Sarah Palin

[Krom]

Man after listening through a bunch of speeches from the RNC, I have to say I'm getting rather tired of hearing about how awesome Sarah Palin is.

If she is so incredible...why isn't she one running for president?

[Cuda68]

Sarah Palin's speech was fantastic. I honestly believe she was the right choice for the Republican Party's VP pick.

VOTE REPUBLICAN

Bet you can't tell where I stand

[Kiran]

Wow, I like Palin's attitude.

I definitely want Palin for VP. Not sure about McCain as President, but I have at least a couple more months to do more research, watch the debates, and make my decision. For now, it's (atm unknownly why)McCain for President and definitely a go for Palin as VP. On the other side, I'm not for Obama on the whole raising taxes to give to the (my definition) high school dropouts who didn't try to work hard for years to succeed. Why do I want a large sum of my hard earned dollars to go to someone who chose to work at Hardee's and smoke pot for a living? I do, to an extent, agree that we should contribute something to society. I don't believe in working my a** off for years and struggling to save money for retirement and have somebody come along and say I have to send off a large sum of my money to those who decide to not work much.

FYI clarifying information about possibility of pressuring Bristol into marrying Levi: I have previously read that according to Levi's mom, they have already planned to wed and that the baby is a bonus.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/0 ... tml?page=2

[Will Robinson]

Man after listening through a bunch of speeches from the RNC, I have to say I'm getting rather tired of hearing about how awesome Sarah Palin is.

If she is so incredible...why isn't she one running for president?

I think what you are seeing is the collective indignation raised by the complete hypocrisy of Obama suggesting Palin is too inexperienced for the job.

Basically the defense of Palin is proportional to the unjust attacks on her ability and background. If the lefty's had left her experience out and simply gone after her position on issues there wouldn't be so much attention paid to her. As it stands now playing the experience card by Obama is turning out to be a Pandora's Box for him because it's obvious to everyone that she really does have more experience and challenging her on that issue is calling attention to Obama's lack of experience.

Think about it like this for a minute, switch to total objective mode.
Without thinking of the person Obama and the person Palin just add up their resume entries.

One has the resume that actually has executive experience and in that job has done admirable work ranking as one of the best among other executives in that position as well as being a reformer who put principle above party to the extent that she turned in corrupt officials in her own party.

The other has experience as a community organizer (but the records are sealed) and as a legislator but no accomplishments in that job, primarily because he has spent his time either avoiding taking a position or campaigning for the next job position.

They both give good speeches on why they should have the job they seek.

Now it sure looks to me that the female candidate is qualified on her own and certainly by comparisson to the other candidate experience wouldn't be an issue at all.

Now go back and look at all the months, years in fact, that the male candidate has been seeking the job and count up the stories in the media that question his experience qualifications...

Now go add up the stories that question the female candidates experience qualifications....

It looks to me that in the few days that the female has been up for the job, even though she has more experience, she has had many, many, times more questions raised by the media about her alleged lack of experience than the male candidate has in the years that he has been running for the job!!

So it is certainly no wonder that people are getting a little fired up about the whole issue. the media and the Obama team are due for a big slap upside the head for their hypocrisy.

[Krom]

But it isn't like McCain has any executive experience either, if Bush is any indication executive experience doesn't mean someone will make a good world leader.

Basically I see this \"look how much executive experience the vice president has!\" line and the only thing I think is how easily swept under the rug the vice president is. No matter how much of a go-getter she is, I have absolutely no reason to believe anyone in Washington or McCain himself will listen to a single word she says once they are in office.

It really doesn't matter how good she is, since unless McCain has a stroke she won't be the one making any decisions, nor will she have any input on them. She was a thorn in the republican parties side in Alaska, so they decided to try and promote her to a position where she can do nothing. The vice president is a redundancy, the entire extent of power the job has is a tie breaker. A perfect position to sit someone who genuinely tries to upset the usual business routines of the good ole boys.

[Kiran]

She was a thorn in the republican parties side in Alaska, so they decided to try and promote her to a position where she can do nothing.

So you're saying they decided to pick out a little-known effective governor of a state far from here and appoint her as VP just because she was shaking things up in her state and turning in corrupted members of her own party and taking care of her people (which is exactly what an elected leader is supposed to do).

I didn't do this research, but as far as I know she didn't seem to have any desire to go any higher up in the system. She was in the middle of governing Alaska when McCain out of the blue decides to pick her.

She does not seem the type that would just sit and be told what to do (come on, look what she did to/for the Alaskan people!). I highly, highly doubt that she would be placed in a position where she can do nothing. And, if anything, she may even make sure that McCain doesn't step out of line and do idiotic things like Bush did in his current term.

[Will Robinson]

Sure McCain can put her in a closet, send her to funerals of lesser foreign leaders and fund raisers etc.
Or he can wield her like a sword and put her out front of every controversial reform position he can so she gets the credit and blame depending on how things shake out.
I don't think he'll put her in the closet, she has too much talent and personality to waste like that and probably by the time they get elected she will be extremely popular which is very valuable to an administration who wants to go over the head of Congress and appeal to the voters to force their congressmen to support the White House plan.

They can play good cop bad cop with the press and just about every other entity that tries to get something out of the White House.

She can influence him and he her, just like any coworker relationship.
My guess is he will set policy and turn to her on a few issues to start with, if she makes him look good she'll be as busy as Cheney, if she doesn't deliver she'll be sent to her room.

[Gooberman]

Without thinking of the person Obama and the person Palin just add up their resume entries.

Ok, lets.

Obama:
B.A in political science from Columbia University, with a specialization in international relations
J.D. in Law from Hardvard, graduated magna cum laude; President of the Harvard Law Review
12 years (92-04) teaching constitutional law
7 years State Senator: sponsored more than 800 bills
4 years Senator for Illinos, a state with 12.8 million people

Palin:
Bachelor's in journalism from University of Idaho
4 years Wasilla City Council (8000 people)
6 years Wasilla mayor (8000 people)
1 year \"Ethics Commissioner of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission\"
20 months governor of a state with 660,000 people

I know we live in a society where a good education doesn't mean ★■◆● in the view of the public, (one of the reasons we suck so much at education!), but really......Sarah and Obama cannot be compared.

[Kiran]

Gooberman, when you laid it out like that, yah, I agree these two cannot be compared. Each were given different opportunities for their talent and education and thus each walked different paths. It's what they did with their time that, in my opinion, matters more.

[Krom]

:words:

McCain is a maverick. He is his own man and doesn't change depending on location or what others say. Wouldn't that usually include the redundant vice president?

Russia is waking from their nap and cooking up some breakfast. If we don't get ourselves in gear and our attention away from the gutters then we will be the ones on the lunch menu. All it would take right now is for Russia and China to get nice and cozy with each other while the USA is hopelessly clawing around in a hole in the middle east...and we will be permanently pushed off the worlds stage, where we can stay in Iraq for "100 years" and nobody will give a damn. Terrorism will be the least of our problems.

There is no future for this country anywhere in the middle east, or in fossil fuels period. Drilling is a diversion not a solution, at best it delays the inevitable, at worst it does nothing, goes nowhere and costs a lot of money in the process. We need a president who will really work hard on getting us permanently out of the middle east both militarily and economically.

It doesn't matter how good the VP choice is if the whole remainder of the party have their heads buried in middle eastern sand, we will still end up playing second or even third to Russia and China.

[Dakatsu]

Honestly, anyone feeling it would be good for Obama/Palin 08? I mean, Biden and McCain both have to be corrupt as hell, at least way more than Obama and Palin. I know it would never happen, but it would be kinda cool...

[Will Robinson]

Without thinking of the person Obama and the person Palin just add up their resume entries.

Ok, lets.

Obama:
B.A in political science from Columbia University, with a specialization in international relations
J.D. in Law from Hardvard, graduated magna cum laude; President of the Harvard Law Review
12 years (92-04) teaching constitutional law
7 years State Senator: sponsored more than 800 bills
4 years Senator for Illinos, a state with 12.8 million people

Palin:
Bachelor's in journalism from University of Idaho
4 years Wasilla City Council (8000 people)
6 years Wasilla mayor (8000 people)
1 year "Ethics Commissioner of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission"
20 months governor of a state with 660,000 people

I know we live in a society where a good education doesn't mean ***** in the view of the public, (one of the reasons we suck so much at education!), but really......Sarah and Obama cannot be compared.

If I was looking to accept someone for post graduate studies at a university I'd say he has her beat but if I want to hire someone to run a government I'd say he takes second place! She's done it on a couple different levels and he hasn't ever done it!

As for those bills he sponsored, you do realize that sponsoring a bill is not always anything important, the bulk of it is posturing for your constituents back home so you can say "I sponsored a bill that would have given you XYZ but the wascally wepublicans shot it down'... you know it's never going to pass but you do it specifically to have it on your record!! And now you know why...

Often it's something like congratulating the local sports team for winning the championship or renaming a government building after somebody famous etc.

How many bills did he author and get passed and what were they? That would be important since as a President he will have to offer up his ideas and get them through Congress! Has he done that?

List those accomplishments and the time he spent pursuing them and then list Palin's accomplishments and time spent pursuing them and then you will be comparing them on equal ground in the context of the jobs they are being considered for.

I don't have his breakdown other than to know that once he left the state senate and went to the U.S. Senate he really hasn't done anything other than campaign! You listed it as 4 years in the U.S. Senate but in reality it's only 150 days actually on the job and very little to show for it!
That equates to one half of his two terms if he gets elected President!!

Now remember we're comparing Obama, who wants to be President, to Palin who was chosen by his opponent to be a back up!!
I'll say it again, no matter how this comparison shakes out Obama is losing by virtue of having to get involved in the debate in the first place! He's having a hard time proving he's more qualified than McCains back up! The very process puts him in McCains shadow and his team is too stupid, or he's too proud (my guess), to recognize it.

My prediction is that if McCain can keep up the pressure Obama's pride is going to fuel his temper and he's going to blow it between now and November. He's going to go off like the time in the diner when he snapped at the reporter and answered the guys question with something like "Can't you just leave me alone and let me eat my pie?!?" I don't blame him for that by the way but I think he's had it way too easy, not just in this campaign but all the way since leaving school and if McCain can make him get in the game I think he'll crack.

[Tunnelcat]

I finally just found out that Sarah's husband DID quit his job to take care of the children, so I have to rescind my criticism of her career choices. They obviously very much look out for the welfare of their children if the father is willing to quit his job to care for them. As for the internet rumors about Palin, most will pass on into obscurity Will. I only mentioned them to show that when you become a public figure, your private life will come under scrutiny from everyone, good or bad. The Republicans need to quit whining about the so-called left-wing press (which it's a myth since most of them are rich and corporate owned) delving into her private life, it's going to happen.

I've noticed that when it's a sex scandal on the Republican's part, they whine that it's a PRIVATE matter, but when it happens to the Democrats, it's fair game to criticize, spread rumors and hold up for moral trashing. By the way, Sarah Palin voted to CUT funding for assisting unwed teen mothers in the state of Alaska. Not all teen parents can afford to raise their children like the Palin's can. Hyprocrite!

You guys thought her speech was good? What BS! I thought it was full of sneers and snipes about Obama and didn't give us any substantive reason to believe that she would be a good VP other than as a attack lap dog for McCain! Every other facial expression was a sneer! No class, just a witch!

Also I noticed something. When she was speaking, there were NO images of the flag behind her, unlike the other speakers. All the images were of scenery from the U.S. She, and McCain were NOT wearing the obligatory flag pin the Republicans are always throwing in the face of their opponents either. Could it have something to do with her state secessionist leanings? Maybe she's not patriotic enough for the whole U.S.? And what WAS that pin of that she and her family were wearing (McCain didn't have one on by the way)?

[Duper]

By the way, Sarah Palin voted to CUT funding for assisting unwed teen mothers in the state of Alaska.

What EXACTLY does that mean? If it's food stamps and WIC, the state is not allowed to discriminate on whether they are married or not. Welfare sure isn't going to care either. this is probably funding to abortion clinics. I'm guessing but I think it's a fair bet.

[Spidey]

I vote we nominate tc (since it’s voting season) for resident conspiracy nut…err theorist.

As far as those résumés, they don’t seem to be in such disparity…one has law & legislative experience and the other executive. (what job are they running for?) And why do we keep comparing the Veep to #1? (I’m telling you, that is going to backfire)

And as far as having children & being president…it’s not like she can’t have a gazillion nannies…it takes a village, right?

As far as being second to China…that’s already inevitable. Now Russia…that I doubt, unless they get their act together and become a good citizen of the world…their natural resources can only go so far. (the American century is over, we can only hope that we don’t fall too far behind) It’s the natural way of things…

PS I missed Palin’s speech…is there a video somewhere?

[Sergeant Thorne]

http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?u ... ention2008

[Spidey]

Thank you

[Will Robinson]

... The Republicans need to quit whining about the so-called left-wing press (which it's a myth since most of them are rich and corporate owned) delving into her private life, it's going to happen.

Is it a myth?
Or is it a myth that the ownership of a company can dictate the political leanings of it's operating officers and the executives and the employees?

Putting Money Where Mouths Are: Media Donations Favor Dems 100-1

By WILLIAM TATE | Posted Wednesday, July 23, 2008 4:20 PM PT

The New York Times' refusal to publish John McCain's rebuttal to Barack Obama's Iraq op-ed may be the most glaring example of liberal media bias this journalist has ever seen. But true proof of widespread media bias requires one to follow an old journalism maxim: Follow the money.

Even the Associated Press — no bastion of conservatism — has considered, at least superficially, the media's favoritism for Barack Obama. It's time to revisit media bias.

True to form, journalists are defending their bias by saying that one candidate, Obama, is more newsworthy than the other. In other words, there is no media bias. It is we, the hoi polloi, who reveal our bias by questioning the neutrality of these learned professionals in their ivory-towered newsrooms.

Big Media applies this rationalization to every argument used to point out bias. "It's not a result of bias," they say. "It's a matter of news judgment."

And, like the man who knows his wallet was pickpocketed but can't prove it, the public is left to futilely rage against the injustice of it all.

The "newsworthy" argument can be applied to every metric — one-sided imbalances in airtime, story placement, column inches, number of stories, etc. — save one.

An analysis of federal records shows that the amount of money journalists contributed so far this election cycle favors Democrats by a 15:1 ratio over Republicans, with $225,563 going to Democrats, only $16,298 to Republicans .

Two-hundred thirty-five journalists donated to Democrats, just 20 gave to Republicans — a margin greater than 10-to-1. An even greater disparity, 20-to-1, exists between the number of journalists who donated to Barack Obama and John McCain.

Searches for other newsroom categories (reporters, correspondents, news editors, anchors, newspaper editors and publishers) produces 311 donors to Democrats to 30 donors to Republicans, a ratio of just over 10-to-1. In terms of money, $279,266 went to Dems, $20,709 to Republicans, a 14-to-1 ratio.

And while the money totals pale in comparison to the $9-million-plus that just one union's PACs have spent to get Obama elected, they are more substantial than the amount that Obama has criticized John McCain for receiving from lobbyists: 96 lobbyists have contributed $95,850 to McCain, while Obama — who says he won't take money from PACs or federal lobbyists — has received $16,223 from 29 lobbyists.

A few journalists list their employer as an organization like MSNBC, MSNBC.com or ABC News, or report that they're freelancers for the New York Times, or are journalists for Al Jazeera, CNN Turkey, Deutsche Welle Radio or La Republica of Rome (all contributions to Obama). Most report no employer. They're mainly freelancers. That's because most major news organization have policies that forbid newsroom employees from making political donations.

As if to warn their colleagues in the media, MSNBC last summer ran a story on journalists' contributions to political candidates that drew a similar conclusion:

"Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left."

The timing of that article was rather curious. Dated June 25, 2007, it appeared during the middle of the summer news doldrums in a non-election year — timing that was sure to minimize its impact among the general public, while still warning newsrooms across the country that such political donations can be checked.

In case that was too subtle, MSNBC ran a sidebar story detailing cautionary tales of reporters who lost their jobs or were otherwise negatively impacted because their donations became public.

As if to warn their comrades-in-news against putting their money where their mouth is, the report also cautioned that, with the Internet, "it became easier for the blogging public to look up the donors."

It went on to detail the ban that most major media organizations have against newsroom employees donating to political campaigns, a ban that raises some obvious First Amendment issues. Whether it's intentional or not, the ban makes it difficult to verify the political leanings of Big Media reporters, editors and producers. There are two logical ways to extrapolate what those leanings are, though.

One is the overwhelming nature of the above statistics. Given the pack mentality among journalists and, just like any pack, the tendency to follow the leader — in this case, Big Media — and since Big Media are centered in some of the bluest of blue parts of the country, it is highly likely that the media elite reflect the same, or an even greater, liberal bias.

A second is to analyze contributions from folks in the same corporate cultures. That analysis provides some surprising results. The contributions of individuals who reported being employed by major media organizations are listed in the nearby table.

The contributions add up to $315,533 to Democrats and $22,656 to Republicans — most of that to Ron Paul, who was supported by many liberals as a stalking horse to John McCain, a la Rush Limbaugh's Operation Chaos with Hillary and Obama.

What is truly remarkable about the list is that, discounting contributions to Paul and Rudy Giuliani, who was a favorite son for many folks in the media, the totals look like this: $315,533 to Democrats, $3,150 to Republicans (four individuals who donated to McCain).

Let me repeat: $315,533 to Democrats, $3,150 to Republicans — a ratio of 100-to-1. No bias there.

Tate is a former journalist, now a novelist and the author of "A Time Like This: 2001-2008." This article first appeared on the American Thinker Web site.

************************************************

I've noticed that when it's a sex scandal on the Republican's part, they whine that it's a PRIVATE matter, but when it happens to the Democrats, it's fair game to criticize, spread rumors and hold up for moral trashing.

No, you are experiencing republican whining about how, according to the democrats and the feminists and the press, sex is a private matter when it's their guy who got caught playing hide the cigar with an intern in the Oval office but the republicans have to quit their jobs if they have an affair...
It's the hypocrisy of the so called objective media that makes them whine.
***************************************************

By the way, Sarah Palin voted to CUT funding for assisting unwed teen mothers in the state of Alaska. Not all teen parents can afford to raise their children like the Palin's can. Hyprocrite!

In my mind there is a difference that should be pointed out between someone "cutting funding" for something and reducing the funding. Yes, using a dictionary you can rationalize that you aren't lying by saying it that way but it is misleading as hell because what she did was cut the funding by 20%..... That little bit you left off leads the reader to far different conclusions when it's presented in the context of a criticism, the average idiot voter would think that she stopped the funding to the program.

It's the same old trick the demo's used on the repubs saying they wanted to starve minority school children by cutting the school lunch program when actually they wanted to reduce the amount of the annual increase in the budget...the dems in the congress passed a 40% increase, the repubs in the Senate wanted to make it a 30% increase...the press reports it as 'Republicans want to cut school lunch program'...
But no, that can't be because the guys that own the company that owns the news stations are rich and probably all vote republican...right

By the way, here's the Palin unwed mothers budget cut thing:

ST. PAUL -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice-presidential nominee who revealed Monday that her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, earlier this year used her line-item veto to slash funding for a state program benefiting teen mothers in need of a place to live.

After the legislature passed a spending bill in April, Palin went through the measure reducing and eliminating funds for programs she opposed. Inking her initials on the legislation -- "SP" -- Palin reduced funding for Covenant House Alaska by more than 20 percent, cutting funds from $5 million to $3.9 million. Covenant House is a mix of programs and shelters for troubled youths, including Passage House, which is a transitional home for teenage mothers.

[Sergeant Thorne]

You guys thought her speech was good? What BS! I thought it was full of sneers and snipes about Obama and didn't give us any substantive reason to believe that she would be a good VP other than as a attack lap dog for McCain! Every other facial expression was a sneer! No class, just a witch!

Claws in, tunnelcat, she's no witch. I suppose she should just grin and bear what the media has been trying to do with her family? Without an ounce of pure truth to anything I've read? It's all a bunch of lies! Distortions of the truth at best. Easily disproved if 1) you don't hate her, and 2) you do some research. I swear I'm going to take the opportunity to make a list of incompetent and otherwise deviously anti-conservative "news" outlets (nothing but a bunch of spin zones). I never once saw her complain. Other women protested for her, but she's obviously a fighter. She let 'em have it with an appropriate amount of disdain, and she maintained her dignity/class. She sure hit the ground running as far as fighting for her ticket, too.

[Gooberman]

Now remember we're comparing Obama, who wants to be President, to Palin who was chosen by his opponent to be a back up!! I'll say it again, no matter how this comparison shakes out Obama is losing by virtue of having to get involved in the debate in the first place!

I'm going to start calling you guys the Shiney-Object Party.

Conservative: Palin is soo much more experienced then Obama
Liberal: Uh, no shes not, see a, b, c.
Conservative: You're comparing your #1 to our #2, Ha! Thats a losing position!

Anyway, to the meat:

If I was looking to accept someone for post graduate studies at a university I'd say he has her beat but if I want to hire someone to run a government I'd say he takes second place!

This is why our country will never see a Tony Blair (Oxford). Why should they be so different? A President has to sign legislation on a very diverse set of issues. Why is it bad to be extremely well educated? We live in a society where if Obama mentions he went to Harvard he DROPs in the polls. This is how we end up with C students like Bush running the country, because C is average and people want a president that is "one of us" (yes he went to Yale, but it was not based on achievement, it was based on Daddy). And how we may end up with, attending 5 colleges in 6 years Palin. In what is arguably one of the easiest majors.

You guys like your "Gut" politicians, and thats what Sarah Palin is. She gets yall rilled up. I don't want any more politicians that are "just like us", I want a politician to look up too.

My prediction is that if McCain can keep up the pressure Obama's pride is going to fuel his temper and he's going to blow it between now and November.

My prediction is the Obama campaign is about to take a sharp turn in course and paint Palin as who she really is:

Dick Cheney in lipstick!

[Spidey]

You guys like your "Gut" politicians, and thats what Sarah Palin is. She gets yall rilled up. I don't want any more politicians that are "just like us", I want a politician to look up too.

That’s ironic, because that’s exactly what Obama is trying to portray himself as, in contrast to the “elitist” indictments.

[woodchip]

This is how we end up with C students like Bush running the country, because C is average and people want a president that is "one of us" (yes he went to Yale, but it was not based on achievement, it was based on Daddy).

Old saying goes, " A students give schools honor and accolades, C students donate money and have their names on school buildings."

[Spidey]

And some dropouts have their names on school buildings too.

[Will Robinson]

I think Palin has used her gut instincts to guide her in her work to cut through the crap that government does and Obama has used his slick talking education to manipulate his way onto the fast track to the top dog spot in the government that is full of crap.

[Tunnelcat]

OOOOOOOOK. Let's see, Palin has military experience because Alaska is right next door to Russia, according to Cindy McCain AND she's Commander in Chief of the National Guard. Well, it turns out that she has never, NEVER actually signed any executive order for them AND also has not addressed the shortage of personnel:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iT8a ... gD92VOKO80

She's also had NO experience dealing with a deficit in her state. Alaska is so flush with oil money that residents of the state even got money back in their tax returns last year. So even with all that money, she feels that it's necessary to slash funding to 'wasteful government programs', ie. 'social', she thinks are not needed, even if these benefit those in less fortunate situations than her family. She was the 'earmark queen' until it became a liabilty to her when it involved the 'Bridge to Nowhere'.

What programs do you think are going to get cut if the McCain/Palin crew gets into office? We're running a deficit in the trillions and he wants to cut taxes to corporations and the ordinary middle-class American family. By ordinary family he means anybody making over $500,000, so naturally they deserve a tax cut. I'm guessing he's going to cut more social programs and funding to our already crumbling infrastructure. So where is he going to get the money for his little war mongering. Out of his rear end? Oh, maybe it's going to come from our grandchildren, because we're probably going to be stupid enough to elect the tax cut and spend Republicans who don't think that the government should interfere with the free market.

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

Well, the McCains are just being portrayed as ordinary folks by their party. I guess that every woman in the country can afford a $300,000 outfit to wear to a Presidential Coronation.

By the way Will, as a woman myself, I have some insight into how we think and act. I respected Hillary because she was a fighter even though I disagreed with her positions and especially her husband. In my opinion, Sarah was just acting like an arrogant PMS b***h during her speech! She's the one with her claws out. A lot of other women commentators noted it that night as well.

Edit: Oh now I get it! A male friend of mine just enlightened me into the male way of looking at the world. The little heads are doing the thinking for the big heads here! He commented that Sarah Palin looked just like she was dressed to star in a porno film. All made up with a short skirt and stockings with an easy to let down seductive hair style, the librarian look with an attitude! The U.S. is in for a wild ride.

[Will Robinson]

OOOOOOOOK. Let's see, Palin has military experience because Alaska is right next door to Russia, according to Cindy McCain AND she's Commander in Chief of the National Guard. Well, it turns out that she has never, NEVER actually signed any executive order for them AND also has not addressed the shortage of personnel:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iT8a ... gD92VOKO80

If you are going to site her being the commander of the Alaskan National Guard as too insignificant a role to count as a qualification then I suppose Obama and Biden have some larger command of troops under them?
This election is clearly a choice between McCain/Palin and Obama/Biden is it not? Well if Palins meager responsibility as Governor of a state and commander of her states guard is not enough to have merit then we have to compare that level of experience with the alternative choice....

Guess what, according to your own criteria, on the commander of military check list, we have McCain/Palin with a little bit of experience for each of them and we have the Obama/Biden team with a grand total of no experience between them.

She's also had NO experience dealing with a deficit in her state. Alaska is so flush with oil money that residents of the state even got money back in their tax returns last year.

Well in my book a politician who recognizes that a surplus of tax revenue belongs to the people not the bureaucracy and actually returns the funds to the tax payer is exactly the kind of politician we want in Washington!!
If you think that any extra revenue should automatically go to inflating the budget of government programs beyond the budget that passed the approval process then have your knowledgeable self voted into office so you can spend it....good luck with that!

She was the 'earmark queen' until it became a liabilty to her when it involved the 'Bridge to Nowhere'.

I've heard she changed her mind on the pork bridge to nowhere, that also is a good sign. What was the alternative team doing during that same period? Voting for the bridge to nowhere and never changed their mind perhaps!!

What programs do you think are going to get cut if the McCain/Palin crew gets into office? We're running a deficit in the trillions and he wants to cut taxes to corporations and the ordinary middle-class American family. By ordinary family he means anybody making over $500,000, so naturally they deserve a tax cut. I'm guessing he's going to cut more social programs and funding to our already crumbling infrastructure. So where is he going to get the money for his little war mongering. Out of his rear end? Oh, maybe it's going to come from our grandchildren, because we're probably going to be stupid enough to elect the tax cut and spend Republicans who don't think that the government should interfere with the free market.

That last bit is so full of crap I'll ask you to break it down and put some facts in there that can be attributed to McCain/Palin and then check to see where the alternative team was in relation to being responsible for the same facts before I bother to think about it.
In simple terms: Cut the crap and we'll talk....

Well, the McCains are just being portrayed as ordinary folks by their party. I guess that every woman in the country can afford a $300,000 outfit to wear to a Presidential Coronation.

By the way Will, as a woman myself, I have some insight into how we think and act. I respected Hillary because she was a fighter even though I disagreed with her positions and especially her husband. In my opinion, Sarah was just acting like an arrogant PMS b***h during her speech! She's the one with her claws out. A lot of other women commentators noted it that night as well.

I think the nature of your reaction in this thread does a whole lot more to carry on that stereotype of women being catty, petty, ill informed, jealous and over-reacting than Palins counter punching speech. After all at least she and her children were attacked unjustly before she struck back what did she ever do to you that got your tampon in a twist?

[Duper]

AP??!! pffft.

[Sergeant Thorne]

tunnelcat, you're gonna choke if you don't quit swallowing that stuff so fast.

I read that article about their outfits. I have two problems with that: 1) They obviously found the highest number they could. The estimate is from a high-price source, and the stones are all assumed to be authentic. 2) How do they know that none of it was rented?

The truth is that Mrs. McCain is an heiress to a lucrative company, and more than likely does have an expensive wardrobe. I don't know about Mrs. Bush, but I would assume she does too. Both of them are in the public eye, after all. Now that's not a life-style that I, personally, agree with, but it ain't news either. They're just trying to alienate people.

I think your friend needs to lay off the porno films.

[Wings]

With how bad Bush screwed up, I was almost positive Democrats would practically be gifted the presidency for the next 4 years.
The Republicans have really done a decent job on trying to make people forget about their failure, and polishing up their appearance.

Honestly, I don't like either party. The best thing voters can do is keep them pitted against eachother so we don't have any more ridiculous legislation coming through.

I turn 18 a month after this whole thing, so it doesn't matter anyway for me.

[TechPro]

I turn 18 a month after this whole thing, so it doesn't matter anyway for me.

Actually, it matters more to you than it does to me (seeing as I'm much nearer to eventual death than you).

Think about it. Then do everything you can to make a difference for the better. Anything else would be a waste.

[Lothar]

With how bad Bush screwed up, I was almost positive Democrats would practically be gifted the presidency for the next 4 years.

Yet Obama now has only a slim margin.

Part of that is, honestly, he's a weak candidate. He doesn't have a strong background, doesn't have a solid set of policies to focus on, doesn't have a lot of accomplishments to say "this is what I'll do for you." As Hillary said, he has a speech he gave in 2002. He has words, which are enough for some people, but may not be enough for enough people.

Part of that is that McCain is not Bush, no matter how bad Obama wants him to be. He's not really very similar to Bush, though the two agree on some major issues. And he's pushing a message of repairing some of the damage done by Bush and the previous congress. Dems like to imagine Bush's low approval ratings are because the public agrees with them on Iraq and all other major policies, but in many cases it's because the public thinks Bush hasn't upheld conservative principles or accomplished important things in his second term.

[Tunnelcat]

What Obama has going for him is intelligence, apparent honesty and a good education in political science and constitutional law, something we badly need after the Bush trashing of our Constitution, although I give Obama a big hit in voting for the FISA bill. Not a good start for his record and I will keep my conspiratorial eye on him if he manages to win the Presidency.

Lets see, little Bushie Dubya was a governor and an actual member of the National Guard. We've all seen how well his little foreign policy decisions and war planning went. Bogged down in a country we shouldn't have invaded in the first place, Iraq (I heard that the surge troops are going to have to stay a little bit longer than planned, things are not as stable as claimed) AND the general running the Afghanistan Campaign is pleading for more troops. The rest of the world no longer sees us with any moral authority and we can't get more international cooperation to fight terrorism on a large front. That's why I don't see how Palin's experience by association is going to be a benefit for our country as the Republicans keep harping about. As for McCain's experience, that REALLY scares me! He's a victim of torture at the hands of an enemy in a war that the U.S. never finished to his satisfaction. He is in all probability suffering from PTSD and has said that he is bitter at the defeat of our country in Vietnam. Do you think that gives him a stable frame of mind to keep our country from future wars? And now,long after he's sung \"Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran...\" it looks like we're going to get his wish:

http://www.israelenews.com/view.asp?ID=2985

Will, do you know where that surplus tax money came from? It came from increasing the STATE tax on oil company revenues. Guess where the oil companies recouped their loss from? A small part of the high gas prices for all of us down here in the lower 48 is my guess! She essentially transfered wealth from the lower 48 states to the people of Alaska! Now granted, increasing oil company profits has been a Democratic campaign slogan lately, so why have the Republicans not come out against her 'tax increase'? The Republicans have relentlessly fought an oil company windfall profits tax and have justified their arguments by saying that it will just cause the oil companies to increase gas prices. Well, it must have worked since all Alaskans got $1200 back in their tax returns last year, some of it from me when I paid $3.99 a gallon, although to be fair, not all of that price increase can be attributed to her actions. Hmmmmmmm, maybe McCain will do that for the rest of the U.S. and make it fair, no more Alaska welfare checks. As for the \"pork bridge\", changing her mind could be construed as perfectly normal, but I think she did it for purely political reasons, not altruistic ones, since she was on the Republican's radar over a year ago. If she's a \"fighter\", she's probably mercenary.

My question still stands and is aimed squarely at the Republican Party nominees. Where are they going to get the money to pay down the HUGE U.S. debt and fight two wars (or maybe more) at the same time? Palin has never had to deal with such a large dept, even at the state level, so what gives her the experience? McCain/Palin could cut EVERY government program EXCEPT Social Security and Medicare (the biggest social government expenditures by far) and STILL NOT have enough money to even begin to pay down the national debt. The only other big money pit is the military budget. Add to that these \"tax cuts\", the $5000 rebate to fix health care and the $7000 child credit he wants and it's JUST NOT POSSIBLE! Unless he is referring to Social Security and Medicare as his \"government waste\". Those old folks don't need it anyway, eff 'em, let them take care of themselves from private sources! And forget McCain cutting the military budget, that'll be his special baby! Your children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren will be paying for this deficit in perpetuity, one way or another! We don't need to worry about the terrorists, most of us will be destitute. At least the Dems are willing to entertain the idea of a tax hike for corporations and the wealthiest 1% of our population (over $250,000 income).

Now you guys can call me \"catty\" if you want, MEOW, HISS, HISS! After all, that's my avatar and I like cats. But as a female, I think that females in general are naturally adept at reading facial expressions and emotions, especially of other women. What you 'guys' thought of her speech as 'coming out swinging' and being a 'fighter', I got out as a sneering, sniping reprimand of Obama, no substance or basis. Even some female press members noted it in their analysis of her speech.

[woodchip]

That's why I don't see how Palin's experience by association is going to be a benefit for our country as the Republicans keep harping about.

Perhaps to put things in better perspective, we should see how a democratic female VP was handled. Case in point, Geraldine A Ferraro:

From a New York Times editorial on July 3, 1984, on Geraldine Ferraro's nomination for vice president:

"Where is it written that only senators are qualified to become President? . . . Or where is it written that mere representatives aren't qualified, like Geraldine Ferraro of Queens? . . . Where is it written that governors and mayors, like Dianne Feinstein of San Francisco, are too local, too provincial? . . . Presidential candidates have always chosen their running mates for reasons of practical demography, not idealized democracy. . . . What a splendid system, we say to ourselves, that takes little-known men, tests them in high office and permits them to grow into statesmen. . . . Why shouldn't a little-known woman have the same opportunity to grow?"

So for those of you who have been mind manipulated by the newsies into thinking Palin is a non-qual for VP, just ask yourself....if Palin was democratic and Obama chose her, do you think the press coverage would be presenting her in the same manner? Would your impressions / arguments be the same? I think not.

[Will Robinson]

....But as a female, I think that females in general are naturally adept at reading facial expressions and emotions, especially of other women. What you 'guys' thought of her speech as 'coming out swinging' and being a 'fighter', I got out as a sneering, sniping reprimand of Obama, no substance or basis. Even some female press members noted it in their analysis of her speech.

I don't have any reason to believe females are more adept at reading facial expressions, I think you are just trying to rationalize your feelings.
I think her sarcastic, condescending tone was purposeful and if she hadn't had her family and her background attacked and belittled it would have been too much but the truth is she was unjustly attacked by Obama, his team and the majority of the media talking heads. To this day they still refer to her as "the mayor of a small town"! They take anonymous ramblings from blogs off of the internet and quote them as a basis of a story to discuss with impunity the pro's and con's of Palin's decision to give birth to a Downs Syndrom child! The hypocrisy is so foul it's stinking up the country.

She has reformed her government, Obama talks about it.
She has turned in her own Party leaders for corruption, Obama took sweetheart real estate deals from them.
The media has given Obama a pass on his background and his record for years! Right now there are more reporters in Alaska looking into Palin's background than all the reporters that have ever been assigned to investigate Obama in all the years he's been running.

I don't mind the scrutiny she's going to face but the way so many of the media have blatantly abandoned even an attempt at objectivity in the coverage has come to a boil and is fueling a backlash that I think is going to backfire in a big way.

If Obama's background and so called experience was critiqued the way Palin's is he would lose 20 points in the polls within 24 hours.
So what is it? Is that kind of critique unwarranted or should the media apply it to both sides of the race?

[dissent]

... And now,long after he's sung "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran..." it looks like we're going to get his wish:

http://www.israelenews.com/view.asp?ID=2985

tc; really, you're close to hyperventilating here.
re: bomb Iran -


As for the Dutch newspaper report, it sounds like a lot of additional hyperventilating and speculation without much in the way of evidence. For the Bush administration to, at this late hour, pick a fight with Iran for no compelling reason would be quite strange. Let me know when you have some actual facts, as opposed to purported "comments of senior officials".

[Sedwick]

Hope I'm not too late with this:

http://www.crosscut.com/politics-government/17341

\"About Sarah Palin: an e-mail from Wasilla
A suburban Anchorage homemaker and activist — who once did battle with the Alaska governor when Palin was mayor — recounts what she knows of Palin's history...\"

[Will Robinson]

Hope I'm not too late with this:

http://www.crosscut.com/politics-government/17341

"About Sarah Palin: an e-mail from Wasilla
A suburban Anchorage homemaker and activist — who once did battle with the Alaska governor when Palin was mayor — recounts what she knows of Palin's history..."

And for a slightly less personally biased version of the story that sticks to the facts: clicky clicky

A couple of telling quotes from the story:

She is largely viewed as having had her hometown’s best interests at heart when she pursued big projects or an overhaul of city taxes. By the time she ran for re-election in 1999 — again facing Mr. Stein — things had smoothed out. She was returned to office by a large margin, 826 votes to 255.
------------
“When I first met Sarah, I would say Sarah was a Republican, with the big R, and that’s it,” said Dave Chappel, Ms. Palin’s deputy mayor for more than two years. “As she developed politically, she began to see beyond the R and look at the whole picture. She matured.”

[woodchip]

From what it looks like, the Dems consider Palin such a non qual that Obama is now asking Hillary for help to combat the Palin revival surge. If Hillary does help to elect Obama, what image does this send to those wavering women who are thinking about voting for McCain because Palin is the VP choice? Once again a women is not good enough to be a VP pick for the Dem. men folk, but good enough to do the char woman task of trying to clean up behind Obama's good ole boy choice for VP. Maybe Obama will throw her a bone and let her be on his cabinet in some domestic position. Better yet maybe Biden will step down (insert reason why) and Obama will then name Hillary as VP. Speak about sucking up to pressure if he does. Could be interesting these next couple of weeks.

[CUDA]

should make for an interesting Election. its a virtual dead heat.

AND DOWN THE STRETCH THEY COME

And right now the electorate stands at 273 Obama - 265 McCain. 270 is required to be elected but there are 120 votes that could go either way

Poll Date Sample Obama (D) McCain (R) Spread
RCP Average 08/29 - 09/06 -- 46.0 45.2 Obama +0.8
Gallup Tracking 09/04 - 09/06 2765 RV 45 48 McCain +3
Rasmussen Tracking 09/04 - 09/06 3000 LV 48 48 Tie
Hotline/FD 09/02 - 09/04 916 RV 46 40 Obama +6
CBS News 09/01 - 09/03 734 RV 42 42 Tie
CNN 08/29 - 08/31 927 RV 49 48 Obama +1

[Tunnelcat]

OK guys, the kitty's tired. No more energy here to argue and rant after spending 6 hours on my roof scraping moss off of the roof tiles, and I'm only one quarter of the way done. Aaaaaaaaaaaaaah! The rains are coming soon!

I guess we'll just have to see what happens in the next few months with the election. I'll be very interested in watching the debates to get more of an opinion concerning the candidates. Should be very interesting. As for Iran, we'll see if the poop hits the fan in the next month, or thereafter in the near future.

Will, females ARE supposedly better at reading facial expressions since they tend to be more empathic and use it to help choose a mate, although I'm sure that you could find contradictory information to this. There are always exceptions to the rule. But I did note that almost all negative press comments about Palin's facial expressions during her speech came from female commentators.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/ ... sing.shtml