DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Brassmask on August 29, 2008, 03:06:26 PM
-
We're looking at a full-blown meltdown. Let's kick things off with Kathryn Jean Lopez of National Review:
"She Just Is Not Ready to Be Commander-in-Chief" [said] Pat Buchanan on MSNBC just now, about Sarah Palin. I'm liable to agree.
Lopez also posted this as a typical email she's gotten:
As much as I loathe Obama-Biden, I can't in good conscience vote for a McCain-Palin ticket. Palin has absolutely no experience in foreign affairs. Considering both McCain's advanced age and the state of the world today, it is essential that the veep be exceedingly qualified to assume the office of president. I simply don't have any confidence in Palin's ability to deal effectively with Iran, Russia, China, etc. I certainly will not cast a vote for Obama-Biden, but nor will I vote for McCain-Palin. Looks like I'll either sit this one out or vote for Bob Barr. Why, o, why, didn't McCain listen to Rove and just pick Romney?
cityduck's diary :: ::
From the National Review's Ramesh Ponnuru:
Inexperience. Palin has been governor for about two minutes. Thanks to McCain’s decision, Palin could be commander-in-chief next year. That may strike people as a reckless choice; it strikes me that way. And McCain's age raised the stakes on this issue.
As a political matter, it undercuts the case against Obama. Conservatives are pointing out that it is tricky for the Obama campaign to raise the issue of her inexperience given his own, and note that the presidency matters more than the vice-presidency. But that gets things backward. To the extent the experience, qualifications, and national-security arguments are taken off the table, Obama wins.
And it’s not just foreign policy. Palin has no experience dealing with national domestic issues, either. (On the other hand, as Kate O’Beirne just told me, we know that Palin will be ready for that 3 a.m. phone call: She’ll already be up with her baby.)
Tokenism. Can anyone say with a straight face that Palin would have gotten picked if she were a man?
Compatibility. It doesn’t seem as though McCain knows Palin well. Do we have much reason to think they would work well together?
Debates. Maybe, as Jonah said the other day, Biden will look like a bully going up against her—and maybe she’ll shine. But I can think of a lot of other picks who would have been lower-risk.
I am not even sure that the pick will have quite the galvanizing effect on conservatives that it seems to be having now as it sinks in. The concerns I’ve mentioned here—about her readiness and her credentials—are the kind of thing that many conservative voters take seriously.
From the National Review's Jonah Goldberg:
Downside: She may not be ready for primetime. The heartbeat-from-the-presidency issue is a real one.
From the National Review's Jonathon Adler:
I recognize that were McCain to select Palin as his Veep it disrupts the Obama Lacks Foreign Policy Experience" talking point, but I was never thought that argument was all that powerful.
From Town Hall's Ron Fournier:
If Obama is an empty suit, as McCain has suggested, is Palin suited for the Oval Office herself?
She is younger and less experienced than the first-term Illinois senator, and brings an ethical shadow to the ticket. Just 20 months ago, she was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, a town of 6,500 where the biggest issue is controlling growth and the biggest annual worry is whether there will be enough snow for the Iditarod dog-mushing race.
From MSNBC's Joe Scarborough:
It Sounds Like a Harriet Miers Decision. Let's Find a Woman, Whether She's Experienced or Not.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/29/125530/561/942/578766 (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/29/125530/561/942/578766)
-
One point that has not been mentioned, before things get too heated. When McCain was searching for a candidate I noted that we would see whether he was comfortable with his base or not. If not he'd pick a safer choice (a.k.a. Mitt Romney). I think the choice of Governor Palin shows that he is very comfortable that conservative and evangelical voters will come out for him in November. While she is a conservative, he could have found a much more well-known conservative woman (Senator Hutchinson for example).
One thing is for certain, it is an interesting race. No matter who wins we'll have our first President to move directly from Capitol Hill to the White House since JFK and we'll have either our first woman veep or our first African-American president.
-
Well deduced, Js
-
I don't expect McCain to die in office, but I do expect that, on account of his age, he'll be a one termer. I'll support McCain in '08 so I can vote for Palin in 2012.
For all her looks, Palin is one tough cookie. She's our best shot yet at developing an American Margaret Thatcher.
Imagine what the 2012 election is going to look like. I can just see Hillary kicking and screaming - "It's not fair! IT'S JUST NOT FAIR!!!"
-
an American Margaret Thatcher
Ugh.
I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
-
I don't expect McCain to die in office, but I do expect that, on account of his age, he'll be a one termer. I'll support McCain in '08 so I can vote for Palin in 2012.
For all her looks, Palin is one tough cookie. She's our best shot yet at developing an American Margaret Thatcher.
Imagine what the 2012 election is going to look like. I can just see Hillary kicking and screaming - "It's not fair! IT'S JUST NOT FAIR!!!"
I wouldn't start printing Palin posters just yet.
President Obama's first term is going to completely bury the the GOP for another 20 years.
-
an American Margaret Thatcher
Ugh.
I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
Repeat after me....
There is no "society"...
There is no "society"...
There is no "society"...
There is no "society"...
There is no "society"...
There is no "society"...
There is no "society"...
-
I don't expect McCain to die in office, but I do expect that, on account of his age, he'll be a one termer. I'll support McCain in '08 so I can vote for Palin in 2012.
For all her looks, Palin is one tough cookie. She's our best shot yet at developing an American Margaret Thatcher.
Imagine what the 2012 election is going to look like. I can just see Hillary kicking and screaming - "It's not fair! IT'S JUST NOT FAIR!!!"
I wouldn't start printing Palin posters just yet.
President Obama's first term is going to completely bury the the GOP for another 20 years.
If Obama can't even gain a significant bounce at his coronation (and he hasn't), he's not going to get elected to anything.
Stick a fork in him. He's done.
-
I remember when I used to say things like that about Bush all the time. I said the same sorts of things about John Kerry when he was running against Dean.
It's what we do when we fall in love with our candidates. Its also what we do when know that our candidate is officially and terminally a "dog".
-
I don't expect McCain to die in office, but I do expect that, on account of his age, he'll be a one termer. I'll support McCain in '08 so I can vote for Palin in 2012.
For all her looks, Palin is one tough cookie. She's our best shot yet at developing an American Margaret Thatcher.
Imagine what the 2012 election is going to look like. I can just see Hillary kicking and screaming - "It's not fair! IT'S JUST NOT FAIR!!!"
I wouldn't start printing Palin posters just yet.
President Obama's first term is going to completely bury the the GOP for another 20 years.
He needs to be an effective president if he is going to have a second term , let alone coattails into the next decade.
What seems like "effective " about him?
I am seeig Jimmy Carter Redoux.
-
Hmmm.....Bush III or Carter II?..
That didn't take long
-
Hmmm.....Bush III or Carter II?..
That didn't take long
At least Carter didnt get US into a bullshit war.
-
an American Margaret Thatcher
Ugh.
I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
Repeat after me....
There is no "society"...
There is no "society"...
There is no "society"...
There is no "society"...
There is no "society"...
There is no "society"...
There is no "society"...
hahahaha
We could always have Maggie Thatcher top rates of 60%+ or increase government spending as a percentage of GDP as she did when compared to James Callaghan... ;)
People often forget her record compared to her rhetoric. But she was tough on the Argentine Junta (that the U.S. supported). It was the fracas of Fascists in the Falklands.
-
Hmmm.....Bush III or Carter II?..
That didn't take long
At least Carter didnt get US into a bullshit war.
No, Carter was more about helping fund right-wing death squads in Latin America and pumping Afghanistan full of weapons. Oh, and using monetarist policies to f*** the economy at home.
-
I don't expect McCain to die in office, but I do expect that, on account of his age, he'll be a one termer. I'll support McCain in '08 so I can vote for Palin in 2012.
For all her looks, Palin is one tough cookie. She's our best shot yet at developing an American Margaret Thatcher.
Imagine what the 2012 election is going to look like. I can just see Hillary kicking and screaming - "It's not fair! IT'S JUST NOT FAIR!!!"
I wouldn't start printing Palin posters just yet.
President Obama's first term is going to completely bury the the GOP for another 20 years.
In the end, no matter how strong this woman is in front of the camera, it all comes down to policies that work.
I agree, Brass on this one.
-
Hmmm.....Bush III or Carter II?..
That didn't take long
At least Carter didnt get US into a bullshit war.
Carters wars were not Bullshit?
I guess because they were small and we did not spend much on them.
?
Anyway , I was in Jimmy Carters Navy , and it was rapidly becomeing the number two navy as the Soviets built a lot and Carter did not , I liked the guy , but I really became a conservative while I worked for him.
-
I don't expect McCain to die in office, but I do expect that, on account of his age, he'll be a one termer. I'll support McCain in '08 so I can vote for Palin in 2012.
For all her looks, Palin is one tough cookie. She's our best shot yet at developing an American Margaret Thatcher.
Imagine what the 2012 election is going to look like. I can just see Hillary kicking and screaming - "It's not fair! IT'S JUST NOT FAIR!!!"
I wouldn't start printing Palin posters just yet.
President Obama's first term is going to completely bury the the GOP for another 20 years.
In the end, no matter how strong this woman is in front of the camera, it all comes down to policies that work.
I agree, Brass on this one.
What " policies that work " are we speaking of?
-
In the end, no matter how strong this woman is in front of the camera, it all comes down to policies that work.
What " policies that work " are we speaking of?
EXCELLENT follow-up, Plane
-
I don't expect McCain to die in office, but I do expect that, on account of his age, he'll be a one termer. I'll support McCain in '08 so I can vote for Palin in 2012.
For all her looks, Palin is one tough cookie. She's our best shot yet at developing an American Margaret Thatcher.
Imagine what the 2012 election is going to look like. I can just see Hillary kicking and screaming - "It's not fair! IT'S JUST NOT FAIR!!!"
I wouldn't start printing Palin posters just yet.
President Obama's first term is going to completely bury the the GOP for another 20 years.
In the end, no matter how strong this woman is in front of the camera, it all comes down to policies that work.
I agree, Brass on this one.
What " policies that work " are we speaking of?
We? ???
I was speaking of the policies that are important to all Americans. You name one, there will be those elements that have worked and those that have not...overall, anything Obama changes in his administration will probably end up to find a ground floor of success compared to the last eight years of waste and death under Bush.
-
I don't expect McCain to die in office, but I do expect that, on account of his age, he'll be a one termer. I'll support McCain in '08 so I can vote for Palin in 2012.
For all her looks, Palin is one tough cookie. She's our best shot yet at developing an American Margaret Thatcher.
Imagine what the 2012 election is going to look like. I can just see Hillary kicking and screaming - "It's not fair! IT'S JUST NOT FAIR!!!"
I wouldn't start printing Palin posters just yet.
President Obama's first term is going to completely bury the the GOP for another 20 years.
In the end, no matter how strong this woman is in front of the camera, it all comes down to policies that work.
I agree, Brass on this one.
What " policies that work " are we speaking of?
We? ???
I was speaking of the policies that are important to all Americans. You name one, there will be those elements that have worked and those that have not...overall, anything Obama changes in his administration will probably end up to find a ground floor of success compared to the last eight years of waste and death under Bush.
How about a policy that prevents attacks like the 9-11 attacks . Or even a policy that really harms Al Queda?
Is that in the offing?
What is the part that will make his work better?
-
I don't expect McCain to die in office, but I do expect that, on account of his age, he'll be a one termer. I'll support McCain in '08 so I can vote for Palin in 2012.
For all her looks, Palin is one tough cookie. She's our best shot yet at developing an American Margaret Thatcher.
Imagine what the 2012 election is going to look like. I can just see Hillary kicking and screaming - "It's not fair! IT'S JUST NOT FAIR!!!"
I wouldn't start printing Palin posters just yet.
President Obama's first term is going to completely bury the the GOP for another 20 years.
In the end, no matter how strong this woman is in front of the camera, it all comes down to policies that work.
I agree, Brass on this one.
What " policies that work " are we speaking of?
We? ???
I was speaking of the policies that are important to all Americans. You name one, there will be those elements that have worked and those that have not...overall, anything Obama changes in his administration will probably end up to find a ground floor of success compared to the last eight years of waste and death under Bush.
How about a policy that prevents attacks like the 9-11 attacks . Or even a policy that really harms Al Queda?
Is that in the offing?
What is the part that will make his work better?
Do you really think that Obama can not protect our nation, plane?
-
I don't expect McCain to die in office, but I do expect that, on account of his age, he'll be a one termer. I'll support McCain in '08 so I can vote for Palin in 2012.
For all her looks, Palin is one tough cookie. She's our best shot yet at developing an American Margaret Thatcher.
Imagine what the 2012 election is going to look like. I can just see Hillary kicking and screaming - "It's not fair! IT'S JUST NOT FAIR!!!"
I wouldn't start printing Palin posters just yet.
President Obama's first term is going to completely bury the the GOP for another 20 years.
In the end, no matter how strong this woman is in front of the camera, it all comes down to policies that work.
I agree, Brass on this one.
What " policies that work " are we speaking of?
We? ???
I was speaking of the policies that are important to all Americans. You name one, there will be those elements that have worked and those that have not...overall, anything Obama changes in his administration will probably end up to find a ground floor of success compared to the last eight years of waste and death under Bush.
How about a policy that prevents attacks like the 9-11 attacks . Or even a policy that really harms Al Queda?
Is that in the offing?
What is the part that will make his work better?
Do you really think that Obama can not protect our nation, plane?
I am asking about better.
He is promiseing change , but if it isn't better I don't want it.
So how will his protection of the USA be better?
-
Do you really think that Obama can not protect our nation, plane?
I am asking about better. He is promiseing change , but if it isn't better I don't want it. So how will his protection of the USA be better?
Again, excellent. I see I'm going to be asking many of my questions to Miss Cynthia, using you as a surrogate, Plane. I hope you don't mind 8)
-
Do you really think that Obama can not protect our nation, plane?
I am asking about better. He is promiseing change , but if it isn't better I don't want it. So how will his protection of the USA be better?
Again, excellent. I see I'm going to be asking many of my questions to Miss Cynthia, using you as a surrogate, Plane. I hope you don't mind 8)
You should be carefull, I could turn on you.
-
Given your track record, I'll take my chances
-
We're looking at a full-blown meltdown. Let's kick things off with Kathryn Jean Lopez of National Review:
"She Just Is Not Ready to Be Commander-in-Chief" [said] Pat Buchanan on MSNBC just now, about Sarah Palin. I'm liable to agree.
Lopez also posted this as a typical email she's gotten:
As much as I loathe Obama-Biden, I can't in good conscience vote for a McCain-Palin ticket. Palin has absolutely no experience in foreign affairs. Considering both McCain's advanced age and the state of the world today, it is essential that the veep be exceedingly qualified to assume the office of president. I simply don't have any confidence in Palin's ability to deal effectively with Iran, Russia, China, etc. I certainly will not cast a vote for Obama-Biden, but nor will I vote for McCain-Palin. Looks like I'll either sit this one out or vote for Bob Barr. Why, o, why, didn't McCain listen to Rove and just pick Romney?
cityduck's diary :: ::
From the National Review's Ramesh Ponnuru:
Inexperience. Palin has been governor for about two minutes. Thanks to McCain’s decision, Palin could be commander-in-chief next year. That may strike people as a reckless choice; it strikes me that way. And McCain's age raised the stakes on this issue.
As a political matter, it undercuts the case against Obama. Conservatives are pointing out that it is tricky for the Obama campaign to raise the issue of her inexperience given his own, and note that the presidency matters more than the vice-presidency. But that gets things backward. To the extent the experience, qualifications, and national-security arguments are taken off the table, Obama wins.
And it’s not just foreign policy. Palin has no experience dealing with national domestic issues, either. (On the other hand, as Kate O’Beirne just told me, we know that Palin will be ready for that 3 a.m. phone call: She’ll already be up with her baby.)
Tokenism. Can anyone say with a straight face that Palin would have gotten picked if she were a man?
Compatibility. It doesn’t seem as though McCain knows Palin well. Do we have much reason to think they would work well together?
Debates. Maybe, as Jonah said the other day, Biden will look like a bully going up against her—and maybe she’ll shine. But I can think of a lot of other picks who would have been lower-risk.
I am not even sure that the pick will have quite the galvanizing effect on conservatives that it seems to be having now as it sinks in. The concerns I’ve mentioned here—about her readiness and her credentials—are the kind of thing that many conservative voters take seriously.
From the National Review's Jonah Goldberg:
Downside: She may not be ready for primetime. The heartbeat-from-the-presidency issue is a real one.
From the National Review's Jonathon Adler:
I recognize that were McCain to select Palin as his Veep it disrupts the Obama Lacks Foreign Policy Experience" talking point, but I was never thought that argument was all that powerful.
From Town Hall's Ron Fournier:
If Obama is an empty suit, as McCain has suggested, is Palin suited for the Oval Office herself?
She is younger and less experienced than the first-term Illinois senator, and brings an ethical shadow to the ticket. Just 20 months ago, she was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, a town of 6,500 where the biggest issue is controlling growth and the biggest annual worry is whether there will be enough snow for the Iditarod dog-mushing race.
From MSNBC's Joe Scarborough:
It Sounds Like a Harriet Miers Decision. Let's Find a Woman, Whether She's Experienced or Not.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/29/125530/561/942/578766 (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/29/125530/561/942/578766)
Dream on bitch -- obama is screwed
-
I've looked at this from every angle, and I only see one conclusion: with this one appointment, McCain has shot himself in the foot - - fatally.
McCain's campaign rests on two primary emotions, hate and fear. Only McCain was strong enough to protect America from the "Islamofascist" "threat" which loomed like a tidal wave over every decent American home; only McCain was qualified to serve as C-in-C of the nation's military, which could be called upon to protect America at any hour of the day or night against sudden and deadly attacks from the "Axis of Evil," from North Korea, from Iraq, from (for the real cognoscenti) Saudi Arabia or Sudan or even the Philippines.
Even if the call came at 3:00 A.M., dependable "war hero" John McCain would be there on the other end of the line, snapping out orders, protecting you, defending you.
And now this senile 72-year-old geezer with some weird growth protruding from the left side of his face, the survivor of several past bouts with the Big C, picks someone to replace him as C-in-C, in the not-so-unlikely event of God calling him home a little ahead of schedule, a runner-up in the Miss Alaska pageant and a Governor who hasn't even served out two full years and tells America (after months of lambasting Obama's "inexperience"), "Here, this babe'll take care of you if anything happens to me. SHE'S fully qualified to assume command of our armed forces any time. Obama isn't, but she is."
Is ANYONE left, even of his most faithful followers, who is willing to believe that while Obama is unfit due to "inexperience" to assume command of the U.S. military, Miss Alaska (almost) who hasn't even served out a full term as Governor, IS fit? McCain stoked the fires of fear, scared his followers with the prospect of the "inexperienced" Obama as C-in-C, psyched them to the point where they were convinced that only he (McCain) had the "experience" to provide the protection they so desperately needed, and then tells these thoroughly frightened people that if anything happens to him, they're in the good hands of Ms. Palin??? Please.
Long and short of it: McCain blew it.
-
We're looking at a full-blown meltdown. Let's kick things off with Kathryn Jean Lopez of National Review:
"She Just Is Not Ready to Be Commander-in-Chief" [said] Pat Buchanan on MSNBC just now, about Sarah Palin. I'm liable to agree.
Lopez also posted this as a typical email she's gotten:
As much as I loathe Obama-Biden, I can't in good conscience vote for a McCain-Palin ticket. Palin has absolutely no experience in foreign affairs. Considering both McCain's advanced age and the state of the world today, it is essential that the veep be exceedingly qualified to assume the office of president. I simply don't have any confidence in Palin's ability to deal effectively with Iran, Russia, China, etc. I certainly will not cast a vote for Obama-Biden, but nor will I vote for McCain-Palin. Looks like I'll either sit this one out or vote for Bob Barr. Why, o, why, didn't McCain listen to Rove and just pick Romney?
cityduck's diary :: ::
From the National Review's Ramesh Ponnuru:
Inexperience. Palin has been governor for about two minutes. Thanks to McCain’s decision, Palin could be commander-in-chief next year. That may strike people as a reckless choice; it strikes me that way. And McCain's age raised the stakes on this issue.
As a political matter, it undercuts the case against Obama. Conservatives are pointing out that it is tricky for the Obama campaign to raise the issue of her inexperience given his own, and note that the presidency matters more than the vice-presidency. But that gets things backward. To the extent the experience, qualifications, and national-security arguments are taken off the table, Obama wins.
And it’s not just foreign policy. Palin has no experience dealing with national domestic issues, either. (On the other hand, as Kate O’Beirne just told me, we know that Palin will be ready for that 3 a.m. phone call: She’ll already be up with her baby.)
Tokenism. Can anyone say with a straight face that Palin would have gotten picked if she were a man?
Compatibility. It doesn’t seem as though McCain knows Palin well. Do we have much reason to think they would work well together?
Debates. Maybe, as Jonah said the other day, Biden will look like a bully going up against her—and maybe she’ll shine. But I can think of a lot of other picks who would have been lower-risk.
I am not even sure that the pick will have quite the galvanizing effect on conservatives that it seems to be having now as it sinks in. The concerns I’ve mentioned here—about her readiness and her credentials—are the kind of thing that many conservative voters take seriously.
From the National Review's Jonah Goldberg:
Downside: She may not be ready for primetime. The heartbeat-from-the-presidency issue is a real one.
From the National Review's Jonathon Adler:
I recognize that were McCain to select Palin as his Veep it disrupts the Obama Lacks Foreign Policy Experience" talking point, but I was never thought that argument was all that powerful.
From Town Hall's Ron Fournier:
If Obama is an empty suit, as McCain has suggested, is Palin suited for the Oval Office herself?
She is younger and less experienced than the first-term Illinois senator, and brings an ethical shadow to the ticket. Just 20 months ago, she was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, a town of 6,500 where the biggest issue is controlling growth and the biggest annual worry is whether there will be enough snow for the Iditarod dog-mushing race.
From MSNBC's Joe Scarborough:
It Sounds Like a Harriet Miers Decision. Let's Find a Woman, Whether She's Experienced or Not.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/29/125530/561/942/578766 (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/29/125530/561/942/578766)
Dream on bitch -- obama is screwed
Obama looks tired and seems depressed about Sarah Palin. He looks like Bambi in the headlights of a truck. Sorry know-it-all Mikey but you are wrong and I'm right about Palin. Don't forget I picked her about a month ago....
-
<<Obama looks tired and seems depressed about Sarah Palin. He looks like Bambi in the headlights of a truck. Sorry know-it-all Mikey but you are wrong and I'm right about Palin. Don't forget I picked her about a month ago....>>
So how do you think a security-obsessed voter who picked McCain because he was best qualified to be commander in chief is gonna feel about the prospects of Palin becoming C-in-C if anything happens to McCain?
-
So how do you think a security-obsessed voter who picked McCain because he was best qualified to be commander in chief is gonna feel about the prospects of Palin becoming C-in-C if anything happens to McCain?
They'll be fine with it. She's a woman and security is high on the agenda for women.
She has a reputation for taking on the entrenched interests. I don't think she will be perceived as one who will blink first. Hillary would have been better than Obama on security too. She was tough. She just had high negatives. And Bill didn't help her any on the trail.
Obama already has a reputation for when things get tense of throwing former allies under the bus.
Back to Palin, as VP she'll have a seat on the NSC. She'll be brought up to speed quick enough.
She is also well versed in energy independence, which in many voters minds is a huge security issue, running pipelines from the North Slope and leading the way in converting the govt fleet to natural gas
Remember Truman was clueless when he was selected, most American's think he did OK, in retrospect. Of course Truman was selected to neuter Henry Wallace. FDR thought he was leaning too far to the left, wasn't he suspected of being a communist at one point?
Ah politics, the games within the games within the games.
-
<<Obama looks tired and seems depressed about Sarah Palin. He looks like Bambi in the headlights of a truck. Sorry know-it-all Mikey but you are wrong and I'm right about Palin. Don't forget I picked her about a month ago....>>
So how do you think a security-obsessed voter who picked McCain because he was best qualified to be commander in chief is gonna feel about the prospects of Palin becoming C-in-C if anything happens to McCain?
You mean compared to Obama -- no brainer this women makes Obama look like a scared little boy. I mean really look at Obama he looks tired, demoralized and somewhat scared of what just hit him between the eyes. Do you think he would have picked Biden if he knew McCain was going to pick Palin?
-
So how do you think a security-obsessed voter who picked McCain because he was best qualified to be commander in chief is gonna feel about the prospects of Palin becoming C-in-C if anything happens to McCain?
They'll be fine with it. She's a woman and security is high on the agenda for women.
She has a reputation for taking on the entrenched interests. I don't think she will be perceived as one who will blink first. Hillary would have been better than Obama on security too. She was tough. She just had high negatives. And Bill didn't help her any on the trail.
Obama already has a reputation for when things get tense of throwing former allies under the bus.
Back to Palin, as VP she'll have a seat on the NSC. She'll be brought up to speed quick enough.
She is also well versed in energy independence, which in many voters minds is a huge security issue, running pipelines from the North Slope and leading the way in converting the govt fleet to natural gas
Remember Truman was clueless when he was selected, most American's think he did OK, in retrospect. Of course Truman was selected to neuter Henry Wallace. FDR thought he was leaning too far to the left, wasn't he suspected of being a communist at one point?
Ah politics, the games within the games within the games.
To compare Sarah to Harry Truman doesn't seem to quite fit, BT.
But, I do agree that she is a tough politician.
I was impressed...but, impressions are only first glance gifts.
This country has to agree to disagree. Abortion/vs Pro life. NRA vs anti GUN. Taxes vs not to tax(es).
That's going to be the bottom line.
Money, how it's spent, why it's spent, priorities in regard to education, war and health are key points.
No amount of charisma or experience/male old/male young/white male/black male/white woman/ will help this nation until we find a point where we can get along. Just my personal take.
I like Sarah. I think she is the best woman politician to come down the Alaskan pike...>MY GOD, she's damn strong. BUt would I vote for McCain because of her. Don't know. Part of me wants to see how she would handle the job as president if God forbid McCAin kicks the bucket.
Honestly, I am tempted to vote for McCain just to see a woman come close to leading this country. But it will only come down to issues that are fair and balanced for all. But, can we really ask for fairness for all? We want what we want.....
Bush's record ripped the trust to shreds in this country imo for 8 years.
A black man will be our new president, mark my words. HE deserves it. I hate to say that it's because he is black that he will get elected, but newness is freshness.....as is the case with Sarah Palin.
Policies have to be the reason we vote...... bottom line.
I am headed into retirement in five years. THE NCLB act is what it is. It needs adjustments. As an educator, I believe no matter who is elected into office, there will be corrections made in the educational system.
But, the bigger issue I believe to be on the docket is
Female rights.
Gay rights.
The rights of the unborn.
Taxes, Rich, vs waste for the poor
HEALTH CARE?
Those are critical issues. I would love to know how McCain and Palin plan to help the poor in this nation.
Obama has a plan, obviously. OR does he?
This is an historical election, indeed. But, we must not lose sight of the bottom line.
TO argue that we are safer since 9-11 is silly, imo.
We have lost our reputation in the world. We are in trillions of dollars in debt. My gosh.
Will McCain stop that spending rage?
-
Obama doesn't DESERVE to be president.
He can be president if he earns the people's trust and wins the majority of the electoral votes.
-
Obama doesn't DESERVE to be president.
He can be president if he earns the people's trust and wins the majority of the electoral votes.
Your opinion, BT>...that he doesn't deserve the position.
He will earn that place....and he will show that he deserved to be there, in the end...mark my words.
-
If he earns it, he deserves it.
He hasn't, so he doesn't.
We will know if he earned it come november.
That's not an opinion, that is a fact.
Would he deserve to be president if he loses the election?
Not according to the voters whose opinion counts.
-
Is ANYONE left, even of his most faithful followers, who is willing to believe that while Obama is unfit due to "inexperience" to assume command of the U.S. military, Miss Alaska (almost) who hasn't even served out a full term as Governor, IS fit? McCain stoked the fires of fear, scared his followers with the prospect of the "inexperienced" Obama as C-in-C, psyched them to the point where they were convinced that only he (McCain) had the "experience" to provide the protection they so desperately needed, and then tells these thoroughly frightened people that if anything happens to him, they're in the good hands of Ms. Palin Please.
Look on the bright side: if McBush croaks and the babe ends up in charge, and that call comes at three in the morning, she'll probably already be up feeding the baby or changing it's diaper.
-
Is ANYONE left, even of his most faithful followers, who is willing to believe that while Obama is unfit due to "inexperience" to assume command of the U.S. military, Miss Alaska (almost) who hasn't even served out a full term as Governor, IS fit? McCain stoked the fires of fear, scared his followers with the prospect of the "inexperienced" Obama as C-in-C, psyched them to the point where they were convinced that only he (McCain) had the "experience" to provide the protection they so desperately needed, and then tells these thoroughly frightened people that if anything happens to him, they're in the good hands of Ms. Palin Please.
Look on the bright side: if McBush croaks and the babe ends up in charge, and that call comes at three in the morning, she'll probably already be up feeding the baby or changing it's diaper.
2008 stay at home dads
-
If he earns it, he deserves it.
He hasn't, so he doesn't.
We will know if he earned it come november.
That's not an opinion, that is a fact.
Would he deserve to be president if he loses the election?
Not according to the voters whose opinion counts.
He will earn it. He does deserve it. No question about it. . . Opinion ? Sure.
He will win the election. The movement against the status quo leans in his direction.
He deserves to win more so than Hillary, or McCain. Obama has proven that he is capable to be the first African American to hit such a high mark in such a powerful arena.
Of course he deserves to win. He has already proven that he is better than a female whos husband was the president for eight years. She was a lead candidate for years....look at her now..
Obama will win. He has proven he deserves to win.
Would he deserve to be president if he loses the election?
Not according to the voters whose opinion counts.
Wrong.
Remember what happened in Florida ....paper trail.....
He will be president. The times demand so.
However, Sarah just might find herself a presidential candidate in the next eight years.
What a time in which we live, and vote.
-
McCain's campaign rests on two primary emotions, hate and fear.
Got a quote or otherwise an example of this?
-
<<Got a quote or otherwise an example of this?>>
Every time he or his surrogates talk about Obama's unfitness to be commander in chief, or McCain's fitness to be commander in chief, it's an appeal to fear. All this talk of fitness or unfitness to be commander in chief is really saying, "If you vote for Obama, he can't protect you and your enemies will destroy you." Hatred is in the racist ads, the most famous one being the bimbo ad, images of Obama and images of Paris Hilton.
It's pointless to look for quotes, these are emotional issues and the pitches are made in non-verbal ways - - even the most racist ads today can't use the N-word, so the Republicans have to find more subtle ways to get the message across.
-
<<Got a quote or otherwise an example of this?>>
Every time he or his surrogates talk about Obama's unfitness to be commander in chief, or McCain's fitness to be commander in chief, it's an appeal to fear. All this talk of fitness or unfitness to be commander in chief is really saying, "If you vote for Obama, he can't protect you and your enemies will destroy you." Hatred is in the racist ads, the most famous one being the bimbo ad, images of Obama and images of Paris Hilton.
It's pointless to look for quotes, these are emotional issues and the pitches are made in non-verbal ways - - even the most racist ads today can't use the N-word, so the Republicans have to find more subtle ways to get the message across.
I have a Quote now ,it is from you.
-
<<Got a quote or otherwise an example of this?>>
Every time he or his surrogates talk about Obama's unfitness to be commander in chief, or McCain's fitness to be commander in chief, it's an appeal to fear. All this talk of fitness or unfitness to be commander in chief is really saying, "If you vote for Obama, he can't protect you and your enemies will destroy you." Hatred is in the racist ads, the most famous one being the bimbo ad, images of Obama and images of Paris Hilton.
It's pointless to look for quotes, these are emotional issues and the pitches are made in non-verbal ways - - even the most racist ads today can't use the N-word, so the Republicans have to find more subtle ways to get the message across.
What is one mans fear is another mans security. Mikey you fear freedom,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
-
<<What is one mans fear is another mans security. >>
You're just playing with words, Kramer. The basic emotion behind a craving for security is fear. If you're not afraid of anything you don't need any security.
McCain's campaign is based on the need for an "experienced" (therefore strong) Commander-in-Chief; and conversely the need to avoid getting an "inexperienced" (i.e., weak) C-in-C. If this were a war on elephants or a war on Bad Breath, nobody in his right mind would give a shit who the Commander in Chief was or how experienced or inexperienced he was. The only reason the voters are supposed to care about this is because "terrorists" are a mortal danger to Americans and their families. A strong comander in chief will "defeat" the "terrorists" and prevent them from hurting you. A weak commander in chief will NOT defeat the "terrorists," which leaves you and your family vulnerable.
McCain's campaign is that he'll be a good commander-in-chief and Obama won't. So he can protect you and your family and Obama can't. So - - you're protected if most of you vote for McCain and you're not protected if most of you vote for Obama.
Now you can call that an appeal to "security" if you like, but "security" is not a basic emotion. The basic emotion behind the need for security is FEAR. When McCain says he can keep you safe as C-in-C, but Obama can't, that is appealing directly to the voters' FEAR. Vote for Obama and the incompetent schmuck will allow the "terrorists" to overrun the country, poisoning the food supplies, blowing up the school buses, pissing in the wells. We're all fucked. Vote for McCain and the "war hero" will take charge of the army, turn them on the "terrorists" and whip their ass forever and we'll all live happily ever after. It's really a no-brainer. You wanna die with your family in a "terrorist" explosion or wouldja rather go out for ice cream with your family without ever having to even think about bombings? THAT is what I meant when I said that McCain's campaign is based on fear.
-
<<What is one mans fear is another mans security. >>
You're just playing with words, Kramer. The basic emotion behind a craving for security is fear. If you're not afraid of anything you don't need any security.
McCain's campaign is based on the need for an "experienced" (therefore strong) Commander-in-Chief; and conversely the need to avoid getting an "inexperienced" (i.e., weak) C-in-C. If this were a war on elephants or a war on Bad Breath, nobody in his right mind would give a shit who the Commander in Chief was or how experienced or inexperienced he was. The only reason the voters are supposed to care about this is because "terrorists" are a mortal danger to Americans and their families. A strong comander in chief will "defeat" the "terrorists" and prevent them from hurting you. A weak commander in chief will NOT defeat the "terrorists," which leaves you and your family vulnerable.
McCain's campaign is that he'll be a good commander-in-chief and Obama won't. So he can protect you and your family and Obama can't. So - - you're protected if most of you vote for McCain and you're not protected if most of you vote for Obama.
Now you can call that an appeal to "security" if you like, but "security" is not a basic emotion. The basic emotion behind the need for security is FEAR. When McCain says he can keep you safe as C-in-C, but Obama can't, that is appealing directly to the voters' FEAR. Vote for Obama and the incompetent schmuck will allow the "terrorists" to overrun the country, poisoning the food supplies, blowing up the school buses, pissing in the wells. We're all fucked. Vote for McCain and the "war hero" will take charge of the army, turn them on the "terrorists" and whip their ass forever and we'll all live happily ever after. It's really a no-brainer. You wanna die with your family in a "terrorist" explosion or wouldja rather go out for ice cream with your family without ever having to even think about bombings? THAT is what I meant when I said that McCain's campaign is based on fear.
Cool quotes for me to use about Putin and the Fearfull Russians.
-
Is ANYONE left, even of his most faithful followers, who is willing to believe that while Obama is unfit due to "inexperience" to assume command of the U.S. military, Miss Alaska (almost) who hasn't even served out a full term as Governor, IS fit? McCain stoked the fires of fear, scared his followers with the prospect of the "inexperienced" Obama as C-in-C, psyched them to the point where they were convinced that only he (McCain) had the "experience" to provide the protection they so desperately needed, and then tells these thoroughly frightened people that if anything happens to him, they're in the good hands of Ms. Palin??? Please.
Long and short of it: McCain blew it.
I'd point out that almost Miss Alaska is a state governor. On the strength of that, she has more executive experience than Messrs. Obama, Biden and McCain put together.
-
<<What is one mans fear is another mans security. >>
You're just playing with words, Kramer. The basic emotion behind a craving for security is fear. If you're not afraid of anything you don't need any security.
McCain's campaign is based on the need for an "experienced" (therefore strong) Commander-in-Chief; and conversely the need to avoid getting an "inexperienced" (i.e., weak) C-in-C. If this were a war on elephants or a war on Bad Breath, nobody in his right mind would give a shit who the Commander in Chief was or how experienced or inexperienced he was. The only reason the voters are supposed to care about this is because "terrorists" are a mortal danger to Americans and their families. A strong comander in chief will "defeat" the "terrorists" and prevent them from hurting you. A weak commander in chief will NOT defeat the "terrorists," which leaves you and your family vulnerable.
McCain's campaign is that he'll be a good commander-in-chief and Obama won't. So he can protect you and your family and Obama can't. So - - you're protected if most of you vote for McCain and you're not protected if most of you vote for Obama.
Now you can call that an appeal to "security" if you like, but "security" is not a basic emotion. The basic emotion behind the need for security is FEAR. When McCain says he can keep you safe as C-in-C, but Obama can't, that is appealing directly to the voters' FEAR. Vote for Obama and the incompetent schmuck will allow the "terrorists" to overrun the country, poisoning the food supplies, blowing up the school buses, pissing in the wells. We're all fucked. Vote for McCain and the "war hero" will take charge of the army, turn them on the "terrorists" and whip their ass forever and we'll all live happily ever after. It's really a no-brainer. You wanna die with your family in a "terrorist" explosion or wouldja rather go out for ice cream with your family without ever having to even think about bombings? THAT is what I meant when I said that McCain's campaign is based on fear.
Mikey,
When was the last time 92% of caucasion's were in favor of a particular candidate? How do you explain this kind of support? White guilt is a fear.
Normal people don't vote for race -- we vote for the best choice.
You see Mikey, Dems are scared people that vote based on emotion and scared is an emotion.
-
<<Cool quotes for me to use about Putin and the Fearfull Russians.>>
? ? ? It took you until now to realize that the Russians are afraid of foreign invasions??
They have BEEN invaded. Several times within living memory. Tens of millions of them have been killed. They have every right to fear foreign invasion. They lived through it.
-
<<Cool quotes for me to use about Putin and the Fearfull Russians.>>
? ? ? It took you until now to realize that the Russians are afraid of foreign invasions??
They have BEEN invaded. Several times within living memory. Tens of millions of them have been killed. They have every right to fear foreign invasion. They lived through it.
Not the current generation , they have no moreof their "greatest Generation" than we do.
What they have lived through was a complete deconstruction of the system that relied on their fear , their vunerability was total and what did we do about it?
Nothing of course , Invadeing Russia would be bad for business in a big way , even destroying them from afar is bad business.
Persuedeing them to Join NATO , that would be good business.
Unfortunately Demigogues and Imperailists seem to be on the uptic. Imperialism has been obsolete for more than a century , some one should tell them .
-
no one deserves to be president unless they win the election.
No one deserves to be president because they are black or female or a senior senator or military hero.
no one deserves to be president because they vanquished formidable opponents in the primaries.
They only deserve to be president if they win the election.
And in Florida, Bush won the election.
If Obama wins the election, then he deserves it and not until then.
Deserving to be President is not about qualifications or right time right place. It isn't about birthright,
It is about meeting the requirement to be sworn in, which is to win the election.
-
<<they have no moreof their "greatest Generation" than we do.>>
You know, plane, I myself have some homefront memories of WWII. There are plenty of us around. The difference would be, if I were in Russia, my memories of the war would be pretty grim. My kids would know my story like it was their own. Their friends' parents would have similar stories, and know them as well as my kids would know mine. I spent three weeks in Moscow apartment about 15 years ago. I remember waking up the first day, looking out the window at three huge apartment buildings just like the one I was in, hundreds, maybe thousands of windows and thinking - - behind each window there's a different story of the German invasion. And when I mentioned this to our hostess, a young woman in her twenties, she nodded vigorously - - every one of them has a story, even those that weren't born then.
<<What they have lived through was a complete deconstruction of the system that relied on their fear , their vunerability was total and what did we do about it? . . . >>
plane, that is just not true. With all due respect, you're talking about a very small minority of the population, the Solzhenitsyn's and their right-wing ideological friends, the political junkies with all of their smart-ass criticisms of the state, the Jews who wanted out - - maybe those folks lived in fear, they had opinions they were afraid to disclose, sure. Most people weren't involved.
<< . . . Nothing of course , Invadeing Russia would be bad for business in a big way , even destroying them from afar is bad business.>>
Especially since they can destroy YOU from afar too.
<<Persuedeing them to Join NATO , that would be good business.>>
How is it good business to persuade one small country to threaten one big country? Whose business is that good for?
<<Unfortunately Demigogues and Imperailists seem to be on the uptic. Imperialism has been obsolete for more than a century , some one should tell them .>>
Your comments are kind of surrealistic, coming from a right-wing American. If imperialism has been obsolete for over a century, what were you doing in Viet Nam? What are you doing in Iraq? Who should tell YOU?
-
I've looked at this from every angle, and I only see one conclusion: ...
Which of course is based on a terminal anti McSame, anti Bush, anti Republican bias........so, what would that supposedly "objective" conclusion be now...........?
...with this one appointment, McCain has shot himself in the foot - - fatally....Long and short of it: McCain blew it.
Wow.......what a stunning revelation, given the source :D
McCain's campaign rests on two primary emotions, hate and fear.
And when one starts with a false premise, no need to follow-on. See, it's not hard at all Tee. It just flows from you like a babbling brook. Thanks, for more of the entertaining hyperbole
-
I'd point out that almost Miss Alaska is a state governor. On the strength of that, she has more executive experience than Messrs. Obama, Biden and McCain put together.
ding ding......give that man a cigar 8)
-
Your comments are kind of surrealistic, coming from a right-wing American. If imperialism has been obsolete for over a century, what were you doing in Viet Nam? What are you doing in Iraq? Who should tell YOU?
Not imperialism.
No ambition to take territory or resorces is defensable in those circumstances , confrontation with an evil that opresses the aspiration of mankind for freedom explains it so well that millions of Americans volenteer to join the effort.
Empire? Who woud join the Imperial American army? That appeal would not fill the Coast Guard.
In Russia on the other hand Putin is running the government from outside the office and is getting huge approval rateings , I understand this from our own history , it is a period of Manifest destiny .
-
Purely opinion of course, but it sure seems to be validated time and time again. That being;
If someone from the hard left hyperbolically condemns X, I can pretty much count on X being a good thing.
If someone from the hard left staunchly claims X about republicans, conservatives, Christians, or some individual that fits those labels, I can pretty much count on said accusation being so wrong, as to be a bald faced lie
If someone from the hard left is singing the praises of X, I can pretty much bank on it not just being bad for Conservative principals, but likely America as well, if not globally
That'd be for the most part of course. I'm sure there must be thos rarified instances where both the left & right will condemn X, almost equally. Alas, not many
-
no one deserves to be president unless they win the election.
No one deserves to be president because they are black or female or a senior senator or military hero.
no one deserves to be president because they vanquished formidable opponents in the primaries.
They only deserve to be president if they win the election.
And in Florida, Bush won the election.
If Obama wins the election, then he deserves it and not until then.
Deserving to be President is not about qualifications or right time right place. It isn't about birthright,
It is about meeting the requirement to be sworn in, which is to win the election.
Obama deserves to be the next president of the United States.
-
Obama deserves to be the next president of the United States.
Is it his birthright?
Is he entitled?
Will it be a gross injustice if he loses?
Obama does not DESERVE to be president.
Neither does McCain.
The person who DESERVES to be president is the one who wins.
-
<<[What was America doing in Viet Nam? In Iraq? Not imperialism.>>
I say that imperialism is not an explanation, it is the ONLY explanation of what America was doing in Viet Nam AND Iraq.
<<No ambition to take territory or resorces is defensable in those circumstances ,>>
It might not be defensible, but that does not stop it from being what you did in Viet Nam and are doing in Iraq.
<<confrontation with an evil that opresses the aspiration of mankind for freedom explains it so well that millions of Americans volenteer to join the effort.>>
It explains nothing. The "evil" that you were "confronting" in Vietnam was a communist-led nationalist movement that had the support -- according to Eisenhower himself, who decided to back the puppet South Vietnamese governement in its refusal to hold fair elections - - of 80% of the population of South Vietnam. EISENHOWER said 80%, I didn't. You had a French-occupied zone of Viet Nam which by treaty was obligated to hold elections , an unelected government of former French civil servants took it over and refused to hold elections, and EISENHOWER backed them, using the justification that if elections were held, 80% of the South Vietnamese would vote for Ho Chi Minh.
That's a great reason to block elections - - because you don't like the guy who's got the most votes. But it's sure typical of American policy, only they're not usually so honest about it.
Usually they are like plane, and raise some phony claim, "Oh we are doing it because they have WMD and we are in great danger from them," or in the case of Viet Nam, "Oh they are so evil that we must confront them and stop them." The fucking NAZIS were so evil, yet the U.S.A. made NO attempt to attack them or overthrow their government. The Trujillo government in the DR, the Batista government in Cuba and the Somoza government in Nicaragua were also "so evil" yet the U.S.A. did not attack THEM, they supported them to the end. If the Viet Minh really WERE as evil as the U.S. government claimed they were, the U.S. would not have "confronted" them, they would have supported them.
So thank you for your explanation that the U.S. in Viet Nam was not practising imperialism, but was "confronting" "evil." Rarely do I hear such ridiculous bullshit, but I thank you for publishing it because it's a pleasure to denounce it and demonstrate the absurdity of it.
<<Empire? Who woud join the Imperial American army? That appeal would not fill the Coast Guard.>>
Strange. And yet the Imperial American army IS filled, as is the Coast Guard. Who fills it? I have already told you who I think fills it, lowlife scum, killers, thugs, rapists, sadists and bullies, guys who in Ontario we used to call seven year men, i.e., it took them seven years to get through five years of high school. The so-called low-hanging fruit.
And now I think I'll tell ya who I REALLY think fills it: poor kids, green card wannabes, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, Salvadorans, Hondurans, kids looking for adventure, patriotic kids, kids who want to blow people's heads off or torture them with a knife, kids from military families, rapists and perverts, Southerners, minority kids looking for a way out; and I'll even tell ya who DOESN'T fill the Imperial American Army: A-students from good schools, rich kids, Congressmen's kids, Bush administration kids, children of neocons, and the children of the CEOs, CFOs and CIOs of the Fortune 500 and kids with scholarships from Ivy league schools.
-
Biden's son is deploying this month.
Palin's son in October.
Webb's son was there.
McCain's son has served.
You are on a roll for being wrong.
-
d'oh
-
Biden's son is deploying this month.
Palin's son in October.
Webb's son was there.
McCain's son has served.
You are on a roll for being wrong.
======================================================
No, I knew you were going to raise those examples - - you fell right into the trap - - their rarity only proves the truth of what I am saying. Hundreds of Congressmen, a group of serving sons I can count on the fingers of one hand. Thanks, sucker. And thanks to Little Sir Echo, too.
-
Biden's son is deploying this month.
Palin's son in October.
Webb's son was there.
McCain's son has served.
You are on a roll for being wrong.
======================================================
No, I knew you were going to raise those examples - - you fell right into the trap - - their rarity only proves the truth of what I am saying. Hundreds of Congressmen, a group of serving sons I can count on the fingers of one hand. Thanks, sucker. And thanks to Little Sir Echo, too.
If it is so rare , how did it become so common with Presidental canadates?
-
Obama deserves to be the next president of the United States.
Is it his birthright?
Is he entitled?
Will it be a gross injustice if he loses?
Obama does not DESERVE to be president.
Neither does McCain.
The person who DESERVES to be president is the one who wins.
I believe in my opinion, BT, that Obama/Biden deserve to lead this country for at LEAST four years.
Point on point in my opinion...
yes
no
Sure he does
Sure HE does to some folks
but in my opinion the person who deserves to be president is Obama.
-
<<If it is so rare , how did it become so common with Presidental canadates?>>
I never said it was rare for Presidential candidates, I said that it was extremely rare for the sons and daughters of Congressmen. And I stand by that; and the few exceptions, which I can count on the fingers of one hand, prove that I'm right.
-
Obama deserves to be the next president of the United States.
Is it his birthright?
Is he entitled?
Will it be a gross injustice if he loses?
Obama does not DESERVE to be president.
Neither does McCain.
The person who DESERVES to be president is the one who wins.
I believe in my opinion, BT, that Obama/Biden deserve to lead this country for at LEAST four years.
Point on point in my opinion...
yes
no
Sure he does
Sure HE does to some folks
but in my opinion the person who deserves to be president is Obama.
What the Presidential canadate deserves is of no consequence , elese I would argue that McCains suffering in service of the country make him deserveing.
But I do not , what the canadate deseerves is very much less important than what the need of the Nation is.
However much the canadate deserves the question must be asked , which one is the best one for us the US?
And the answer to that question is the primary answer.
-
<<If it is so rare , how did it become so common with Presidental canadates?>>
I never said it was rare for Presidential candidates, I said that it was extremely rare for the sons and daughters of Congressmen. And I stand by that; and the few exceptions, which I can count on the fingers of one hand, prove that I'm right.
How much diffrence does this make in the Presidential race then?
The Republican Main and Veep have direct concern with a serviceman in the family , the Democrats picked a Veep with this strong connection.
Pretty good on both.
-
How much diffrence does this make in the Presidential race then?
The Republican Main and Veep have direct concern with a serviceman in the family , the Democrats picked a Veep with this strong connection.
Pretty good on both.
===================================================
Yeah, keep in mind this whole discussion on serving sons came about only incidentally, because I was anwering a question from you about who would join an Imperial American Army, and I mentioned various classes who WOULDN'T, one of which happened to be Congressmen's kids. It wasn't mentioned in the context of candidates for election.
-
define "deserves".
One of us is misusing the meaning or misunderstanding the other.
Back when the Buffulo Bills were going to the superbowl every other year and coming away empty handed by the fourth time around many said they deserved to win because they had been there so many times.
What nonsense. The team that deserves to win is the team that scores the most points.
Presidential elections are not so different.
-
How much diffrence does this make in the Presidential race then?
The Republican Main and Veep have direct concern with a serviceman in the family , the Democrats picked a Veep with this strong connection.
Pretty good on both.
===================================================
Yeah, keep in mind this whole discussion on serving sons came about only incidentally, because I was anwering a question from you about who would join an Imperial American Army, and I mentioned various classes who WOULDN'T, one of which happened to be Congressmen's kids. It wasn't mentioned in the context of candidates for election.
We do not have a class that would.
-
define "deserves".
One of us is misusing the meaning or misunderstanding the other.
Back when the Buffulo Bills were going to the superbowl every other year and coming away empty handed by the fourth time around many said they deserved to win because they had been there so many times.
What nonsense. The team that deserves to win is the team that scores the most points.
Presidential elections are not so different.
'
Come on BT.....the point is this;
I am saying that Obama deserves to win based on MY O P I N I ON!!!!!
IMO
imo
IN my O
i MY op
IMopywan kanopee....
= ;D
I have every right to believe that he deserves to win the presidency of the United STates of this America if I chose to say so.
I do believe that he deserves to win.
Period.
You already know why.
-
Come on Cindy
In your Opinion
In Your Opinion
In Your Opinion
I get that you believe that he is the better candidate
I get that you will probably vote for him.
I get that you WANT him to win.
But i still fail to see why he deserves to win, why he is entitled to win , because in my OPINION those terms are synonymous.
-
De gustibus non disputatum.
But if you want to be persursuasive , you have to be able to say why.
-
Come on Cindy
In your Opinion
In Your Opinion
In Your Opinion
I get that you believe that he is the better candidate
I get that you will probably vote for him.
I get that you WANT him to win.
But i still fail to see why he deserves to win, why he is entitled to win , because in my OPINION those terms are synonymous.
In my opinion, I believe that Obama deserves to win more so than McCain.
He deserves to win IMO because he stands for the points closet to my heart. Education being number one, which impacts children's futures, which impacts all Americans in the long run. The status quo of the NCLB act is not working as it should. He knows that. He has more awareness of the broken pieces than McCain. So, for that reason, alone, I feel that Obama deserves to win for the child's sake.
-
He deserves to win IMO because he stands for the points closet to my heart.
Again. Define deserves.
I have no problem with you saying that Obama meets more of your selection criteria than McCain although i'm curious why you put NCLB ahead of the abortion issue. I thought you said in a previous post that that was KEY.
I do have a problem with Obama being entitled to win because he meets your selection criteria.
-
He deserves to win IMO because he stands for the points closet to my heart.
Again. Define deserves.
I have no problem with you saying that Obama meets more of your selection criteria than McCain although i'm curious why you put NCLB ahead of the abortion issue. I thought you said in a previous post that that was KEY.
I do have a problem with Obama being entitled to win because he meets your selection criteria.
THat was a difficult choice to make, BT. It is one of the KEYs. It is. But, the nation's children, and our own future is at stake. We can not continue providing only three subject areas reading writing and math to millions of children. There is so much more to a quality education. If McCain mentions even once that he understands the broken act needs tweaked...he's probably going to be looking pretty good to me, as well. It's a tough one for me. But, for now the children DESERVE more.
In my opinion, Obama deserves to win because of his background. He is the first black male to run for president of the USA. Of course in that way, I feel he deserves to win. Who wouldn't feel that way. Obama deserves to win. You are entitled to your opinion about the word deserves.
In many ways, Obama is the 21st century's "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" candidate, in my opinion. Why not say a man deserves to be president? He deserves it more so than McCain, imo. Obama has in some ways worked harder for it than McCain, who lost the first time around to Bush. Seems that McCain did not have the ability to do it the first time around. How can anyone say that HE deserves a second chance? I am for the candidate who will bring a fresh approach to our country. Look how things have turned out for 8 years? Gas prices, war, education? Under Bush, the abortions just keep on keepin on, BT. So how will that really change under McCain, who is not nearly as "right" as Bush.
-
If McCain mentions even once that he understands the broken act needs tweaked...he's probably going to be looking pretty good to me, as well. It's a tough one for me. But, for now the children DESERVE more.
Perhaps you should up on it.
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ce50b5-daa8-4795-b92d-92bd0d985bca.htm (http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ce50b5-daa8-4795-b92d-92bd0d985bca.htm)
-
If McCain mentions even once that he understands the broken act needs tweaked...he's probably going to be looking pretty good to me, as well. It's a tough one for me. But, for now the children DESERVE more.
Perhaps you should up on it.
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ce50b5-daa8-4795-b92d-92bd0d985bca.htm (http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ce50b5-daa8-4795-b92d-92bd0d985bca.htm)
No Child Left Behind has focused our attention on the realities of how students perform against a common standard. John McCain believes that we can no longer accept low standards for some students and high standards for others.
No where does McCain mention that he is aware that the NCLB act is indeed in need of a major overhaul- broken. Talk about low standards? Under the act, too many schools are not receiving enough, Ami. I do believe that the agenda on the conservative side of the arena is interested in overloading the public schools with "just do the basics" in order to enhance their own desire for vouchers. Let's put the screws to teh PS's and then the families will be forced to seek home schooling or other quality schools. To coin a phrase BZZZZZZZ. It simply isn't enough for McCain to state that he thinks we could do better. Obama was quoted (on video) saying how the act needs tweaked in precise ways. But, that video was shunned by the good folks on this board...laughed at by the Sirfly don't bother me.
It escapes the general population and those of you on this board who refuse to believe that the NCLB act is helping this nation's children. It hasn't so far. It has only encouraged systems to teach the basics RWM..and that's all!-----I have said it once and I'll say it again the NCLB act is leaving not only children behind but quality education in the dust.
-
Then read it all. Did you read the continuation page?
John McCain Will Build On The Lessons Of No Child Left Behind (NCLB). There should be an emphasis on standards and accountability. However, our goal cannot be group averages. Instead, our focus should be to inspire every child to strive to reach his or her potential. While NCLB has been invaluable in providing a clear picture of which schools and students are struggling, it is only the beginning of education reform.
There is plenty of stuff there. You just haven't bothered to read it.
-
If McCain mentions even once that he understands the broken act needs tweaked...he's probably going to be looking pretty good to me, as well. It's a tough one for me. But, for now the children DESERVE more.
Perhaps you should up on it.
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ce50b5-daa8-4795-b92d-92bd0d985bca.htm (http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ce50b5-daa8-4795-b92d-92bd0d985bca.htm)
No Child Left Behind has focused our attention on the realities of how students perform against a common standard. John McCain believes that we can no longer accept low standards for some students and high standards for others.
No where does McCain mention that he is aware that the NCLB act is indeed in need of a major overhaul- broken. Talk about low standards? Under the act, too many schools are not receiving enough, Ami. I do believe that the agenda on the conservative side of the arena is interested in overloading the public schools with "just do the basics" in order to enhance their own desire for vouchers. Let's put the screws to teh PS's and then the families will be forced to seek home schooling or other quality schools. To coin a phrase BZZZZZZZ. It simply isn't enough for McCain to state that he thinks we could do better. Obama was quoted (on video) saying how the act needs tweaked in precise ways. But, that video was shunned by the good folks on this board...laughed at by the Sirfly don't bother me.
It escapes the general population and those of you on this board who refuse to believe that the NCLB act is helping this nation's children. It hasn't so far. It has only encouraged systems to teach the basics RWM..and that's all!-----I have said it once and I'll say it again the NCLB act is leaving not only children behind but quality education in the dust.
Then quit the union honey and get the politics out of our children's education... or just get the government out of the education business all-together and leave it to private interests. Tax Incentives
-
<<Then quit the union honey and get the politics out of our children's education... or just get the government out of the education business all-together and leave it to private interests. Tax Incentives>>
Hilarious advice.
Quit the union, honey. Get back to the days when the teachers swept the floors, washed the windows, heated the building, shoveled the walks and somehow found the time to squeeze in a few minutes of book-larnin somewhere in the course of their busy days. Didn't get paid a helluva lot but then lotsa good folk were prepared to stand the teacher a good solid meal at their own tables mebbe oncet a fortnight in rotation. None a them teachers starved to death, believe you me.
It gets better: Just get the government out of th education business altogether and leave it to private interests. Back to the 16th century!! The faster the better!! Do we need more educated citizens or do we need more trained robotic killers who will go anywhere, no questions asked, and kill anyone they're told to kill. Privatize. Let the bastards go to Enron University. Blackwater College. The Halliburton School of Government Contracting. Training for the Real World by Real Robots.
Kramer, I bet if McCain wins and then kicks it two months into his term, Palin's gonna select YOU to be her Education Czar. You're a natural for the position.
-
Sirs didn't write the post you responded to.
BTW both Biden and Obama attended private schools.
Far as i can tell of the 4 only Palin is a public school product.
-
Sirs didn't write the post you responded to.
BTW both Biden and Obama attended private schools.
Far as i can tell of the 4 only Palin is a public school product.
SirFly sure does butt in on my posts, however... enough so that I have shellysir ;) shock..
Ok seriously, now. I am going to read the entire article. Chalking this evening up. Had a rough patch of an afternoon with a family member in crisis. I should know better than to reply to Ami without some serious thought. I do trust your reply posts, Ami..... So, hey I am sorry for jumpin' to conclusions.
I will re read the entire article. Believe it or not, I do want McCain to come on board when it comes to reform, and change.
I am opened minded more than some around here, afterall.
Later....
Cindy
-
My apologies. My last post should have been a reply to Kramer and not sirs. I corrected it. Thanks, BT.
-
My apologies. My last post should have been a reply to Kramer and not sirs. I corrected it. Thanks, BT.
NP i know how sensitive you are to your advanced age and didn't want the folks around here thinking you had gone senile on us.
-
Sirs didn't write the post you responded to. BTW both Biden and Obama attended private schools. Far as i can tell of the 4 only Palin is a public school product.
SirFly sure does butt in on my posts, however... enough so that I have shellysir shock..
In English?
-
<<NP i know how sensitive you are to your advanced age and didn't want the folks around here thinking you had gone senile on us. >>
LOL
Don't worry about it. When it happens, it happens.
-
Don't worry about it. When it happens, it happens.
Ain't that the truth.