DescentBB

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:48 am**

thoughts?

This pick is so McCain.

It's funny a year ago all the radio talking heads were making fun of gender voters, and dissing McCain....now, they are praising McCain and encouraging gender voters!

What a crazy year.

I can't really say much on Palin yet, no idea who she is. But its really thinking Hillary supporters are pretty shallow if he expects them to come over.

On the other hand, if a Hillary supporter wasn't going to vote for Obama, whose policies are near identical, then perhaps he is right.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 11:23 am**

Any Hillary supporters that end up voting for McCain because of this choice are only sending one message to Washington: \"Boobz!\"

I think this move is crazy, he is trying to use this to convince us he is also thinking of change, but all I see is picking some pushover to try and grab more gender votes. If McCain had a stroke or something and she ended up being president... what would it look like having a president that has to balance being a mother of an infant with downs syndrome and the demands of the executive office all at once. I don't think it is humanly possible for one person to give both of those jobs the dedication and time they need to accomplish them well.

Did McCain pick her purely based on her looks and isolation? I think I can see what he was trying to accomplish with this choice, but it still stinks of dirty old man politics and does not make McCain appear any better as a presidential candidate.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 11:33 am**

If McCain had a stroke or something and she ended up being president...

Yeah, and I never thought I would see a PILF.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 11:44 am**

It just proves that McCain is mercenary and will do anything to get elected, totally rejecting any candidates that would have been a smarter choice than a no-name, unknown woman with no experience. Sound familiar? If women in this country are stupid enough to vote for McCain based on this pick, especially Hillary supporters, they deserve the outcome that their estrogen-brained emotional logic thoughts chose. Idiots! The country doesn't need this joke!

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 12:15 pm**

Palin a first-term governor of a state with more reindeer than people
-CNN

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 12:51 pm**

I think McCain is framing his candidacy as being a reformer - to \"fix the mess in Washington\". Hence he has chosen someone who is a political outsider in her own state, and can also bill herself as a reformer.

re: \"no experience\" - interesting to note that the GOP Veep candidate has nearly two more years experience in a chief executive position that the Dem's presidential candidate.

I don't think this is all about geender at all, though it doesn't hurt the GOP to have a woman on the ticket, and might very well have hurt them not to have a woman ( or at least someting other than another white male) on the ticket.

The whole key to the Dem's convention was to try to paint McCain as just another four years of Dubya. Every difference the McCain camp can tack on to their campaign makes this cynical attempt even less and less tenable.

The choice of Palin opens up all kinds of options for the McCain campaign, instead of letting the Dem's dig a moat around it. Let's see if they take advantage of any of them.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 1:10 pm**

The scorned woman's vote is obviously a factor, and probably will pay off too, but I think the Obama team better hurry up and find a better response because it is no lie that Palin has a better resume than Obama...
Better in the professional executive field and a more compelling personal history as well!

Team Obama, and the willing accomplices in the press who have let him run largely on personality now have a personality on the other side as well.

I bet Obama was due for a ten point bounce in the polls from his convention speech and now due to McCains choice and the timing of the announcement Obama probably won't get five points out of it.

McCains team has been kicking Obama's team all over the field lately and he still has the convention ahead of him to pick up a little more momentum.

Of the four people running on the two sides I'd rank Palin over the other three based on the little bit of her resume I've read. She seems to be authentically who she says she is and has been living and working in the real world the whole time.
You can't say that about the other three.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 1:43 pm**

It must be comforting to her knowing she was picked for the sole purpose of obtaining the female vote instead of her stance on the issues. And the fact that she's a creationist with an eye on education made it easy in my decision whether to vote or not.

I'm voting for Obama because McCain already seems sleazy to me and we've had enough of the Cheney type sleaze.

Bettina

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:00 pm**

Bet51987 wrote:It must be comforting to her knowing she was picked for the sole purpose of obtaining the female vote instead of her stance on the issues....

I think that's pretty unfair and untrue, there were plenty of women, with more national recognition that he could have picked if he only wanted a woman he would have picked one more known and possibly without scandals to overcome.

I think he definitely enjoyed the female vote prospects but he probably enjoyed the whistleblower-goes-against-her-own-party aspect even more!
Then there is the whole My VP has more executive experience than their Presidential candidate thing...
And then of course her conservative credentials, her hard working down to earth nature, her competitive nature, the mother of a son going to fight in Iraq on 9-11-2008, a damn good looking person, etc. etc.
Truth is, you may not like the religious component of who she is but to dismiss the total of her character and experience over that one issue is a little bit irrational.

And speaking of irrational, I may still vote for Obama too, but it won't be because I think he will be a better president.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:42 pm**

Opps, a little dirt under the carpet here and there's already a Wikipedia entry! Can you say 'Annie Oakley'?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin

One question? If McCain were to die in office, probable since he has health problems connected with age and war injuries, would you want her as President?

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:36 pm**

ok, I'll bite; how is it \"probable\" that McCain will die in office, if elected??

Looks like the average life expectancy in the US is about 75.15 years for males.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... expectancy

oh, and Bettina, where did you get the idea that she wanted to pursue a creationist agenda in education. In the wiki article that tunnelcat linked, going to reference 38 and reading the Anchorage News report, Palin distinctly states that -

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

\"I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum.\"

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

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

\"I won't have religion as a litmus test, or anybody's personal opinion on evolution or creationism,\" Palin said.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:03 pm**

Does McCain look healthy to you? He doesn't look as good as he did in 2000. I'm just saying that the ODDS are higher that he might have a health related problem that would contribute to his death given his age. S##t, I'm only in my 50's and even I'm having age-related health problems. My father died at the age of 39 from cancer. So if it were remotely possible he couldn't finish his term, would you want Palin to become President, hypothetically?

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:06 pm**

Will Robinson wrote:it is no lie that Palin has a better resume than Obama...
Better in the professional executive field and a more compelling personal history as well!

Palin's history seems kind of idyllic to me. Leader of the basketball team, winner of a beauty pageant... not exactly getting your hands dirty working the streets of Chicago as a community organizer and leader. I still find Biden's story compelling as well, just knowing that a person only four years older than I am became a Senator, and then suffered such a devastating loss in a car accident.

I'm afraid I fail to see how being the governor of Alaska for just 2 years and the mayor of a small town of fewer than 9,000 people uniquely prepares you with the executive experience required for dealing with the likes of Putin.

McCain eschewed several VP candidates with vastly more extensive resumes who could have been equally called Washington outsiders and instead made this desperate move in a cheap appeal to female voters. There are even women inside the Republican party who are more qualified! Rather, he makes this pick look like a joke, an obvious pander, instead of anything meaningful.

(Sorry, Goob's post below quotes something from an earlier draft of this post)

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:22 pm**

It's just funny to me how the GOP fanboys are lining up and spouting this talking point, as if the tiniest bit of executive experience is better than none.

Not just line up, but literally have to pull a complete 180 in their talking points of the last year.

I don't think this was accidental, its no secret that McCain dislikes certain segments of his party...and he is really making alot of the conservative radio talking heads look like complete dishonest partisan hacks!

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:25 pm**

tunnelcat wrote:...So if it were remotely possible he couldn't finish his term, would you want Palin to become President, hypothetically?

Judging from what I've read so far I think it would be an upgrade if she took McCains place.
She's been more effective in her life doing the right thing in her capacity as a representative of the people than Biden, McCain or Obama....

McCain and Obama both have been touted as being different candidates, unencumbered by their Party's usual corrupt controls. Well, apparently, compared to Palin, they are just posuers and she's the one who has actually been walking the walk.

Obviously I don't know the future or what is in her heart but my instincts tell me that if she ends up Vice President and then President, America will be better off than any other likely outcome from this election.
To think we almost had Hillary and at the last minute could instead end up with the anti-Hillary!!! Hell yes sign me up!!!

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:29 pm**

dissent wrote:In the wiki article that tunnelcat linked, going to reference 38 and reading the Anchorage News report, Palin distinctly states that -
In an interview Thursday, Palin said she meant only to say that discussion of alternative views should be allowed to arise in Alaska classrooms:

"I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."

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

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

"I won't have religion as a litmus test, or anybody's personal opinion on evolution or creationism," Palin said.

Did you know someone went to town on her Wikipedia entry about 24 hours before her candidacy was announced? All spun positively, of course. Not surprising or wrong (any candidate would do the same), just saying it may be more white-washed than usual.

This quote makes me think she's firmly in the "teach the controversy" camp, which is just the latest creationist tactic:

Sarah Palin wrote:"Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information....Healthy debate is so important and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both. And you know, I say this too as the daughter of a science teacher. Growing up with being so privileged and blessed to be given a lot of information on, on both sides of the subject -- creationism and evolution. It's been a healthy foundation for me. But don't be afraid of information and let kids debate both sides."

Of course "teach the controversy" sounds good at first unless you follow it to its logical conclusion. Teach all sides of every issue in schools, no matter how crackpot they may be. First, kids aren't equipped with very good BS filters. Second, the amount of time to teach all sides of everything would be essentially infinite, which is significantly longer than 180 school days. Third, fourth, fifth, well there's more where that came from.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:34 pm**

Let's stay on topic, lest this spiral into yet another creationism versus evolution debate. Take that crap somewhere else.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:55 pm**

hehe Kyouryuu, that wasn't Genghis's point. I think it's a rather acute point of how volatile and unreliable Wiki can be for solid info.

She's done some good stuff for Alaska. Let's see what she can do here.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:57 pm**

Lets put the experience in perspective shall we?!?

1st - Obama was handed the job of being State representative and then handed the job of being Senator. Go look at his opposition, or lack there of if you don't believe me. He ran unopposed by republicans in some or all of those races because it was a democrat only district and the first choice democrat candidate was discovered to have some serious scandal brewing!!

2nd - the job and duties of a state representative and a U.S. Senator are not executive, in fact at the freshman level, the only level he's ever known, it is Party asskissing drone work. Raise money for your party, stay out of the way and sign where they tell you to sign....

3 - Once he got the push up to U.S. Senate he never even served as U.S. Senator, he went straight into campaign mode! He's had the job for under 150 working days total and spent all of them running for President!! At least Hillary served as a Senator for a few years and earned her keep for the State of New York.

4 - Even the senior Senators like McCain and Biden are not executives, they don't do the hiring and firing and bill paying and plan the business of an administration all their own like Presidents do. And they never face the music with the press without the smoke screen provided by the national party.

Case in point, a week or so ago Nancy Pelosi told her little democrats in Congress it would be OK to go back to their districts and say they were going to work on domestic oil drilling legislation because she understood the people were sick of $4 per gallon gas prices and clamoring for some good old U.S. Oil production. she told them they could go tell that lie because she would make sure the Congress never really brought the issue up for a vote. - SMOKE SCREEN

Governors don't get that luxury, they build an administration, they own their budget, they own their decisions and the press holds their feet to the fire for anything they do when it doesn't work.
As a governor, if your state is in trouble you don't get to blame the other governors of your state when the plan fails or never gets implemented the way Senators do...THERE ARE NO OTHER GOVERNORS IN YOUR STATE...you don't hide a difficult issue in committee knowing you will never really have to vote on it...etc. etc.

So yea, Obama is associated with a big important position where you can find some of his peers to be real heavyweight politico's but look any deeper than that and he isn't qualified as a reformer or a representative or even as freshman of Hillary's caliber and he sure as hell isn't an executive at all! He's a professional candidate!

So yea, Palin's work as a Mayor, as a whistleblower on the Oil&Gas Commision and as a Governor is pretty damn impressive. She didn't just show up for the photo's and limo rides she actually represented the people of Alaska quite well!

And the number one thing Obama's team better grasp, like yesterday, is, the country is now debating with quite a bit of substance whether the V.P. pick on the Repub's side is a superior pick to the Presidential candidate on the demo's side!!!
That's a losing battle for the Obama team no matter how it shakes out!

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:08 pm**

5 - Governs less people then the mayor of Austin, a city that doesn't rank in our top 15.

6 - Doesn't deal with ANY inner city issues.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:12 pm**

I find it laughable some of you are nay saying Palin on her \"Lack of Experience\". Tell me where Obama has any where near her experience running anything except when he runs his mouth. Yet none who criticize Palin's experience has a problem with Obama's experience. Please go find a toilet to stick your heads in so you can flush away the cobwebs.
As to why McCain picked her, beyond the obvious female angle, Palin also brings strong conservative credentials to McCains side. She is also a political outsider who is not afraid to call a spade a spade and hopefully will be a breath of fresh air to the Washington scene.
As to the republicans lining up to tout her, it is obvious the Democrats and their loyal press poodles are lining up to find dirt on her. At this point I think the Dems have realized they just lost the presidency and are desperate enough to say and do anything to besmirch Palin. To bad your boy didn't pick Hillary as vp because then he would of been a shoo-in. But then we all know Obama lacks even the experience to pick a vp that will get him into office. And some of you want this guy's finger on the nuclear football? Sad.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:14 pm**

dissent wrote:..oh, and Bettina, where did you get the idea that she wanted to pursue a creationist agenda in education. In the wiki article that tunnelcat linked, going to reference 38 and reading the Anchorage News report, Palin distinctly states that -
In an interview Thursday, Palin said she meant only to say that discussion of alternative views should be allowed to arise in Alaska classrooms:

"I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."

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

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

"I won't have religion as a litmus test, or anybody's personal opinion on evolution or creationism," Palin said.

I know what she said in the Wiki article but she is a creationist at heart. When she first stated that she wanted creationism to be taught in class along side of evolution she suddenly changed her mind a few days later??? This, to me, implies she got static from the Alaska education system for that remark. As VP she can push that view with a little more authority.

Bee

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:21 pm**

woodchip wrote:I find it laughable some of you are nay saying Palin on her "Lack of Experience". Tell me where Obama has any where near her experience running anything except when he runs his mouth.

By completely sidestepping the argument like you always do and presenting the same tired rhetoric, you implicitly accept that a mayor of a tiny Alaskan town has everything needed to step in as President if needed. That a governor of merely two years possesses all of the experience required to deal with Putin.

No wonder you guys can't win the War on Terror.

I just find it funny how you operate, because when I've been in the position of giving advice on potential hires, two years in the field doesn't amount to much. I acknowledge that in her brief career as a governor, putting her mayoral experience aside, Palin has done a lot of good for Alaska. She is taxing the oil companies. She did stand up to the corrupt Ted "Series of Tubes" Stevens. She is clamping down on pork barrel projects, of which there are no shortage in Alaska.

That's all well and good. Bush's approval ratings looked great in the first two years as well. But as Goob points out, she has no experience in the government of a large city. She hasn't had to deal with the problems of the inner city, the bureaucracy, the Peking order. Moreover, she hasn't had to deal with the potential fallout of her plans. For all we know, two years from now, Alaska could be running an enormous deficit. The short-term is the easy part. It's the long-term that is unproven.

What I'm getting at is, Republicans are lining up in lockstep to praise her "executive" experience. But you have to put it in perspective. We're not talking about being the mayor of New York City here; we're talking about Alaska.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:42 pm**

yea, so...Only people from big cities that are in Democratic control should count? What the heck are you saying aside from you clearly don't like Republicans?

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:55 pm**

Cuda68 wrote:yea, so...Only people from big cities that are in Democratic control should count? What the heck are you saying aside from you clearly don't like Republicans?

Please, the Straw Man argument was old then and it's old now.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:55 pm**

Bet51987 wrote:I know what she said in the Wiki article but she is a creationist at heart. When she first stated that she wanted creationism to be taught in class along side of evolution she suddenly changed her mind a few days later??? This, to me, implies she got static from the Alaska education system for that remark. As VP she can push that view with a little more authority.

Sorry, Bee, I don't see it. Seems clear to me she admitted she didn't know much about it and there were lots of more pressing concerns. And in a post-Dover America, I doubt the Veep would bother to wade into this swamp.

Kyouryuu wrote: just find it funny how you operate, because when I've been in the position of giving advice on potential hires, two years in the field doesn't amount to much. ...

That's all well and good. Bush's approval ratings looked great in the first two years as well. But as Goob points out, she has no experience in the government of a large city. She hasn't had to deal with the problems of the inner city, the bureaucracy, the Peking order. Moreover, she hasn't had to deal with the potential fallout of her plans. For all we know, two years from now, Alaska could be running an enormous deficit. The short-term is the easy part. It's the long-term that is unproven.

What I'm getting at is, Republicans are lining up in lockstep to praise her "executive" experience. But you have to put it in perspective. We're not talking about being the mayor of New York City here; we're talking about Alaska.

Heh. Change Alaska to Illinois, she to he, and remove all that experience stuff, and you've made a good case not to vote for Barack Obama.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:56 pm**

OK Kyouryuu, Now tell me what credentials Obama has as he is running for president. Was Obama in charge of anything that could be construed as leadership experience?

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:09 pm**

Kyouryuu wrote:....I acknowledge that in her brief career as a governor, putting her mayoral experience aside, Palin has done a lot of good for Alaska. She is taxing the oil companies. She did stand up to the corrupt Ted "Series of Tubes" Stevens. She is clamping down on pork barrel projects, of which there are no shortage in Alaska.

What did Obama accomplish during those same years?

What has he accomplished during that span of time during any of his years?

What has he accomplished during that amount of time even if you get to break it up and cherry pick a month here a quarter there?!?

She hasn't had to deal with the problems of the inner city, the bureaucracy, the Peking order.

What President, in all our history, has had to micro manage any city?!?

Moreover, she hasn't had to deal with the potential fallout of her plans. For all we know, two years from now, Alaska could be running an enormous deficit. The short-term is the easy part. It's the long-term that is unproven.

You can look at the things she's done and project the longer term ramifications of probably most of it and get a damn good idea if she's accidentally given too much money back to the people.... or should have accepted a bit of the ridiculous pork barrel spending she refused.... or avoided turning in the corrupt officials...
Yea, it's kind of hard to tell what her principles are....NOT!

She probably should have just kept to criticizing her predecessors and promising change because that's what Obama's experience is made of and obviously he's more qualified for having limited himself to those endeavors....right?

Do you really think Clinton had a clue about how to run the Presidency or the military or even half of what his job as President would really be like?!? Do you think Clinton was up to the task of dealing with Putin when he was the young governor of Arkasas spending more time getting laid than worrying about inner cities?!?
Hell no, none of them do. It's all about their character and ability to react, adapt and overcome.

All I'm saying is Palin has shown consistent signs of how she reacts, we've seen examples of how she can adapt and it's not hard to figure out what her character is.

Barack Obama, when pressed to explain his few recorded moments has told us 'the dog ate his homework', 'it wasn't the situation as he understood it then' and 'we need change' ... and I'll bet you still haven't thought of anything comparable he did while Palin was doing her best as Governor of Alaska....

It's not my fanboyism showing it's my incredulity at Obama's idiots daring to take him down the experience road that has me fired up! They didn't just swallow the bait they inhaled the whole frikkin fishing pole! And over the V.P. position no less!!!!

He should have gone right to his superior vision of how he'll take us to a better place more effectively than McCain can even imagine and left Palin to Biden on the side stage! He's blown the reaction and now they have to figure out how to transition away from her before he steps into it with his other foot!

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:17 pm**

Kyouryuu wrote:
woodchip wrote:I find it laughable some of you are nay saying Palin on her "Lack of Experience". Tell me where Obama has any where near her experience running anything except when he runs his mouth.
By completely sidestepping the argument like you always do and presenting the same tired rhetoric, you implicitly accept that a mayor of a tiny Alaskan town has everything needed to step in as President if needed. That a governor of merely two years possesses all of the experience required to deal with Putin.

No wonder you guys can't win the War on Terror.

I just find it funny how you operate, because when I've been in the position of giving advice on potential hires, two years in the field doesn't amount to much. I acknowledge that in her brief career as a governor, putting her mayoral experience aside, Palin has done a lot of good for Alaska. She is taxing the oil companies. She did stand up to the corrupt Ted "Series of Tubes" Stevens. She is clamping down on pork barrel projects, of which there are no shortage in Alaska.

That's all well and good. Bush's approval ratings looked great in the first two years as well. But as Goob points out, she has no experience in the government of a large city. She hasn't had to deal with the problems of the inner city, the bureaucracy, the Peking order. Moreover, she hasn't had to deal with the potential fallout of her plans. For all we know, two years from now, Alaska could be running an enormous deficit. The short-term is the easy part. It's the long-term that is unproven.

What I'm getting at is, Republicans are lining up in lockstep to praise her "executive" experience. But you have to put it in perspective. We're not talking about being the mayor of New York City here; we're talking about Alaska.

There's no straw man argument here. Every paragraph you have, has no facts or substance and starts out/ends with Republican bashing. Give some comparisons, tit for tats, something to debate.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:25 pm**

He was not a mayor or a governor, which is what I presume is meant by leadership experience since we are comparing him to Palin.

Obama's record is quite transparent and has been told countless times in every form of media. He came out of Columbia University. With a degree like that, he could have had any job in the world. Instead, he decided to roll up his sleeves and go to work in the inner city of Chicago. That tells me a lot about a person's character. I don't know if you have ever done that kind of work, Woodchip, maybe you have, but it truly shapes and influences a person. We can talk about poverty and cite statistics all we want. Until you're down there in the middle of it, you can't appreciate the human angle. He became the director of a community development organization for that region and managed to grow that organization to include a job placement program, a college prop program - these are huge things for people. College! Most of these people drop out of high school and here is a group that is trying to give them the tools they need to go to college. Obama did that.

A few years later, he went to get his law degree from Harvard and practiced law regarding economic development and civil rights.

We only go up from there, to State Senator, to Senator, and now to Presidential candidate. He upset the pecking order of Chicago, working his way to the top. It wasn't without problems; he lost the first run at the Senate for example, but he got there.

The point is, we can talk about experience. McCain's experience was as a war veteran and a P.O.W., experiences that can't be understated. Without doubt these experiences shaped his thinking and when he was finally and thankfully able to come home from Vietnam, he vowed to put that experience to work and he has ever since he was elected in 1983.

Now, compare them against Palin and I'm confident you'll find that her story just a bit shy of epic and I'm confident event Palin herself would agree. She's not personally making this argument about executive experience after all, it's the invention of spin wizards. Her story is in many ways just beginning, and it's certainly off to a whirlwind start!

Cuda68 wrote:There's no straw man argument here. Every paragraph you have, has no facts or substance and starts out/ends with Republican bashing. Give some comparisons, tit for tats, something to debate.

I believe I was quite clear. The claim is that she possesses a lot of executive experience. I'm saying she while she has been a governor and a mayor, I question how her experience governing in Alaska should apply to the rest of the country. The reasons for the concern are quite obvious. She was the mayor of an exceptionally small town. She is the governor of a state whose entire population is less than the city of Austin, TX. If you define executive experience as holding a governor position or a mayor position, I insist that you have to put these experiences in context. Alaska is a very unique state. How do the lessons learned in Alaska apply to the country as a whole?

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:50 pm**

Kyouryuu wrote: Obama's record is quite transparent and has been told countless times in every form of media.

Well the first page of the Bio is....but a lot of the records, like from the Annenbergh foundation to his records in the State Senate are sealed...
Pretty cool running on a record that is locked away!

Trust me on this, Obama's record is not going to get him elected or we would all have seen it published like Britneys lack of underwear!

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 7:14 pm**

We'll see how that pans out. I know that McCain has spent a couple million, hoping that it will become the swift boat issue of the campaign. I think it may become an issue if it is played right, but it is a trump card that campaign is holding onto for now.

The truth is that Chicago has a long history of corrupt politics and revolutionaries and it's not surprising that paths cross. Knowing or being friends with someone should never imply that you share their beliefs.

Ayers' problem is that he continues to stand behind his actions, refusing to admit that they were the result of an exceptionally dark, radical era in American politics. We should never repeat what happened to those who came home from Vietnam. Never.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 7:30 pm**

Way to give the lady a chance….

If you ask me executive experience is worth a hell of a lot more then legislative experience, when it comes to being president. It’s going to be a mistake if the Obama campaign takes on her experience, it will work against their candidate if they do. Also calling him a panderer will sound pretty trite. He picked a woman…well it wouldn’t have mattered who he picked, the democrat pit bulls would be on the attack. (you know who you are)

Oh and Bett, McCain sees a lot of himself in the lady, so I think your wrong.

As stated tonight on The News Hour:

He rails against the bridge to nowhere…she did something about it.
He took on some big business interests, she took on the oil companies.
He takes stands against his own party, she has done the same.

To name a few.

Edited...

And she’s pro life…so what! I don’t think for one minute the democrats have any right to bring up a persons personal beliefs, after what we went thru during the Clinton administration. (can you say hypocrisy)

Now carry on your attacks……

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 7:49 pm**

Spidey wrote:And she’s pro choice…

*BEEP* Wrong! She is a member of Feminists for life. No need to thank me

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 7:50 pm**

Spidey wrote:He picked a woman…well it wouldn’t have mattered who he picked, the democrat pit bulls would be on the attack.

Actually, if he was to pick anyone on his hypothetical short list, such as Romney or Pawlenty, I wouldn't have cared. It's possible that Republicans would share the apathy.

I think McCain's approach to this was pretty simple. Who is going to get people excited about his party and his campaign? All criticisms aside, if McCain wanted to reinvigorate his constituency and make people take another look at his campaign, the choice has clearly succeeded on that count.

On a more practical level, she also forces Biden to be very cautious should the two get into a debate. It's hard to imagine Biden ripping into her, compared to Romney. Dare I say, I think she may neutralize his effectiveness as the "attack dog" in a head-to-head battle.

It's important to note that while I argue about the experience factor, I don't necessarily disagree about the pick. Strategically, it did what it needed to do.

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:24 pm**

Dakatsu wrote:
Spidey wrote:And she’s pro choice…
*BEEP* Wrong! She is a member of Feminists for life. No need to thank me

BEEEP! Wrong

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:45 pm**

Oops, I meant pro life.

Wasn’t that obvious?

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:49 pm**

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin has updated a LOT in the last 24 hours. It's about twice as long as it was this morning.

Have to admit, the more I read about her, the more I agree about the executive experience. Who knew there was so much drama in Alaska?

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:19 pm**

lol Kyo, Alaska is environmentalist central (with the northwest a close second

)

Posted: **Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:21 pm**

Spidey wrote:Also calling him a panderer will sound pretty trite. He picked a woman…well it wouldn’t have mattered who he picked, the democrat pit bulls would be on the attack. (you know who you are)

Actually my very first emotion when I heard her name this morning was pride. No matter which party you belong to, you have to step back and take some pride in the healing that will take place on Nov. 4th.

My second emotion was 'wtf'.

DescentBB

Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re: