vid, i know a couple of people that actually think he is a authentic conservative commentator, don't worry they aren't my friends
.
.
.
or is the joke on me  ?


----------



## Altron (Sep 1, 2008)

BlueNinja44 said:


> [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBt_gX0gwXs[/YOUTUBE]​



oh man


----------



## ximkoyra (Sep 1, 2008)

*I'd hit that *


----------



## Bender (Sep 1, 2008)

chikmagnet7 said:


> Did you not see her acceptance speech? Do I have to find the very lines she spoke for you?
> 
> She made several references to Hilary Clinton, not the least of which was the "highest, hardest glass cieling, and the women of America aren't finished yet!" remark.



It's shit like that that makes me think she was once a dumb Hockey soccermom feminimaniac and rabid Clinton supporter who believes 

women > World 

Instead, of concentrating on just women why don't she and all the other crazy bitter supporters focus on everyone and not just themselves. It's rather selfish of them really. Shit, really this is no different than the Bush rule since not only is he trying to overcloud the fact that he,ll use the old Bush politics but also try and divert the people's attention away from that by the fact the person he,ll be picking a woman and everyone who knows Clinton supporters and how deeply in love they are with Clinton because of her plastic novelty penis  and womanly MANLY looks which make her look like her husband people forgot all about the countryl the same which will be with Palin the librarian. Bush ,Karl Rove Chenney and them were right, it is GENIUS especially if your definition by that is "*Distraction*" due to the fact that your policies suck something I doubt ANY if ALL Republicans can see through.  This is the same exact type of shit that makes us look primitive and pathetic and no different than apes.


----------



## ximkoyra (Sep 1, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> It's shit like that that makes me think she was once a dumb Hockey soccermom feminimaniac and rabid Clinton supporter who believes
> 
> women > World
> 
> This is the same exact type of shit that makes us look primitive and pathetic and no different than apes.




*But she has succulent breasts 

Succulent breasts > logic and reasoning 


McCain's a genius *


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Sep 1, 2008)

her daughter is stacked, how old is her daughter?


----------



## ximkoyra (Sep 1, 2008)

*Oldest is 17. . . .but I've got my eye on the 14 year old in the center 




She still has a bit of growing to do *


----------



## Kira U. Masaki (Sep 1, 2008)

the vid was funny, is it still possible to reverse your choice


----------



## Bender (Sep 1, 2008)

It's a pity how someone so intriuging as her is being used as a distraction


----------



## ximkoyra (Sep 1, 2008)

*You gotta give him props though.  He knows how to work the bitches 





			McCain was still married and living with his wife in 1979 while, according to The New York Times' Nicholas Kristof, "aggressively courting a 25-year-old woman who was as beautiful as she was rich." McCain divorced his wife, who had raised their three children while he was imprisoned in Vietnam, then launched his political career with his new wife's family money. In 2000, McCain managed to deflect media questioning about his first marriage with a deft admission of responsibility for its failure
		
Click to expand...


*


----------



## dreams lie (Sep 1, 2008)

drache said:


> And before that Obama was a state senator for almost 9 years.



Comparing a state senator to a governor is like comparing an US senator to the President.  You may have your duties and all, but your overall influence is small.  



> So again Obama has alot more experience then Palin, especially in getting things done. Please go look at his 9 years in the state senate it's full of bipartisan agreements where he found a compromise or something that both sides could agree on that achieved what each wanted.



Being in the state senate hardly makes you any more influential than being a mayor.  I know, Illinois is a much bigger state and Obama has much more experience than Palin, but it isn't really saying much.  And like I said earlier, the job Obama is running for requires an enormously greater amount than the job Palin is running for.



> I wish people would stop *spreading this lie* that Obama just suddenly one day decided to run for the National Senate and happened to win. It didn't happen like that.
> 
> And before that he has almost 72 months in the State Senate. And before that he was an organizer.
> 
> ...



I don't even think I implied such a thing;  I thought jobs in the state senate or jobs as a mayor are negligible when you're looking at experience on a national level.



> Also, I'm not going to get too much into this medical stuff but the truth is things you don't see coming happen. My grandfather was active and aware even at 80 years old and then one day he fell and broke his leg. He died 3 months later in the hosptial as he never fully recovered from that break and later got a bone infection.



So you think McCain is going to get into a really messy fall or some other accident during his first term of presidency?  Otherwise, that doesn't tell me that he's not physically ready for the role.



> You may think that McCain's choice is fine but most people don't think so, in fact only something like 29% think she's ready for the office (compared to 39% at a similair point when Biden was introduced) and Biden's spent his life in the Senate.



What the majority of the population say hardly affects what I believe.  Granted, they will be the ones voting and deciding who will ascend, but I'm not one to jump into such political bandwagons.  I mean really;  back when Bush declared war on Iraq, he had overwhelming American support behind him.


----------



## Viciousness (Sep 1, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> Comparing a state senator to a governor is like comparing an US senator to the President.  You may have your duties and all, but your overall influence is small.


Comparing a governor of a state of under 1million for 2 years to any senator or governor eligible for the position is...well its ridiculous. She was mayor of a town of 6,000, and has a controversial record, then became governor largely on charm and good looks. She's liked there, but shes likeable and Alaska is an odd state. Even Bush's approval ratings were high in his first couple of years as pres. Its been said before there's 15 cities with larger populations, not including Washington DC which never has less people in it than Alaska, and has many unnacounted for living there, no governor, and just a mayor.
Tell me what makes her any different from someone who is just a mayor besides Alaska being a large landmass? She is basically an overglorified mayor.

Biden in deleware has been through washington fighting for over 20 years so don't try to justify that being a small state as comparison. Even had it just been 2 years instead he's a senator of a small state. He deals in washington. Shes a governor and said 2 months ago she wasn't sure what the VP does and when someone tells her that she'll think of all this VP talk.




> Being in the state senate hardly makes you any more influential than being a mayor.  I know, Illinois is a much bigger state and Obama has much more experience than Palin, but it isn't really saying much.  And like I said earlier, the job Obama is running for requires an enormously greater amount than the job Palin is running for.



Its saying he's close to the heartland of this country, has seen how things really run here, and done what he can to influence it thus far. He's also one of the greatest orators we've had run for presidential candidate. A trait many Reaganites who think he was the greatest president ever site as being his greatest asset. He's a born leader. She's not, and her running mate could be a dead leader, then she likely wouldn't make much of a leader. Does she have any real knowledge of foreign affairs? They tried to state Alaska's closeness to Russia as being her proof of understanding of foreign affairs. She would be trampled over if this situation were to arise.




> I don't even think I implied such a thing;  I thought jobs in the state senate or jobs as a mayor are negligible when you're looking at experience on a national level.


So basically her job as an overglorified mayor several thousand miles from the rest of the US should be negligible, meaning she has absolutely no real experience.




> So you think McCain is going to get into a really messy fall or some other accident during his first term of presidency?  Otherwise, that doesn't tell me that he's not physically ready for the role.



 He's 72. The average life expectancy for a white male is 75. He has cancer that may recur and would require chemo in that event, he was tortured in a POW camp for 5 years, and heart attacks run in his family. It's not if he's physically ready for the role today. Its whether he'll be physically and mentally ready in 2 years.



> What the majority of the population say hardly affects what I believe.  Granted, they will be the ones voting and deciding who will ascend, but I'm not one to jump into such political bandwagons.  I mean really;  back when Bush declared war on Iraq, he had overwhelming American support behind him.



Thanks to lies and propaganda. Those in the executive office, house, and senate had facts the american public did not, which is why Obama did his best to coerce his coworkers out of signing off on the war. As a novice in the office he got great applause but did not have the respect he has today, and many were scared to oppose bush with his approval rating.


----------



## drache (Sep 1, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> Comparing a state senator to a governor is like comparing an US senator to the President. You may have your duties and all, but your overall influence is small.


 
Small? Who do you think helps craft, draft and pass laws? Yes te governor has to sign them into law generally (sometimes there's no choice about it) but to call the role of a state senator 'small' is a gross exageration of things.



dreams lie said:


> Being in the state senate hardly makes you any more influential than being a mayor. I know, Illinois is a much bigger state and Obama has much more experience than Palin, but it isn't really saying much. And like I said earlier, the job Obama is running for requires an enormously greater amount than the job Palin is running for.


 
Last I heard mayors don't effect the entire state 

Your analogy frankly sucks badly.

And you're welcome to have 2 standards, I don't and find such talk hypocritical. Palin could end up president on day 2 or she could never end up president, but the fact is that because she is next in line she has to be as qualified as any other presidential nominee.

And she clearly isn't.




dreams lie said:


> I don't even think I implied such a thing; I thought jobs in the state senate or jobs as a mayor are negligible when you're looking at experience on a national level.


 
There are generally 2 jobs that launch you to the national Senate, one is state Senator the other is governor. Perhaps you'd like to rethink your stance?



dreams lie said:


> So you think McCain is going to get into a really messy fall or some other accident during his first term of presidency? Otherwise, that doesn't tell me that he's not physically ready for the role.


 
I think that anything is possible and I damn well want to be assured that the very next person in line is ready for the job should she, he or even it find themselves unexpectedly president. 

This is not a game for bottlecaps and should be treated seriously; what McCain did was act like this is some game where he can pick a token VP despite the very real health concerns about him.

Falling was just an example, what about a stroke? Alzhimer's? A return of his cancer? A new cancer? A heartattack? I mean come on I could sit here for considerable time naming all the health concerns that would either kill or incapiate a man McCain's age and they are all possiblities.




dreams lie said:


> What the majority of the population say hardly affects what I believe. Granted, they will be the ones voting and deciding who will ascend, but I'm not one to jump into such political bandwagons. I mean really; back when Bush declared war on Iraq, he had overwhelming American support behind him.


 
Yes and Bush *LIED* to us the American people, that he wasn't impeached is just wrong and borderline unforgivable.

Are you implying there's a lie here?


That statement wasn't about bandwagons it was trying to show you even though Biden's been in the national spotlight for years and just ran his own campaign for the nomination *still* less then 50% think he's ready to be president. And yet you think some how Palin is going to be better recieved?


----------



## Nae'blis (Sep 1, 2008)

lol her 17 year old daughter is pregnant.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Sep 1, 2008)

Nae'blis said:


> lol her 17 year old daughter is pregnant.



dammit, someone was thinking just like me ! That 's those conservative values i espouse !  Premarital sex and pregnancy, and great milky cans  yummmmmmm!


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Sep 1, 2008)

"It's gonna hurt when it comes out of ur vagina "


----------



## Bender (Sep 1, 2008)

No surprise that her daughter would be pregnant


----------



## ANBUONE (Sep 1, 2008)

wonder how the mccain camp going to spin this, to limit the damage, i mean these things happen. and there nothing to be a shame of, but to some people it can look like a woman who can,t even mange her own home let alone  maybe the nation, let be honest if obama oldest pop up pregent, the repubs would be jumping on the concept of a man who can,nt even keep his own child in line, so do we really want this man in the white house, and how timely that Palin daughter and the dude who knocked her up suddenly are planning on getting marriaed

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080901/pl_nm/usa_politics_palin_dc


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Sep 1, 2008)

well, imagine the bush daughters in the white house all over again, except prettier and with bigger jugs, and a 2 rug rats


----------



## Nodonn (Sep 1, 2008)

A single 17 year old girl has the feature of the US in her hands.
One abortion can bend fate.

Anyone care to make a movie?


----------



## dreams lie (Sep 1, 2008)

DrunkenYoshimaster said:


> Comparing a governor of a state of under 1million for 2 years to any senator or governor eligible for the position is...well its ridiculous. She was mayor of a town of 6,000, and has a controversial record, then became governor largely on charm and good looks. She's liked there, but shes likeable and Alaska is an odd state. Even Bush's approval ratings were high in his first couple of years as pres. Its been said before there's 15 cities with larger populations, not including Washington DC which never has less people in it than Alaska, and has many unnacounted for living there, no governor, and just a mayor.
> Tell me what makes her any different from someone who is just a mayor besides Alaska being a large landmass? She is basically an overglorified mayor.



I really don't see the point in ranting to me;  I suppose what you're trying to say is that she's receiving too much attention and that popularity can be fleeting.  Much of everything here seemed superflourus and doesn't back up the argument that comparing a state senator to a governor is not like a president to the US Senator.  



> Biden in deleware has been through washington fighting for over 20 years so don't try to justify that being a small state as comparison. Even had it just been 2 years instead he's a senator of a small state. He deals in washington. Shes a governor and said 2 months ago she wasn't sure what the VP does and when someone tells her that she'll think of all this VP talk.



What's your point?  I was trying to say that governors have a much bigger role in government than state senators, very similar to presidents to national senators.  You're trying to prove how Obama & Biden are better than McCain & Palin, which has nothing to do with anything; I dislike both candidates almost equally.  




> Its saying he's close to the heartland of this country, has seen how things really run here, and done what he can to influence it thus far.



Are you seriously saying that being in a state senate gives you national experience and allows you to have contact with foreign policy?  



> He's also one of the greatest orators we've had run for presidential candidate. A trait many Reaganites who think he was the greatest president ever site as being his greatest asset. He's a born leader.



You could be very charismatic and fail as a national leader.  And again, Obama didn't create his own campaign; he hired many others to do it for him.



> She's not, and her running mate could be a dead leader, then she likely wouldn't make much of a leader.



Oh for fucks sake.  Unless a serious accident occurs, McCain is physically fit to lead;  I don't know why I have to keep wasting my time arguing this.  



> Does she have any real knowledge of foreign affairs? They tried to state Alaska's closeness to Russia as being her proof of understanding of foreign affairs. She would be trampled over if this situation were to arise.



Would she truly need much knowledge of foreign affairs?  



> So basically her job as an overglorified mayor several thousand miles from the rest of the US should be negligible, meaning she has absolutely no real experience.



Yes, a job as a mayor or one in the state senate doesn't give you any national experience whatsoever.  The only real things she could count are the 20 so months as governor.




> He's 72. The average life expectancy for a white male is 75.



Which doesn't matter if medical *experts* have confirmed he is physically ready.



> He has cancer that may recur and would require chemo in that event,



The possibly of this happening is less than 10 percent and shrinks more and more as time goes on.



> he was tortured in a POW camp for 5 years,



The physical effects of it are negotiable and the mental aspect of it isn't likely to cause his death. 



> and heart attacks run in his family. It's not if he's physically ready for the role today. Its whether he'll be physically and mentally ready in 2 years.



The doctors already issued a statement how his body is in excellent shape.  His mind has zip to do with rather or not he will die.



> Thanks to lies and propaganda. Those in the executive office, house, and senate had facts the american public did not, which is why Obama did his best to coerce his coworkers out of signing off on the war. As a novice in the office he got great applause but did not have the respect he has today, and many were scared to oppose bush with his approval rating.



That was a bad example, although the point is that what the masses believe isn't always true or correct.  Nor would it really have much effect on what I believe.



drache said:


> Small? Who do you think helps craft, draft and pass laws? Yes te governor has to sign them into law generally (sometimes there's no choice about it) but to call the role of a state senator 'small' is a gross exageration of things.



He's drafting STATE laws and would have pretty much no influence on national matters.  It might be an exaggeration, but hardly a gross one.  



> Last I heard mayors don't effect the entire state
> 
> Your analogy frankly sucks badly.



The mayors have a much more narrow focus, but wields just as much influence as a single state senator would.  I was trying to say that neither of them counts when you are talking about national experience which couples in factors like foreign policy.



> And you're welcome to have 2 standards, I don't and find such talk hypocritical. Palin could end up president on day 2 or she could never end up president, but the fact is that because she is next in line *she has to be as qualified as any other presidential nominee.*
> 
> And she clearly isn't.



She is basically a spare tire; it doesn't have to do much and basically sits there unless something unfortunate happens.  As such, I honestly think that spare tires don't have to be judged on the same standards as the ones that are actually running.



> There are generally 2 jobs that launch you to the national Senate, one is state Senator the other is governor. Perhaps you'd like to rethink your stance?



That barely makes any sense at all;  the jobs that lead you into a career with national experience have national experience of their own?  



> I think that anything is possible and I damn well want to be assured that the very next person in line is ready for the job should she, he or even it find themselves unexpectedly president.
> 
> This is not a game for bottlecaps and should be treated seriously; what McCain did was act like this is some game where he can pick a token VP despite the very real health concerns about him.
> 
> Falling was just an example, what about a stroke? Alzhimer's? A return of his cancer? A new cancer? A heartattack? I mean come on I could sit here for considerable time naming all the health concerns that would either kill or incapiate a man McCain's age and they are all possiblities.



Anything is possible, but not everything is probable.  If experts told us he was ready, I have to take their word for it and believe that McCain is physically ready.



> Yes and Bush *LIED* to us the American people, that he wasn't impeached is just wrong and borderline unforgivable.



In order to lie, you would have to know that it wasn't the truth.  Anyways, that's another debate for another day.



> Are you implying there's a lie here?



No.  That was a bad example and I admit it.  The point was that 300 million people may believe in something, but they can still be wrong.



> That statement wasn't about bandwagons it was trying to show you even though Biden's been in the national spotlight for years and just ran his own campaign for the nomination *still* less then 50% think he's ready to be president. And yet you think some how Palin is going to be better recieved?



I do not care if she is going to be well received or not.  I have my own views and do not let the views of the masses influence me too much.


----------



## Superrazien (Sep 1, 2008)

So this chicks daughter is pregnant. On top of a kid with down syndrome, and little experience, and is soon to be a grandmother, we are suppose to believe she is going to put her country first, and actually help out America.


----------



## drache (Sep 1, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> He's drafting STATE laws and would have pretty much no influence on national matters. It might be an exaggeration, but hardly a gross one.


 
Yes and every thing he learned about coperation, compromise and so on still applies at the state legistrative level. Thus it is a gross exaggeration.




dreams lie said:


> The mayors have a much more narrow focus, but wields just as much influence as a single state senator would. I was trying to say that neither of them counts when you are talking about national experience which couples in factors like foreign policy.


 
Yes neither of them have national experience, I never claimed that. But to say that a mayore has just as much influence as a state senator is still ridiclous. There are multiple things a state senator does that a mayor doesn't do. You are in effect trying to compare apples and oranges.




dreams lie said:


> She is basically a spare tire; it doesn't have to do much and basically sits there unless something unfortunate happens. As such, I honestly think that spare tires don't have to be judged on the same standards as the ones that are actually running.


 
And what happens when your 'spare' has to perform like a real tire? And your analogy has serious probelms as there are offical duties a VP must attend to and thier are unoffical ones (like being sent to vist countries when the president is unaviable).




dreams lie said:


> That barely makes any sense at all; the jobs that lead you into a career with national experience have national experience of their own?


 
Um I never said that in fact neither the office of govenor nor state senator have national experience. I don't know where you got that idea from.



dreams lie said:


> Anything is possible, but not everything is probable. If experts told us he was ready, I have to take their word for it and believe that McCain is physically ready.


 
All the experts can say is that at *this specific moment*  McCain's health isn't an issue. They can't speak to 3 months from now or even 3 years.  Statistics can and the statistics are a more then a little grim.



dreams lie said:


> In order to lie, you would have to know that it wasn't the truth. Anyways, that's another debate for another day.


 
Fair enough, as this is off topic I won't respond.




dreams lie said:


> No. That was a bad example and I admit it. The point was that 300 million people may believe in something, but they can still be wrong.


 
Yes but I fail to see the revelence here.



dreams lie said:


> I do not care if she is going to be well received or not. I have my own views and do not let the views of the masses influence me too much.


 
That's all well and good but you should at least evualte the 'masses influence' to see if there's a point there.

Just because most people are screaming 'fire' doesn't make it untrue.


----------



## dreams lie (Sep 1, 2008)

drache said:


> Yes and every thing he learned about coperation, compromise and so on still applies at the state legistrative level. Thus it is a gross exaggeration.



I was talking about experience on a national level from the beginning; which basically means that it is a very small role.  Cooperation, compromise, and so forth could be learned at almost anything you do anyways; students, your average workers, etc etc have had to learn the skills at some point in their lives.



> Yes neither of them have national experience, I never claimed that.



I was talking about national experience from the beginning:



dreams lie said:


> I don't even think I implied such a thing; I thought jobs in the state senate or jobs as a mayor are negligible when you're looking at experience on a national level.



I thought I made it clear, too.



> But to say that a mayore has just as much influence as a state senator is still ridiclous. There are multiple things a state senator does that a mayor doesn't do. You are in effect trying to compare apples and oranges.



Perhaps the two cannot be adequately compared, but the mayor has a lot more duties and handles far more problems.  Granted, it's much more narrow and influences less people, but the overall power difference isn't much.  



> And what happens when your 'spare' has to perform like a real tire?



I would hope it never happens, but if so, she would be drafted in as an inexperienced president.  Palin would have advisers around her to help her make decisions, but yes, she isn't qualified.



> And your analogy has serious probelms as there are offical duties a VP must attend to and thier are unoffical ones (like being sent to vist countries when the president is unaviable).



The official duties of a Vice President has always been miniscule and if she proves to be incompetent, we just wouldn't give her much unofficial jobs.



> Um I never said that in fact neither the office of govenor nor state senator have national experience. I don't know where you got that idea from.



I was talking about national experience from the beginning, which is why I was ready to dismiss the time served as mayor or one in a state senate.  Governors wouldn't have much national experience either, even if they have served a while, but would certainly hold more than a state senator.  



> All the experts can say is that at *this specific moment*  McCain's health isn't an issue. They can't speak to 3 months from now or even 3 years.  Statistics can and the statistics are a more then a little grim.\


 
They judged that he is ready to serve his first term.  Of course, it is just a prediction, but the statistics aren't very grim.  Less than 10% of cancer returning and lower with every passing second?  



> Yes but I fail to see the revelence here.





			
				Earlier Post said:
			
		

> You may think that McCain's choice is fine but most people don't think so, in fact only something like 29% think she's ready for the office (compared to 39% at a similair point when Biden was introduced) and Biden's spent his life in the Senate.


 
It sounds as if you were trying to convince by telling me the thinking of the general public, so I replied that it hardly matters how many people believe in something, it doesn't mean it's true.



> That's all well and good but you should at least evualte the 'masses influence' to see if there's a point there.
> 
> Just because most people are screaming 'fire' doesn't make it untrue.



I had to use wikipedia to remember the latin phrase, but here it is.  Argumentum ad populums are a fallacy, even if it is true in certain cases.


----------



## SAFFF (Sep 1, 2008)

Considering how hot Palin's 17 year old daughter is she was bound to get preggers before 21, anyways. It just happened at the wrong time.


----------



## Bender (Sep 1, 2008)

Supreme Alchemist Fan said:


> Considering how hot Palin's 17 year old daughter is she was bound to get preggers before 21, anyways. It just happened at the wrong time.



Saying she's going put the country before her  family is a big fat lie as is the McCain camp saying that he already knew about her daughters pregnancy


----------



## SAFFF (Sep 1, 2008)

No doubt, who's going to take care of the daughter and her baby? The bf? Yeah right. Looks like pops is gonna have to quit whatever job he has soon and watch his 4 kids + grandkid + semi-watch his 17 year old in helping her finish school and get a job.


----------



## BeyonderZ (Sep 1, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> Saying she's going put the country before her  family is a big fat lie as is the McCain camp saying that he already knew about her daughters pregnancy



Like how after Obama was starting to get popular you find out that he was part of a Racist Bigoted Church for more then a decade? 

Obama is far from perfect. The fact is the more you build him up in your mind the harder its gonna be when you find something else out about him.


----------



## Bender (Sep 1, 2008)

BeyonderZ said:


> Like how after Obama was starting to get popular you find out that he was part of a Racist Bigoted Church for more then a decade?



Man, you are dumb

No different than the dumb bitter Hillary supporters


----------



## Biolink (Sep 1, 2008)

Supreme Alchemist Fan said:


> No doubt, who's going to take care of the daughter and her baby? The bf? Yeah right. Looks like pops is gonna have to quit whatever job he has soon and watch his 4 kids + grandkid + semi-watch his 17 year old in helping her finish school and get a job.



The Father doesn't even work.

Dude is a stay at home dad, and a fisherman on the side. Not like he has tons of stuff to do to begin with.

Eat, Sleep, Shit, get wife pregnant, Watch kids, is his job. It must be awesome to be Mr. Palin


----------



## Spanish Hoffkage (Sep 1, 2008)

lol pregnancy


----------



## Yume-chan (Sep 1, 2008)

If you define someone's experience as the number of people represented and for how long (of course, there's more to it than that but that seems to be the way we're talking about it here), then Obama is 51.07 times as experienced as Palin (giving her credit only for her time as governer and him credit only for his time in the Senate).  

If you count only executive experience, Palin is 1.77 times as experienced as my college President (counting only students at the college).  Quite an accomplishment. 

I know there's no practical value to these numbers, but they are amusing.


----------



## BlueNinja44 (Sep 1, 2008)

Blaze of Glory said:


> Man, you are dumb
> 
> No different than the dumb bitter Hillary supporters



It's sad to think that he's the few that actually still believes that Obama's a Muslim. 

Obama made a very virtuous move for telling the press that he didn't want the pregnancy to be brought up and that he wants to stick to the issues.


----------



## Viciousness (Sep 2, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> I really don't see the point in ranting to me;  I suppose what you're trying to say is that she's receiving too much attention and that popularity can be fleeting.  Much of everything here seemed superflourus and doesn't back up the argument that comparing a state senator to a governor is not like a president to the US Senator.


No first I was saying she is governor of a state with very few people living there so she may as well have been mayor of a city thousands of miles away from any other state. And yeah thats sort of it with the popularity analogy, but alot is based on her charm and good looks. 



> What's your point?  I was trying to say that governors have a much bigger role in government than state senators, very similar to presidents to national senators.  You're trying to prove how Obama & Biden are better than McCain & Palin, which has nothing to do with anything; I dislike both candidates almost equally.




The state senator topic came up because it was brought up that Obama was elected to State Senate in 96, so saying he has only 3 years experience in politics is ludicrous.Palin's experience is incomparable. Even adding her time as mayor of 6,000, is like being the president of some small organization, fraternity etc. 



> Are you seriously saying that being in a state senate gives you national experience and allows you to have contact with foreign policy?


It directly adds to his experience in the US Senate. While not dealing with the same issues its dealing with operations. And from his 3.5 years as US Senator he does have those things.



> You could be very charismatic and fail as a national leader.  And again, Obama didn't create his own campaign; he hired many others to do it for him.



Having the most campaign volunteers has nothing to do with his oration ability. Palin has charisma but would probably fail as a national leader. This is about being able to speak in a way that makes people listen and not just fall asleep unlike some other politicians. The ability to speak and gather people. I'm not saying that alone will make him a great national leader or its even a necessity. But Reaganites sure seem to think it was the main ingredient to his legacy.



> Oh for fucks sake.  Unless a serious accident occurs, McCain is physically fit to lead;  I don't know why I have to keep wasting my time arguing this.


Because the man is 72. He goes to some doctors who do no mental evaluation and are likely to say something positive about his current condition only unless something is seriously wrong. He has to remain from 2009 till at least 2013 if he wins. He will probably be getting evaluated till then regularly because at that age the possibility of something showing up dramatically increases. He's already 10 years past the average retirement age. 




> Would she truly need much knowledge of foreign affairs?


If she doesn't she is not going to be respected overseas, a problem our current president often faces, who just a couple years ago claimed to have just learned the existence of Shanghai (or a city in China with a billion people..)



> Which doesn't matter if medical *experts* have confirmed he is physically ready.


Ok you're physically ready to run a mile now at 72. After an exhaustive 2 more years as president will you be? we don't know. but We can confirm you're physically not going to die or lose your marbles before election day.




> The doctors already issued a statement how his body is in excellent shape.  His mind has zip to do with rather or not he will die.


My doctor issued a statement saying I may have an eye condition so if I get pulled over by the cops I have an excuse for my window tints. I drafted the letter, he signed it, because anything is a possibility. Maybe its not exactly the same, but for a politician who wants a particular study outcome, coercing a doctor into saying only the most positive things isn't parting the red sea. He doesnt have to lie, but its more a skewing of the facts that isnt unfathomable or unlikely. Where does the study say he will be this healthy or nearly as healthy as a man over the age of 75?


----------



## drache (Sep 2, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> I was talking about experience on a national level from the beginning; which basically means that it is a very small role. Cooperation, compromise, and so forth could be learned at almost anything you do anyways; students, your average workers, etc etc have had to learn the skills at some point in their lives.


 
And yet there's more to being qualified then simply having national experience; it national experience was the only factor then we'd never elect govenors to the office. Of course I'd point out that in general only govenors of big states are taking seriously that way.

Further I find your assertation that coperation and other skills a little naive. Do you know how to get legitration passed? Do you know how to compromise enough to get what you want passed? Those are only skills you learn in politics, not on the playground.



dreams lie said:


> I was talking about national experience from the beginning:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought I made it clear, too.


 
No you didn't but if all you want to talk about is national experience then Palin fails on a massive scale. She doesn't even have a hint of national experience.




dreams lie said:


> Perhaps the two cannot be adequately compared, but the mayor has a lot more duties and handles far more problems. Granted, it's much more narrow and influences less people, but the overall power difference isn't much.


 
Yes because the life of a state senator is one of lesure right? 

Why do you persist in defending this bad analogy? It failed move on please.




dreams lie said:


> I would hope it never happens, but if so, she would be drafted in as an inexperienced president. Palin would have advisers around her to help her make decisions, but yes, she isn't qualified.


 
Do you know why we vet our presidents? Because all the important decesion like say nuclear war, starting world war 3, protecting the ecnomy and so on go though that office.

That you would so blathely say that oh it's fine she'll have advisors is just scary. All presidents have advisors but you know what? Sometimes they're wrong and being president means ultimately *you* not your advisors have to make a decesion.



dreams lie said:


> The official duties of a Vice President has always been miniscule and if she proves to be incompetent, we just wouldn't give her much unofficial jobs.


 
So in other words if this really is tokenism it's okay because hey we really don't have to give her work. She's just a woman all she has to do is stand there showing off her boobs and her job is done.

Wow yeah that's not sexist and offensive at all.  




dreams lie said:


> I was talking about national experience from the beginning, which is why I was ready to dismiss the time served as mayor or one in a state senate. Governors wouldn't have much national experience either, even if they have served a while, but would certainly hold more than a state senator.


 
See above



dreams lie said:


> They judged that he is ready to serve his first term. Of course, it is just a prediction, but the statistics aren't very grim. Less than 10% of cancer returning and lower with every passing second?


 
 You're talking about a specific form of cancer and that's only under some specific cavets.

That says nothing about the other upteen number of ways a man his age can die or be incapiated. 



dreams lie said:


> It sounds as if you were trying to convince by telling me the thinking of the general public, so I replied that it hardly matters how many people believe in something, it doesn't mean it's true.
> 
> I had to use wikipedia to remember the latin phrase, but here it is. Argumentum ad populums are a fallacy, even if it is true in certain cases.


 
I'm going to try and explain this to you.

It does not mattter (in general) what you or I think about her qualifications. The fact is this is about the *entire* population of the US and thus this isn't argumentum ad populums.

I'm not asking you to agree with me.

I'm not asking you to agree with what the statistics says is the majority.

I'm not trying to use the majority to convince you.

I am simplying stating a *fact* and that *fact* is that less people by a wide margin think she's ready then Joe Biden and that indicates a failure of McCain's pick.

End of story.

You're welcome to think she's the greatest thing since sliced bread or the worst thing since Atilia the Hun or anything in between. As that's your *opnion* I'm mostly don't care, besides which you can't argue an opnion.

I'm presenting facts here, facts about her, her record and how people are reacting to her.


----------



## Garlock (Sep 2, 2008)

INteresting tidbit:



> Among other less attention-grabbing news of the day: it was learned that Ms. Palin now has a private lawyer in a legislative ethics investigation in Alaska into whether she abused her power in dismissing the state’s public safety commissioner; that she was a member for two years in the 1990s of the Alaska Independence Party, which has at times sought a vote on whether the state should secede; and that Mr. Palin was arrested 22 years ago on a drunken-driving charge.



source:

So they let treasonous people who try to make the state Secede and become independent VP nowadays huh?

BURN FIRES OF RAGE BURNNNNNN


----------



## Juno (Sep 2, 2008)

> *11.* Are you offended by the phrase
> ?Under God? in the Pledge of
> Allegiance? Why or why not?
> 
> ...



OK, gentlemen. List 3 things wrong with this answer.


----------



## sadated_peon (Sep 2, 2008)

Seabear said:


> OK, gentlemen. List 3 things wrong with this answer.



1)The pledge of allegiance wasn't around at the time of the founding fathers, 
2)The phrase under god wasn't added until the 1950s. 
.....
3)that she shouldn't defend it?


----------



## jkingler (Sep 2, 2008)

What sp said. And don't forget her  - one of my most loathed fallacies, I might add.


----------



## juve (Sep 2, 2008)

If you want to know everything they have found about her so far


----------



## Pilaf (Sep 2, 2008)

sadated_peon said:


> 1)The pledge of allegiance wasn't around at the time of the founding fathers,
> 2)The phrase under god wasn't added until the 1950s.
> .....
> 3)that she shouldn't defend it?



3 should be that the founding fathers were secularists who bordered on atheism who believed in separation of church and state.


----------



## BlueNinja44 (Sep 2, 2008)

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYFkR8zYiBw[/YOUTUBE]​


----------



## sadated_peon (Sep 2, 2008)

Pilaf said:


> 3 should be that the founding fathers were secularists who bordered on atheism who believed in separation of church and state.



dang, 
I knew I was missing something.


----------



## Ichiban-nin (Sep 2, 2008)

> John McCain tapped little-known Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin



On a need to know basis: Seriously sums up the event.


----------



## Suzume (Sep 2, 2008)

Pilaf said:


> 3 should be that the founding fathers were secularists who bordered on atheism who believed in separation of church and state.



The separation of church and state wasn't originally for the state, it was for the church, or at least that's the way I was taught in school.  They didn't want the government forcing regulations on people's beliefs.  It's only recently that the idea has been turned around...Whether they were atheists or not, I have no idea...


----------



## Killa Cam (Sep 2, 2008)

[YOUTUBE]d-QevraCQUc[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 2, 2008)

Well, at least this reinforces the Democrats' claim of McCain's poor judgment. I definitely feel this is gonna cost McCain.


----------



## drache (Sep 2, 2008)

Suzume said:


> The separation of church and state wasn't originally for the state, it was for the church, or at least that's the way I was taught in school. They didn't want the government forcing regulations on people's beliefs. It's only recently that the idea has been turned around...Whether they were atheists or not, I have no idea...


 

First the idea went both ways but primairly it was to keep religion out of goverment.

The nation the Founding Fathers had broken away from had instutionalized a religion to the point at which if you weren't a member of that religion you were asked (sometimes nicely sometimes not) to leave England.

That's why so many....interesting interprations of Christianity ended up in America.

Secondly, you need to get the idea that secularism=atheism out of your head. They are 2 seperate concepts and are not the same thing.

It is true that in general many atheists are secularists, but so too are agnostics, most buddhists I've met and many other people that have a religion.


----------



## SAFFF (Sep 2, 2008)

Killa Cam said:


> [YOUTUBE]d-QevraCQUc[/YOUTUBE]



That's exactly how it happened, my friend.


----------



## Hi Im God (Sep 2, 2008)

More deep background on Palin from a local, 

This was posted in the comments section on the Washington Independent by Alaskan and a Wasillan, Anne Kilkenny, someone who has followed Sarah Palin very, very closely - with too many city council meetings under her belt - not to say her piece. She seems the kind of person that a professional vetting system would have found, and debriefed. We're talking small town politics here as well, so bear that in mind. And I've reproduced only the gist here - go read the original for much more. But after you read this, you begin to realize that there can have been almost no vetting whatsoever:

Her experience is as mayor of a city with a population of about 5,000 (at the time), and less than 2 years as governor of a state with about 670,000 residents. During her mayoral administration most of the actual work of running this small city was turned over to an administrator. She had been pushed to hire this administrator by party power-brokers after she had gotten herself into some trouble over precipitous firings which had given rise to a recall campaign. Sarah campaigned in Wasilla as a “fiscal conservative”. During her 6 years as Mayor, she increased general government expenditures by over 33%. During those same 6 years the amount of taxes collected by the City increased by 38%.

This was during a period of low inflation (1996-2002). She reduced progressive property taxes and increased a regressive sales tax which taxed even food. The tax cuts that she promoted benefited large corporate property owners way more than they benefited residents. The huge increases in tax revenues during her mayoral administration weren’t enough to fund everything on her wish list though, borrowed money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt, but left it with indebtedness of over $22 million. What did Mayor Palin encourage the voters to borrow money for? Was it the infrastructure that she said she supported? The sewage treatment plant that the city lacked? or a new library? No. $1m for a park. $15m-plus for construction of a multi-use sports complex which she rushed through to build on a piece of property that the City didn’t even have clear title to, that was still in litigation 7 yrs later--to the delight of the lawyers involved! The sports complex itself is a nice addition to the community but a huge money pit, not the profit-generator she claimed it would be. She also supported bonds for $5.5m for road projects that could have been done in 5-7 yrs without any borrowing. While Mayor, City Hall was extensively remodeled and her office redecorated more than once. These are small numbers, but Wasilla is a very small city.

As an oil producer, the high price of oil has created a budget surplus in Alaska. Rather than invest this surplus in technology that will make us energy independent and increase efficiency, as Governor she proposed distribution of this surplus to every individual in the state. In this time of record state revenues and budget surpluses, she recommended that the state borrow/bond for road projects, even while she proposed distribution of surplus state revenues: spend today's surplus, borrow for needs. She’s not very tolerant of divergent opinions or open to outside ideas or compromise. As Mayor, she fought ideas that weren’t generated by her or her staff. Ideas weren’t evaluated on their merits, but on the basis of who proposed them.

While Sarah was Mayor of Wasilla she tried to fire our highly respected City Librarian because the Librarian refused to consider removing from the library some books that Sarah wanted removed. City residents rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin's attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew her termination letter. People who fought her attempt to oust the Librarian are on her enemies list to this day. Sarah complained about the “old boy’s club” when she first ran for Mayor, so what did she bring Wasilla? A new set of "old boys". Palin fired most of the experienced staff she inherited. At the City and as Governor she hired or elevated new, inexperienced, obscure people, creating a staff totally dependent on her for their jobs and eternally grateful and fiercely loyal--loyal to the point of abusing their power to further her personal agenda, as she has acknowledged happened in the case of pressuring the State’s top cop (see below). 

As Mayor, Sarah fired Wasilla’s Police Chief because he “intimidated” her, she told the press. As Governor, her recent firing of Alaska's top cop has the ring of familiarity about it. He served at her pleasure and she had every legal right to fire him, but it's pretty clear that an important factor in her decision to fire him was because he wouldn't fire her sister's ex-husband, a State Trooper. Under investigation for abuse of power, she has had to admit that more than 2 dozen contacts were made between her staff and family to the person that she later fired, pressuring him to fire her ex-brother-in-law. She tried to replace the man she fired with a man who she knew had been reprimanded for sexual harassment; when this caused a public furor, she withdrew her support. 

She has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in help. The City Council person who personally escorted her around town introducing her to voters when she first ran for Wasilla City Council became one of her first targets when she was later elected Mayor. She abruptly fired her loyal City Administrator; even people who didn’t like the guy were stunned by this ruthlessness. Fear of retribution has kept all of these people from saying anything publicly about her. 

When then-Governor Murkowski was handing out political plums, Sarah got the best, Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission: one of the few jobs not in Juneau and one of the best paid. She had no background in oil & gas issues. Within months of scoring this great job which paid $122,400/yr, she was complaining in the press about the high salary. I was told that she hated that job: the commute, the structured hours, the work. Sarah became aware that a member of this Commission (who was also the State Chair of the Republican Party) engaged in unethical behavior on the job. In a gutsy move which some undoubtedly cautioned her could be political suicide, Sarah solved all her problems in one fell swoop: got out of the job she hated and garnered gobs of media attention as the patron saint of ethics and as a gutsy fighter against the “old boys’ club” when she dramatically quit, exposing this man’s ethics violations (for which he was fined). 

As Mayor, she had her hand stuck out as far as anyone for pork from Senator Ted Stevens. Lately, she has castigated his pork-barrel politics and publicly humiliated him. She only opposed the “bridge to nowhere” after it became clear that it would be unwise not to. As Governor, she gave the Legislature no direction and budget guidelines, then made a big grandstand display of line-item vetoing projects, calling them pork. Public outcry and further legislative action restored most of these projects--which had been vetoed simply because she was not aware of their importance--but with the unobservant she had gained a reputation as “anti-pork”. She is solidly Republican: no political maverick. The State party leaders hate her because she has bit them in the back and humiliated them. Other members of the party object to her self-description as a fiscal conservative.

Around Wasilla there are people who went to high school with Sarah. They call her “Sarah Barracuda” because of her unbridled ambition and predatory ruthlessness.  When Sarah's mother-in-law, a highly respected member of the community and experienced manager, ran for Mayor, Sarah refused to endorse her. As Governor, she stepped outside of the box and put together of package of legislation known as “AGIA” that forced the oil companies to march to the beat of her drum. 

Like most Alaskans, she favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. She has questioned if the loss of sea ice is linked to global warming. She campaigned “as a private citizen” against a state initiaitive that would have either a) protected salmon streams from pollution from mines, or b) tied up in the courts all mining in the state (depending on who you listen to). She has pushed the State’s lawsuit against the Dept. of the Interior’s decision to list polar bears as threatened species. McCain is the oldest person to ever run for President; Sarah will be a heartbeat away from being President. There has to be literally millions of Americans who are more knowledgeable and experienced than she. However, there’s a lot of people who have underestimated her and are regretting it.​


----------



## SAFFF (Sep 2, 2008)

Time to get out the reading glasses i see.


----------



## Amaretti (Sep 2, 2008)

Hi Im God said:


> More deep background on Palin from a local,
> 
> This was posted in the comments section on the Washington Independent by Alaskan and a Wasillan, Anne Kilkenny, someone who has followed Sarah Palin very, very closely - with too many city council meetings under her belt - not to say her piece. She seems the kind of person that a professional vetting system would have found, and debriefed. We're talking small town politics here as well, so bear that in mind. And I've reproduced only the gist here - go read the original for much more. But after you read this, you begin to realize that there can have been almost no vetting whatsoever:
> 
> ...



So either Palin's a typical incompetent politician, or she slept with this woman's husband.


----------



## dreams lie (Sep 3, 2008)

DrunkenYoshimaster said:


> No first I was saying she is governor of a state with very few people living there so she may as well have been mayor of a city thousands of miles away from any other state. And yeah thats sort of it with the popularity analogy, but alot is based on her charm and good looks.



I think we already established that even before you posted the second part of it, but okay. 



> The state senator topic came up because it was brought up that Obama was elected to State Senate in 96, *so saying he has only 3 years experience in politics is ludicrous.*
> 
> Palin's experience is incomparable. Even adding her time as mayor of 6,000, is like being the president of some small organization, fraternity etc.



Only I never said "3 years in politics."  I said national experience from the start.  National experience is what you need was the President, not leading a single state or in Obama's case, helping pass laws for a state, but experience in foreign policy and running the entire country.  



> It directly adds to his experience in the US Senate.



Politics wise maybe, but definitely not nationally speaking.  When was the last time you heard a foreign leader spoke to a state senator?  It's much more rare than having one speak to a governor (limited national experience) or anything on a federal stage.



> While not dealing with the same issues its dealing with operations. And from his 3.5 years as US Senator he does have those things.



See above.



> Having the most campaign volunteers has nothing to do with his oration ability.



Quantity isn't the only thing that matters; there is also quality.  The people working on such big political campaigns are most likely veterans at what they do.  How do you know his speeches weren't prepared for him?  Or his slogans, his advertisements, etc etc?  



> Palin has charisma but would probably fail as a national leader. *This is about being able to speak in a way that makes people listen and not just fall asleep unlike some other politicians. The ability to speak and gather people. *I'm not saying that alone will make him a great national leader or its even a necessity. But Reaganites sure seem to think it was the main ingredient to his legacy.



I have to be honest with you;  Reagan had a huge crowd most likely because the man before him, Jimmy Carter, helped push our country into the shithole and Reagan had helped dig us out.  Granted, I think most of his policies were pretty much shit and his ideology of tax cuts have gathered so many supporters that it still hurts us today, but he was basically the Republican FDR.  It very well appears as if this man had led us out of a major crisis and as such collected an almost cult gathering.

Anyways, the part I bolded seems to hold little difference.  Both just means they are charismatic and popular, only that one seems to be more so than the other.



> Because the man is 72. He goes to some doctors who do no mental evaluation and *are likely to say something positive about his current condition only unless something is seriously wrong. *



Wait, why would the doctors cover up any physical problems about him again?  If he had gone to doctors with a conflict in interest, the media or any watchdog groups would have stomped all over it.



> He has to remain from 2009 till at least 2013 if he wins. He will probably be getting evaluated till then regularly because at that age the possibility of something showing up dramatically increases. He's already 10 years past the average retirement age.



...  This means shit because you're not an expert and the men who evaluated him were.  If you're not going to at least accept that experienced doctors decided he was healthy enough to lead, then I'm not going to bother to keep arguing with you.  He's at the age where he already takes a number of pills and he isn't deluded about his senior status.  He most likely take annual exams anyways.  



> If she doesn't she is not going to be respected overseas, a problem our current president often faces, who just a couple years ago claimed to have just learned the existence of Shanghai (or a city in China with a billion people..)



Shanghai doesn't have a billion people or anywhere close.  Anyways, who says Obama is going to get enough respect to be listened to?  He doesn't have much foreign policy experience himself and the reason people love him aboard might simply be that his policies are as liberal as the Europeans and because his charisma. 



> Ok you're physically ready to run a mile now at 72. After an exhaustive 2 more years as president will you be? we don't know. but We can confirm you're physically not going to die or lose your marbles before election day.
> 
> My doctor issued a statement saying I may have an eye condition so if I get pulled over by the cops I have an excuse for my window tints. I drafted the letter, he signed it, because anything is a possibility. Maybe its not exactly the same, but for a politician who wants a particular study outcome, coercing a doctor into saying only the most positive things isn't parting the red sea. He doesnt have to lie, but its more a skewing of the facts that isnt unfathomable or unlikely. Where does the study say he will be this healthy or nearly as healthy as a man over the age of 75?



...

Yutaka Nakamura



> Sen. John McCain appears to be in overall good health, despite some close calls over the past eight years, his medical records show.
> 
> The presumptive Republican presidential nominee has had no recurrence of melanoma, a form of skin cancer. McCain has had four melanomas removed since 1993, the most recent in 2002.
> 
> ...



There is nothing that would stop him running it perfectly fine today.  Unless his conditions somehow dramatically worsened over the course of two years, he is going to be fine.  Their biggest fear, the return of his skin cancer, is pointed at under 10% and shrinking every day.


----------



## Viciousness (Sep 3, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> Quantity isn't the only thing that matters; there is also quality.  The people working on such big political campaigns are most likely veterans at what they do.  How do you know his speeches weren't prepared for him?  Or his slogans, his advertisements, etc etc?


He had no campaign in 2004 when he made a huge speech to the DNC against the war in Iraq. He did not start with a campaign of this size at the beginning of this election either. His speaking style has not changed. Obama has been known as a great orator long before this. And if somehow they were prepared for him, he has done a great job in execution. Bush's speeches were all prepared for him yet he constantly bumbles over words, moreso in his first 5-6 years than today.



> I have to be honest with you;  Reagan had a huge crowd most likely because the man before him, Jimmy Carter, helped push our country into the shithole and Reagan had helped dig us out.  Granted, I think most of his policies were pretty much shit and his ideology of tax cuts have gathered so many supporters that it still hurts us today, but he was basically the Republican FDR.  It very well appears as if this man had led us out of a major crisis and as such collected an almost cult gathering.



I have to agree about his policies being shit, but his supporters continue to say what a great Orator he was and how it made him a great leader. I can't really take that away from him and do think it helped him with followers. Personally I think Bush 1 was a better president than him when it came to decisions, but he didn't have nearly as large a following, partially because he believed in letting his work speak for itself, and was somewhat opposite Reagan in that regard.




> Wait, why would the doctors cover up any physical problems about him again?  If he had gone to doctors with a conflict in interest, the media or any watchdog groups would have stomped all over it.



McCain was very selective in who the records were released to, didn't allow any photocopies and was very secretive. Its fine and good that he can do this when the media has so much freedom and Americans so little privacy. But it shows no one in the media had much info to go on besides the scraps they were fed including an unsubstantiated statement that it had a less than 10% chance of reccurance, from one Dermatologist who isnt cited as his primary physician or even his physician and refuses to give a number on it. 



> ...  This means shit because you're not an expert and the men who evaluated him were.  If you're not going to at least accept that experienced doctors decided he was healthy enough to lead, then I'm not going to bother to keep arguing with you.  He's at the age where he already takes a number of pills and he isn't deluded about his senior status.  He most likely take annual exams anyways.



It's not about whether the tests and results were legitimate, its how they were worded. Whether it was done in a way to be most positive, negative, or impartial for the senator. And it was most likely spun by his campaign to be as positive as possible in the media.




> Shanghai doesn't have a billion people or anywhere close.  Anyways, who says Obama is going to get enough respect to be listened to?  He doesn't have much foreign policy experience himself and the reason people love him aboard might simply be that his policies are as liberal as the Europeans and because his charisma.


Right, Should've been 10 million. No city has close to a billion. I think 10mill still makes  it one of the 10 largest cities in the world. yet Bush had never heard of it. And Obama isn't stumbling over who our enemies are between shiite and sunni, and has amassed great crowds overseas because he represents a change in course for the US in trying to better the world by reaching out and connecting with the rest of the world. Rather than ignoring our enemies until it gets to the point where we feel we must attack, and continuing the idiotic policies of president Bush. 




> There is nothing that would stop him running it perfectly fine today.  Unless his conditions somehow dramatically worsened over the course of two years, he is going to be fine.  Their biggest fear, the return of his skin cancer, is pointed at under 10% and shrinking every day.



Statistics are often called the biggest lie in politics. Especially when a source that voluntarily throws them out refuses to back them up. The republicans always lie about numbers without anyone really arguing against them, like this bullshit that Palin got more votes in a town of 6000 than Biden got in the national election, when he already had 9,000 before dropping out in the first state of Iowa. They know how to game the media and are rarely challenged despite how hypocritical they may be.
In the same location but from Time Magazine's story on McCain:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1779596-2,00.html



> The sunburns that blistered McCain's skin as a child may prove far more of a threat to his longevity than his time as a prisoner. McCain's 2000 brush with melanoma wasn't his first and, experts say, may not be his last. He had a melanoma removed from his left shoulder in 1993 and had other noninvasive skin cancers removed from his upper left arm in 2000 and his nose in 2002. All were picked up and treated in the earliest stages of the disease, but because melanoma is one of the more unpredictable types of cancer, doctors say he remains at risk for not only spread from the excised cancers but new growths as well. "We know that there is a 40% risk of melanoma coming back with metastases even though the primary lesion is taken out," says Dr. Antoni Ribas, a cancer surgeon at UCLA Medical Center, who has not treated the Senator.



He's had skin cancer 3 times in the past 15 years. One time there was a 7 year gap between the cancers, and yet now when its only been 6 yeas past his last episode we are meant to believe there is little to no chance of its return. Yet a cancer surgeon who is an expert but hasn't treated McCain, not a dermatoligist who may or may not treat cancer, who may or may not treat MCcain, says there is at least a 40% chance of recurrance. Besides that fact they did no mental evaluation and the main focus was on his cancer, when heart disease runs in his family and he's 72. Their answer was a blunt, "he's healthy as of this moment..we don't know what the future holds"
There should be questions about electing a 72 year old man to run your country for the next 4 years, even when he hasn't had several bouts with cancer, been stabbed twice, tortured and beaten for 5 years etc. If telling you he is ok for this moment is good enough for you then thats acceptable.


----------



## dreams lie (Sep 3, 2008)

drache said:


> And yet there's more to being qualified then simply having national experience; it national experience was the only factor then we'd never elect govenors to the office. Of course I'd point out that in general only govenors of big states are taking seriously that way.



How hypocritical; you were accusing me of comparing apples to oranges only to compare the requirements of governors and presidents a single post afterwards.



> Further I find your assertation that coperation and other skills a little naive. Do you know how to get legitration passed? Do you know how to compromise enough to get what you want passed? Those are only skills you learn in politics, not on the playground.



First of all, that's still legislative experience and second of all, it's still done on a STATE level.  



> No you didn't



...

I implied national experience from the very first post and then I actually went forth and *clarified* in my second post afterwards.  



> but if all you want to talk about is national experience then Palin fails on a massive scale. She doesn't even have a hint of national experience.



You're right.  The only thing that can be considered as experience on a federal basis is her job as a governor, which she held for only twenty months.  However, I already said that and how Obama, while holds a year or two more experience, is still relatively new on the national stage.



> Yes because the life of a state senator is one of lesure right?



I have no idea how you drew this conclusion;  you need not many different duties in order to be occupied in your job.



> Why do you persist in defending this bad analogy? It failed move on please.



I really don't see what is so different about the two when you're comparing influence/experience.  Neither offers any national experience whatsoever.  One holds a lot of influence and power (being the only mayor in the town) for a small amount of people while the other holds a small amount of influence (because there are many other senators in the room), but over a large amount of people.   This is opposed to your analogy where you compared the national experience requirements for a President and a governor.  Their jobs are not at all different and very similar, but on completely different scales.  The difference in influence is incredible because there is only one US President per COUNTRY as to one governor per STATE. 



> Do you know why we vet our presidents? Because all the important decesion like say nuclear war, starting world war 3, protecting the ecnomy and so on go though that office.



Only Palin isn't going to be the president;  she's going to be the vice president.  



> That you would so blathely say that oh it's fine she'll have advisors is just scary.



Only I didn't.  I clearly stated that she is under-qualified, but it helps that she isn't alone in her job if such an unlikely accident occured.



> All presidents have advisors but you know what? Sometimes they're wrong and being president means ultimately *you* not your advisors have to make a decesion.


 
Exactly, which is why McCain is the president and she is the VICE president. 



> So in other words if this really is tokenism it's okay because hey we really don't have to give her work.



Well, as much as I hate to say it, yes.  If McCain have truly picked her simply because of her sex, then the smart thing to do after he moves into the white house would to cast her aside.  



> She's just a woman all she has to do is stand there showing off her boobs and her job is done.
> 
> Wow yeah that's not sexist and offensive at all.



Well, I never stated that.  The real influence and power of the VP is low, but it is more than fit enough to expose and fight corruption.  She might introduce some new ideas as to returning to the budget and dig out of the national debt too.  Still, if McCain had based his pick completely on the gender, then yes, it was tokenism at play and as irritating as it may sound, the smartest thing to do would be to limit her duties if she proved incapable.






> You're talking about a specific form of cancer and that's only under some specific cavets.
> 
> That says nothing about the other upteen number of ways a man his age can die or be incapiated.



It is the biggest threat to his health so far.



> I'm going to try and explain this to you.
> 
> It does not mattter (in general) what you or I think about her qualifications. The fact is this is about the *entire* population of the US and thus this isn't argumentum ad populums.
> 
> ...



You first posted this:  



> You may think that McCain's choice is fine but most people don't think so, in fact only something like 29% think she's ready for the office (compared to 39% at a similair point when Biden was introduced) and Biden's spent his life in the Senate.



It sounded as if you were trying to persuade me she isn't fit simply because other people believed it.  I refused to give in.  I think it became a major misunderstanding after that.  



> I'm presenting facts here, facts about her, her record and how people are reacting to her.



Only when you posted that fact, it had nothing to do with what we were arguing unless you really were trying to persuade me.


----------



## dreams lie (Sep 4, 2008)

DrunkenYoshimaster said:


> He had no campaign in 2004 when he made a huge speech to the DNC against the war in Iraq. He did not start with a campaign of this size at the beginning of this election either. His speaking style has not changed. Obama has been known as a great orator long before this. And if somehow they were prepared for him, he has done a great job in execution. Bush's speeches were all prepared for him yet he constantly bumbles over words, moreso in his first 5-6 years than today.



Executing speeches and holding crowds with charisma isn't always a sign of a great leader;  that's pretty much all there is to say.  





> I have to agree about his policies being shit, but his supporters continue to say what a great Orator he was and how it made him a great leader.



It helped him BECOME the leader rather than actually lead.  His policies are what determined his success.



> I can't really take that away from him and do think it helped him with followers. Personally I think Bush 1 was a better president than him when it came to decisions, but he didn't have nearly as large a following, partially because he believed in letting his work speak for itself, and was somewhat opposite Reagan in that regard.



The first Bush didn't have a great following because he introduced a tax after it became clear that he was running far too great of a debt and can't continue his spending sprees or all his tax cuts.  Introducing taxes was pretty much political suicide seeing the fiscal positions his supporters held or at least after famously declaring "No new taxes."  This isn't considering the fact that he was succeeding Reagan himself, which is pretty hard to follow up.  




> McCain was very selective in who the records were released to, didn't allow any photocopies and was very secretive. Its fine and good that he can do this when the media has so much freedom and Americans so little privacy. But it shows no one in the media had much info to go on besides the scraps they were fed including an unsubstantiated statement that it had a less than 10% chance of reccurance, from one Dermatologist who isnt cited as his primary physician or even his physician and refuses to give a number on it.



...



> Dr. John Eckstein, *McCain's primary physician* at the Mayo Clinic Scottsdale, told reporters in a teleconference.



Your source gave a 40%, but I believe the doctors were talking about skin cancer in general as they didn't even examine John McCain.



> It's not about whether the tests and results were legitimate, its how they were worded. Whether it was done in a way to be most positive, negative, or impartial for the senator. And it was most likely spun by his campaign to be as positive as possible in the media.



Only there are almost always political watchdogs and the other campaign watching.  Still, even if it was a 9.9% chance of returning, it is well known that the longer the time passes without it returning, the rarer it becomes.



> Right, Should've been 10 million. No city has close to a billion. think 10mill still makes  it one of the 10 largest cities in the world. yet Bush had never heard of it.



It is actually closer to 20 million, if wiki is to be trusted.  Still, Bush does make a lot of gaffes. 



> And Obama isn't stumbling over who our enemies are between shiite and sunni, and has amassed great crowds overseas because he represents a change in course for the US in trying to better the world by reaching out and connecting with the rest of the world. Rather than ignoring our enemies until it gets to the point where we feel we must attack, and continuing the idiotic policies of president Bush.



Or Obama's views are just being well received in the much more liberal EU and is charismatic enough to draw out crowds.  




> Statistics are often called the biggest lie in politics. Especially when a source that voluntarily throws them out refuses to back them up. The republicans always lie about numbers without anyone really arguing against them, like this bullshit that Palin got more votes in a town of 6000 than Biden got in the national election, when he already had 9,000 before dropping out in the first state of Iowa. They know how to game the media and are rarely challenged despite how hypocritical they may be.
> In the same location but from Time Magazine's story on McCain:
> http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1779596-2,00.html



Nonprofit organizations are ones I would least expect to mislead the public, even if it is through statistics.  Still, your TIME's article doesn't differ much from NPR, with the only difference being the different sources they drew on for information.



> He's had skin cancer 3 times in the past 15 years. One time there was a 7 year gap between the cancers, and yet now when its only been 6 yeas past his last episode we are meant to believe there is little to no chance of its return. Yet a cancer surgeon who is an expert but hasn't treated McCain, not a dermatoligist who may or may not treat cancer, who may or may not treat MCcain, says there is at least a 40% chance of recurrance.



Remember about your statement about statistics being a lie?  I'm almost certain he was talking about skin cancer in general, especially seeing how he never got a chance to look at McCain himself.



> Besides that fact they did no mental evaluation and the main focus was on his cancer, when heart disease runs in his family and he's 72. Their answer was a blunt, "he's healthy as of this moment..we don't know what the future holds"



They decided to do cancer because that was what the big scare was about.



> There should be questions about electing a 72 year old man to run your country for the next 4 years, even when he hasn't had several bouts with cancer, been stabbed twice, tortured and beaten for 5 years etc. If telling you he is ok for this moment is good enough for you then thats acceptable.



If the biggest threat to him was lower than a 10% and shrinking with every passing moment, I think he's at least physically acceptable to become the President.


----------



## drache (Sep 4, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> How hypocritical; you were accusing me of comparing apples to oranges only to compare the requirements of governors and presidents a single post afterwards.


 
No I am not, I am acknowledging that govenors have been chosen to be president but only generally those with enough national name reconigation so generally only the big states like CA or TX.

But at the same time there's more to the president then just excutive decesions. The President also leads Congress and thus legistrative experience can be deemed just as important.





dreams lie said:


> First of all, that's still legislative experience and second of all, it's still done on a STATE level.


 
And what's so bad about that? Careers have to start somewhere and if you're going to project the STATE experience of a govenor onto the NATIONAL level then I can do the same with the legistlative experience of a state senator.




dreams lie said:


> ...
> 
> I implied national experience from the very first post and then I actually went forth and *clarified* in my second post afterwards.


 
You only recently clarified and despite me trying to drop the topic you keep brining it up.



dreams lie said:


> You're right. The only thing that can be considered as experience on a federal basis is her job as a governor, which she held for only twenty months. However, I already said that and how Obama, while holds a year or two more experience, is still relatively new on the national stage.


 


THE OFFICE OF GOVENOR HAS *NO* NATIONAL EXPERIENCE.

What do you not understand about that? The govenor doesn't command troops, does not make decesions effecting hundreds of millions.

That said this arguement is 2 edged, because by your own arguement then McCain himself isn't qualified enough compared to Palin. So then who should we elect?



dreams lie said:


> I have no idea how you drew this conclusion; you need not many different duties in order to be occupied in your job.


 
You're dismissing the work a state senator does and comparing it to a mayor.  Which is just naive.



dreams lie said:


> I really don't see what is so different about the two when you're comparing influence/experience. Neither offers any national experience whatsoever. One holds a lot of influence and power (being the only mayor in the town) for a small amount of people while the other holds a small amount of influence (because there are many other senators in the room), but over a large amount of people. This is opposed to your analogy where you compared the national experience requirements for a President and a governor. Their jobs are not at all different and very similar, but on completely different scales. The difference in influence is incredible because there is only one US President per COUNTRY as to one governor per STATE.


 
If you restrict yourself to big cities I could see you having a small point, that said many state senators represent more people then many mayors. And again your under stating the influence a state senator has. Depending on the state there's something like 15-50 senators per state depending on how the state is set up.

There are still MASSIVE probelms with directly comparing a governor to a president as I noted above. Your analogy isn't perfect.



dreams lie said:


> Only Palin isn't going to be the president; she's going to be the vice president.


 
She could be though and thus should be vetted with that in mind. Anything less is a hypocritical double standard.




dreams lie said:


> Only I didn't. I clearly stated that she is under-qualified, but it helps that she isn't alone in her job if such an unlikely accident occured.


 
And again it's frightening you can admit she is under qualified and yet still be okay with that.

McCain if elected is taking an INCREDIBLE gamble with the fate of millions and yet we're supposed to be okay with that? 



dreams lie said:


> Exactly, which is why McCain is the president and she is the VICE president.


 
See above



dreams lie said:


> Well, as much as I hate to say it, yes. If McCain have truly picked her simply because of her sex, then the smart thing to do after he moves into the white house would to cast her aside.


 
Which I find unforgiveable and inexcusable.

It's a slap in the face of all those that have fought for equality and tolerance and fair play.

As far as I'm concerned McCain can go to tell and take any small amount of respect I had for him. If he wants to act like a typical politican fine, but that's not a maverick.

And I have a hard time understanding any woman that would give her approval to this bullshit by voting for the GOP. Personally I hope McCain loses the female vote by record margins because at this point that's what he deserves.




dreams lie said:


> Well, I never stated that. The real influence and power of the VP is low, but it is more than fit enough to expose and fight corruption. She might introduce some new ideas as to returning to the budget and dig out of the national debt too. Still, if McCain had based his pick completely on the gender, then yes, it was tokenism at play and as irritating as it may sound, the smartest thing to do would be to limit her duties if she proved incapable.


 
No you can't have it both ways, either Palin is experienced enough to carry out the duties of VP or she's a balant token and should be locked in a room so she doesn't acidentally start WW3. Make up your mind and position now and then I'll respond.




dreams lie said:


> It is the biggest threat to his health so far.


 
Not really, the biggest threat is always the one you don't expect. McCain is intelligent enough to take precautions to prevent a relapse and unlike most of America has incredible enough healthcare to do it.




dreams lie said:


> You first posted this:
> 
> 
> 
> It sounded as if you were trying to persuade me she isn't fit simply because other people believed it. I refused to give in. I think it became a major misunderstanding after that.


 
Sense you want to persist in this:



> That statement wasn't about bandwagons it was trying to show you even though Biden's been in the national spotlight for years and just ran his own campaign for the nomination *still* less then 50% think he's ready to be president. And yet you think some how Palin is going to be better recieved?


 
I said that 2 days ago and yet you want to claim it's my fault you misunderstood?

Perhaps you should work on your reading skills.

PS I'd link it but the forum is acting odd.


----------



## Viciousness (Sep 4, 2008)

dreams lie said:


> Executing speeches and holding crowds with charisma isn't always a sign of a great leader;  that's pretty much all there is to say.


The point is that it was trumpeted by republicans as the greatest asset of their greatest leader (in present times with the present party) whereas it s being bashed in Obama's case for being lofty and above the heads of the common man.





> It helped him BECOME the leader rather than actually lead.  His policies are what determined his success.



which we both agree were pretty bad, especially domestically. Anytime anything went wrong in his administration he would claim that no one told him anything, and take no responsibility.



> The first Bush didn't have a great following because he introduced a tax after it became clear that he was running far too great of a debt and can't continue his spending sprees or all his tax cuts.  Introducing taxes was pretty much political suicide seeing the fiscal positions his supporters held or at least after famously declaring "No new taxes."  This isn't considering the fact that he was succeeding Reagan himself, which is pretty hard to follow up.


 
Thats what later made opinion of him negative, especially when it came time for Clinton and Perot to run. But he never really had a Reaganesque following.







> Your source gave a 40%, but I believe the doctors were talking about skin cancer in general as they didn't even examine John McCain.


So then that right there shows you're admitting the reports from the doctors were given positive spin to be as much in McCains favor as possible without stating all the facts. Rather than let the public know that a 72 year old man (71 at the time) who had 3 bouts with skin cancer  since 93, had at least a 40% chance at reccurance, they'd rather tell the public..the chances of melenoma alone returning to a specific area they treated was less than 10% and declining every day.

Not to mention you bolded the part about his primary physician when the one who gave the statement about 10% was not his primary physician. but instead Suzanne M. Connelly who it only says was a dermatologist at the clinic, not if she was even McCains dermatologist. Then she wouldn't back her statement up with numbers.



> Only there are almost always political watchdogs and the other campaign watching.  Still, even if it was a 9.9% chance of returning, it is well known that the longer the time passes without it returning, the rarer it becomes.


Right.. the other campaign that lets the repubs push them around in the media falsely letting them trash Kerry a real american hero's war record, then can't say a thing negative about McCain other than him siding with Bush, because he was a POW in Vietnam. The other party that lets the repubs steal two elections in a row, because theyre afraid challenging would make them seem to care about themselves ahead of the need for america to have a president by a certain date, despite the other party clearly showing only concern for themselves and victory in 2000 and 04. They're really going to challenge the medical records they've been asking for for months on end, when its going to be spun as them being ungrateful, and no amount of "proof" ever being enough for them...



> It is actually closer to 20 million, if wiki is to be trusted.  Still, Bush does make a lot of gaffes.


probably is, but he said over 10 mill so it would work either way.




> Or Obama's views are just being well received in the much more liberal EU and is charismatic enough to draw out crowds.


In the EU, south america, Africa, and the non-extremist middle east, Obama is viewed very favorably. Pretty much the rest of the world.





> Nonprofit organizations are ones I would least expect to mislead the public, even if it is through statistics.  Still, your TIME's article doesn't differ much from NPR, with the only difference being the different sources they drew on for information.


3 individuals from an organization prodded by McCains campaign to speak the truth but only the good truth. And we already know the articles pertaining to his health following the study were skewed in his favor when they make no mention of the lesion he has had removed in the past year. The doctors conference you speak of was nothing more than a conference call over a telephone where reporters were given limited time to come with questions.



> Remember about your statement about statistics being a lie?  I'm almost certain he was talking about skin cancer in general, especially seeing how he never got a chance to look at McCain himself.


See above




> They decided to do cancer because that was what the big scare was about.


yet you insist he's completely healthy for the next 4 years to come, when heart disease runs in his family, his mental health hasn't been evaluated in years etc. I understand why they did melanoma, but there's alot of other questions about his health that were floating out there. Just like this hushed them about the legitimacy of what was actually stated, these scraps about his melanoma hushed the questioners about his health in general.




> If the biggest threat to him was lower than a 10% and shrinking with every passing moment, I think he's at least physically acceptable to become the President.


You call it the biggest threat to him, despite him having a more than 40% chance of developing another skin cancer, despite him being at risk for heart attack because it runs in his family, despite his broken arms which don't raise above shoulder length, and the fact that he's a 72 year old man and would be 76 by the time he leaves office. He's physically acceptable to become president for right now, but I personally have my doubts about it remaining that way come 2012, and would like some assurances that his VP has some ability to lead, other than running a state with less people than Austin Texas, and before that a town with less people than some highschools, and most colleges, and did it quite poorly I might add. 

Bush ran the entire state of Texas and did a mediocre job at it for years. It sure helped him a lot in the presidency.. You talk as if the chances of Palin ever having to take over for John McCain if he wins are slim to none, whereas what I've seen would indicate they are fair to good. You talk as if questions of John McCains health are not legitimate, and this one study focused on melanoma should write off all health concerns, when McCain himself admits questions of his health are legitimate.


----------



## Cromer (Sep 4, 2008)

This may be the turning point in thecampaign I was expecting; when the media find a new darling (Palin), overexposure starts to do Obama a false favour, and the media rip into him. But hey, what do I know?


----------



## ANBUONE (Sep 4, 2008)

Dog Rapist said:


> This may be the turning point in thecampaign I was expecting; when the media find a new darling (Palin), overexposure starts to do Obama a false favour, and the media rip into him. But hey, what do I know?



What RNC were you watching she just attacked the media ,and called them all kinds of names


----------



## Sunuvmann (Sep 4, 2008)

*What Republicans Really think of Palin (Noonan and Murphy Hot Mic on MSNBC)*

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDBW0SbDxPo[/YOUTUBE]

Bullshit narratives


----------



## Hi Im God (Sep 4, 2008)

haha yes!!  I read this transcript already today I didn't think there was an actual clip though.


----------



## Viciousness (Sep 4, 2008)

Dog Rapist said:


> This may be the turning point in thecampaign I was expecting; when the media find a new darling (Palin), overexposure starts to do Obama a false favour, and the media rip into him. But hey, what do I know?



Media has always ripped on Obama. The media being (pardon my french) on the man's dick, was a lie made by the right wing. Non-profit organizations did a study showing over 72% of all comments made in the media towards obama were all negative. 

It's just McCain of today isn't really interesting so he goes unnoticed in most media appearances such as his 13 times on Jay Leno, and the fact that his last trip to Europe was far longer than Obama's. So he and the right wing get away with statements like Obama is a celebrity, because the Republican party has stayed alive mainly by gaming the media, and fooling most of America outside of the wealthy whose main concern is increasing their wealth, and those who are loyal to the party because their parents were etc. and are just uninformed.


----------



## Harley (Sep 4, 2008)

I am sick of this Palin women and her hockey mom tactics. Its really insulting how she uses them I spoke with a few friends of mine who are women and their opinions are that she thinks she can win votes by just showing herself as a mother to the media. To be quite honest its degrading this is directed towards Palin in a way. You think cause you did what a mother is supposed to do and had children it gives you bragging rights? Any women can do this my own mother said that no one really cares its what a mom does we all know your a women start talking about the country cause women will not be hypnotized by this bullshit.


----------



## Yume-chan (Sep 4, 2008)

*"The Word from Wasilla"*



> I am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Sarah since 1992.
> 
> She is "pro-life". She recently gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby. There is no cover-up involved, here; Trig is her baby.
> 
> ...



http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080904/cm_thenation/45354444

One person's personal account isn't worth all that much, but it'd be interesting to learn more about some of these things.  (Censorship, bad budgeting, ethics violations, etc.)

Edit: Eh, this should probably be in the Debate Corner.  Curses.


----------



## Deamiel (Sep 4, 2008)

O.o

Even Republicans don't like it?  Knew it.


----------



## Spencer_Gator (Sep 5, 2008)

I like her, she was funny


----------



## hcheng02 (Sep 5, 2008)

The Economist wrote an article about this.





> The Woman from Nowhere
> 
> THE most audacious move of the race so far is also, potentially, the most self-destructive. John McCain?s choice of Sarah Palin as his running-mate has set the political atmosphere alight with both enthusiasm and dismay.
> 
> ...



In short, she's like a female George W. Bush especially judging by the rabid approval of the far right. Well, at least I'll feel a lot better about voting for Obama now.


----------



## Bender (Sep 6, 2008)

If she wants people to vote for her stop waving your pregnant duaghter your down syndome baby and your entire family in front of you as a shield so people won't attack you. You may not know it but she's publicly politicizing her family in an effort to prevent people from further scrutinizing her. In my mind she is no better than McCain. As he uses her as a tool she's using her family and making herself look far from innocent.


----------



## Harley (Sep 6, 2008)

She is a extremist that is way out of touch with main stream America.


----------



## Altron (Sep 6, 2008)

what's pretty funny is that i am pretty sure most here in the cafe, would have never even heard of the name "Sarah Palin" until McCain choose her to be his VP.


----------



## Harley (Sep 6, 2008)

Whats funny is McCain picking someone that thinks women should have babies even if their raped.


----------

