View Full Version : All About McCain
Does anyone else find it odd that Hillary supporters, who supposedly were ready to boycott Obama if he dared put any woman other than Hillary on the ticket with him, now are supposed to flock to McCain because he put a woman other than Hillary on the ticket with him?
(Note: This post engages in hyperbole for comic effect)
Chernabog
08-29-2008, 04:33 PM
I'm sorry but Bill's first term and Obama now... totally f*ckable.
:blush:
Oh god now I'm picturing GC dressed like Marilyn Monroe, and it's quite funny! :D
Gemini Cricket
08-29-2008, 04:42 PM
Oh god now I'm picturing GC dressed like Marilyn Monroe, and it's quite funny! :D
Brad: "Why do the always look like unhappy rabbits?"
Cherny: "Because that's what they are. Now go and make Barry happy."
:D
JWBear
08-29-2008, 04:50 PM
Brad: "Why do the always look like unhappy rabbits?"
Cherny: "Because that's what they are. Now go and make Barry happy."
:D
Just to be pedantic ('cause I can)... It's nappy rabbits.
Morrigoon
08-29-2008, 05:00 PM
Does anyone else find it odd that Hillary supporters, who supposedly were ready to boycott Obama if he dared put any woman other than Hillary on the ticket with him, now are supposed to flock to McCain because he put a woman other than Hillary on the ticket with him?
(Note: This post engages in hyperbole for comic effect)
Assuming there's a certain percentage of complete nimrods in every population, it would only take a portion of them to swing this very close election. As long as she doesn't carry with her anything that would detract from McCain's campaign, a small benefit can make for a huge win.
Just saw and interesting factoid and it hadn't occurred to me. This morning, John McCain brought to an end a very long streak in Republican presidential politics:
2004 - George W Bush/Dick Cheney
2000 - George W Bush/Dick Cheney
1996 - Bob Dole/Jack Kemp
1992 - George HW Bush/Dan Quayle
1988 - George HW Bush/Dan Quayle
1984 - Ronald Reagan/George HW Bush
1980 - Ronald Reagan/George HW Bush
1976 - Gerald Ford/Bob Dole
Thus ends the streak of 8 straight Republican tickets with a Bush or a Dole on them.
Another thing I just noticed. Palin's second child is a 17-year-old named Bristol (female).
Keith Olbermann tonight noted that at one time Palin aspired to be a ESPN sportscaster.
ESPN is headquartered in Bristol, Connecticut. Maybe a connection? Has that been commented on at all today?
tracilicious
08-29-2008, 08:41 PM
My (female, pro-Obama, anti-McCain) perspective seems to be aligned with Helen's. I'm insulted. The very idea that droves of women will swing over to vote for McCain simply because he picked an unknown woman to run with him...grrr. What does she really bring to the table in terms of "something McCain doesn't have"?
Regarding "family values", whatever that means - she returned to work three days after giving birth to her Trig (the one with down syndrome) saying (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-05-10-4082128881_x.htm)"My baby will not be at all or in any sense neglected." I run a bit conservative on those lines, and I'm sure there are plenty of McCain supporters who would be troubled by the working mom mystique.
Likewise. Not that I would vote McCain anyways, but it so happens that pretty much every first world country besides US offers paid maternity leave. Doesn't sound like she'd be pushing women's rights in that direction. Her 3 day return says to me that she doesn't value family all that much.
Gemini Cricket
08-29-2008, 09:19 PM
Just to be pedantic ('cause I can)... It's nappy rabbits.
According the the script, it's posted online:
ADDISON
(icily)
Claudia dear, come closer.
(she does, and he points)
This is Max Fabian. He is a
producer. Go do yourself some good.
MISS CASWELL
(sighs)
Why do they always look like
unhappy rabbits?
ADDISON
Because that is what they are. Go
make him happy.
Source (http://sfy.ru/sfy.html?script=all_about_eve)
Strangler Lewis
08-29-2008, 10:51 PM
Obama now has a campaign taunt available to him that probably hasn't been heard since the days of James Buchanan:
"First I'm going to beat you. Then I'm going to f*ck your vice president."
True, but if you were Buchanan would you have been able to resist the allure of William Dayton (http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/3245265.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=DCB332A6E7C66BD39D128520751F6D27A55A1E4F32AD3138 )?
Chernabog
08-29-2008, 11:05 PM
True, but if you were Buchanan would you have been able to resist the allure of William Dayton (http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/3245265.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=DCB332A6E7C66BD39D128520751F6D27A55A1E4F32AD3138 )?
And to think that one image just replaced my entire porn collection. :eek:
Her 3 day return says to me that she doesn't value family all that much.
To me, that's a woman in patriarchal Alaska overdoing the I'm-tougher-than-a-man. And speaking of Alaska, Palin is governor of a state with a population of 670,00 or, as the Dallas News says here (http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/08/governor-of-ala.html), Alaska = Memphis.
So if she could go back to work after 3 days, the job of governor of Alaska can't be that demanding.
Palin is a Dan Quayle pick.
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 07:16 AM
As I've thought about this and read about her, I 've come to the decision that she is a great choice for a few reasons.....
She solidifies the conservative base that has been wavering on McCain.
She is a pick that cannot be portrayed as just another white guy republican.
She has been a reformer in Alaska, where the government had been quite corrupt taking on the leadership within the republican party. Seems like she's tough.
She can appeal to those Hillary voters that (much to the chagrin of 3894) want to see a female on the ticket.
She is really a fiscal conservative, slashing unnecessary projects and cutting taxes in Alaska.
This is of course, without ever having seen or heard her outside a news clip or a sound bite.
To call her a Dan Quayle pick may be effective, but I am also of the opinion that calling Obama a Jimmy Carter pick can be effective.
BDBopper
08-30-2008, 07:41 AM
If you want to know the impact of McCain's choice I've got a scoop.
My Mom is the secretary for a local Private school for special needs children. Once the parents found out that Palin has a child with down syndrome that is all they would talk about when the parents picked up their kids yesterday afternoon. Everything was overly positive and all of them will be voting for McCain/Palin (and some of these parents are liberal). Whether it is true or not the perception is that if McCain is elected the person a heartbeat away from the Presidency will understand what it is like to be a parent with a special needs child and understands their needs.
Strangler Lewis
08-30-2008, 07:57 AM
It seems she has about as much experience as Spiro Agnew did when he was selected in 1968, so I assume that angle will die down fairly quickly, and we'll focus on the folks at the top of the ticket.
As for women, well, as we see here, womens is haters. Plenty of women will find reason to dislike her.
Regardless of whether the labels are warranted, I'd point out that Jimmy Carter candidates and Dan Quayle picks aren't exactly shining examples of presidential election failure.
Now, since I did it for Obama's selection of Biden I felt compelled to do it with McCain's selection Palin. So I watched several hours of talking head coverage across many channels and once again found a startling pattern.
Those commentators and analysts who align with the Republicans are close to universally claiming to be of the opinion that Palin is a good to great selection as running mate. Those commentators and analysts who align with the Democrats are close to universally claiming the opinion that it is at best an indifferent and at worst a sign of desparation on McCain's part.
And once again I am sure this party divide is completely coincidental and that each analyst reached their conclusions after careful personal consideration that has nothing to do with the memorizing the bullet points on their parties' various press releases.
In fact, I am so shocked by these patterns seen in response to the Biden/Palin selections that I will be submitting them as a topic for coverage in the next revival of Ripley's Believe it Or Not!
She can appeal to those Hillary voters that (much to the chagrin of 3894) want to see a female on the ticket.
But a female who wants to outlaw all abortions in every circumstance ... But then, working and middle- class Republicans vote against their self-interest all the time.
In fact, I am so shocked by these patterns seen in response to the Biden/Palin selections that I will be submitting them as a topic for coverage in the next revival of Ripley's Believe it Or Not!
You're equating Biden with Palin? You need more sleep.
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 08:23 AM
But a female who wants to outlaw all abortions in every circumstance ... But then, working and middle- class Republicans vote against their self-interest all the time.
Perhaps to some voters an election is all about SELF interest. For example, if Obama wins and the Obama tax cut link posted by CP is accurate, I stand (assuming the cut happens, which is indeed not a gauruntee in the least if he wins) to get a HUGE tax cut. However, because I don't think his tax policies are best for the country overall, it doesn't affect my selection.
JWBear
08-30-2008, 08:35 AM
According the the script, it's posted online:
Source (http://sfy.ru/sfy.html?script=all_about_eve)
What are the sources for those scripts? There is nothing to say where they came from; no copyright acknowledgments; no credits; no nothing. Also, it's hosted on a Russian server (that's never a good sign).
If you watch the movie, she clearly says "nappy" (which makes more sense than "unhappy" in the context).
Motorboat Cruiser
08-30-2008, 08:59 AM
She can appeal to those Hillary voters that (much to the chagrin of 3894) want to see a female on the ticket.
She can appeal to them, only if they are willing to compromise every other issue that they believe in. This is a woman who thinks that creationism should be taught in school, that is pro-life, pro-drilling in ANWR, anti-environment, etc.
If one was a supporter of Hillary, then it seems a fair assumption that one also agreed with her policies. And yet, all of those must be discarded to vote for this woman. I just don't see them being successful in that regard. People didn't just want to see "a woman" on the ticket. They wanted to see a specific woman on that ticket. If the Pubs threw Mariah Carey on the ticket, I don't think you are going see Hillary supporters flocking to support her.
You're equating Biden with Palin? You need more sleep.
Perhaps you need some sleep. I made absolutely no comment on either Biden or Palin in that post and certainly did nothing to compare them.
My comment was purely on the obviousness partisan nature of the responses by the nattering class to the selections. And that, therefore, they are essentially meaningless since they come from no attempt at actual analysis but rather are overt spin.
But if you'd like, here is my comparison of them:
In terms of the impact they have on how I am going to vote they are equal. I don't particularly give a damn who is selected as vice president because, though a non-zero chance, my views of the actual candidates for president are never so equal that I need to go to the twelfth tie-breaker.
As to which I would prefer be president if I had to choose between Biden and Palin, Biden would obviously be the choice. As to which I think would make a better advisor to the president, again I would say Biden.
That said, for me to say that I would not vote for Palin as president does not require me to decide she is a horrible person, or a horrible mother, or an idiot, or an empty shirt, or minimize her by calling her a MILF, or emphasizing that she once did well in a beauty pageant.
It is perfectly possible to think she is not cut out to be president while still thinking that she is likely a decent, intelligent, articulate person with whom I have significant political differences. 24 hours ago half the commentators on TV were still struggling to find the proper pronunciation of her name and yet by noon they had all set their opinions of her in Quikcrete. Opinions, that just oh so conveniently fit the narrative for success by their preferred candidate.
She may be the return of Dick Nixon or she may be the reincarnation of Abraham Lincoln. It doesn't matter, she is on the underside of a political ticket lead by a candidate I'm not gonig to vote for regardless.
tracilicious
08-30-2008, 09:17 AM
She can appeal to them, only if they are willing to compromise every other issue that they believe in. This is a woman who thinks that creationism should be taught in school, that is pro-life, pro-drilling in ANWR, anti-environment, etc.
If one was a supporter of Hillary, then it seems a fair assumption that one also agreed with her policies. And yet, all of those must be discarded to vote for this woman. I just don't see them being successful in that regard. People didn't just want to see "a woman" on the ticket. They wanted to see a specific woman on that ticket. If the Pubs threw Mariah Carey on the ticket, I don't think you are going see Hillary supporters flocking to support her.
True that. I have a hard time envisioning many women that will vote solely on possession of a vagina. Hilary is a bad-ass in many ways. I wouldn't have been too unhappy if she had got the ticket. Palin is so clearly patriachy's b!tch that I can't imagine many empowered women giving their vote to her. All this does is give people who were already gonna vote McCain a warm fuzzy feeling that they're voting in as radical a way as those of us voting Joebama.
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 09:21 AM
She can appeal to them, only if they are willing to compromise every other issue that they believe in. This is a woman who thinks that creationism should be taught in school, that is pro-life, pro-drilling in ANWR, anti-environment, etc.
Anti-environment? Is pro-drilling automatically anti-environment? Or is there something else....I bet her website says she's for dirty air and water and the The Exxon Valdez was her dream ship. :)
In the same way that there are many one issue voters when it comes to abortion or tax policy or whatever, I would figure there are many one issue voters when it comes to a woman breaking through the "glass ceiling" and becoming VP.
tracilicious
08-30-2008, 09:22 AM
Those people are idiots and should be made to wear signs stating such.
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 09:27 AM
Are you referring to one issue voters in general or one issue voters on the glass ceiling aspect?
I don't understand one issue voters, personally, or one issue making someone a great candidate or party member vs. someone being a horrid candidate or a traitor. One issue (Iraq and terrorism in particular....I guess that's two, so i'll call it national defense to make it one) has separated one Joe Leiberman from the democrat even though he is a big time dem party line voter on every other issue. Does that mean the dems are stupid for black balling him over one issue? The same can be said for republicans that black ball a candidate who may not be as staunchly pro-life as they would like.
Sohrshah
08-30-2008, 09:40 AM
http://pics.livejournal.com/purpura/pic/000r5w0c
Just Sayin'
tracilicious
08-30-2008, 09:52 AM
Are you referring to one issue voters in general or one issue voters on the glass ceiling aspect?
I mean one issue voters, but particularly this issue. Her being a woman isn't even an issue. It's genetics.
Though I will say that I find voting for someone with whom you staunchly disagree with on all but one issue to be ridiculous, but voting against someone that you generally agree with but staunchly disagree with on one issue to be perfectly understandable. If my politics are generally aligned with someone, but they are intent on criminalizing abortion, no way in Satan's hell are they gonna get my vote.
cirquelover
08-30-2008, 09:53 AM
I don't know who the people are but an amazing likeness to McCain and Palin!
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 09:57 AM
You say you mean one issue voters, but then go on to say it is understandable, particularly with your one issue.
To you it may seem like an issue of genetics. To other women, it is symbolic of the obstacles women have faced in their lifetimes.
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 09:58 AM
I don't know who the people are but an amazing likeness to McCain and Palin!
I was going to say the same thing but then thought I might seem culturally illiterate or something. No clue who they are.
tracilicious
08-30-2008, 10:07 AM
It's more about deal breakers. If someone has ten deal breakers, but one issue that I'm aligned with, I'm still not voting for them. If someone has ten issues that I'm aligned with and one major deal breaker, I'm still not voting for them. Abortion is one, but there are others.
But to vote for someone solely because they have the right anatomy even if you wholly disagree with their politics is just offensive. To all women. I mean, I'm down with pvssy pride and all that, but to vote in such a way implies that you don't think a woman will come along with the brains, power, and leadership abilities that you normally look for in a candidate, so you have to take the first pair of tits on any ticket, regardless.
Sohrshah
08-30-2008, 10:08 AM
I don't know who the people are but an amazing likeness to McCain and Palin!
They are characters from Battlestar Gallactica, believe it or not!
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 10:25 AM
but to vote in such a way implies that you don't think a woman will come along with the brains, power, and leadership abilities that you normally look for in a candidate, so you have to take the first pair of tits on any ticket, regardless.
Well, there is nothing to suggest that Palin isn't smart or a leader. If someone disagrees with you it does not mean they are not smart or a good leader.
I disagree politically with....well, the vast majority of people here....but don't think they are stupid. Well, not all, anyway. ;)
CoasterMatt
08-30-2008, 10:30 AM
At least with Palin we don't have to worry about her shooting anybody in the face accidentally, she's quite a hunter/ice fisher.
To you it may seem like an issue of genetics. To other women, it is symbolic of the obstacles women have faced in their lifetimes.
I haven't seen any woman in this thread who agrees with this assesment.
JWBear
08-30-2008, 10:51 AM
Anti-environment? Is pro-drilling automatically anti-environment? Or is there something else....
She's also trying to remove polar bears from the endangered species list.
If there are so many women who will vote for a woman candidate only on that basis, then Elizabeth Dole's run for the presidency in 2000 wouldn't have flamed out before the first primaries. I don't think any significant number of Hillary supporters will be drawn to Palin.
JWBear
08-30-2008, 11:01 AM
Oh... for the record... My mother, a diehard life long Republican, does not like the choice of Palin. She thinks McCain was "stupid" to pick her because "He just did it to try and get Hillary supporters to vote for him".
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 11:12 AM
I haven't seen any woman in this thread who agrees with this assesment.
True. Out of the ....7 women? or however many that are posting in this thread, you are certainly correct.
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 11:14 AM
If there are so many women who will vote for a woman candidate only on that basis, then Elizabeth Dole's run for the presidency in 2000 wouldn't have flamed out before the first primaries. I don't think any significant number of Hillary supporters will be drawn to Palin.
I dont' think i said "so many women". I agree with Morrigoon's assessment that in a close election it doesn't take a whole bunch to turn the tide. Even 3894 must think it is a possibility because she almost immediately posted "women, we are better than this".
tracilicious
08-30-2008, 11:17 AM
Well, there is nothing to suggest that Palin isn't smart or a leader. If someone disagrees with you it does not mean they are not smart or a good leader.
True, and Palin may well be all of those things. But voting for her solely because she's female implies that you don't even care whether she's all those things. If someone thinks she's smart and a good leader and agrees with her politics then her being female should only be a bonus (if it factors in at all).
CoasterMatt
08-30-2008, 11:24 AM
I was hoping McCain would have picked Jaleel White as his running mate - nobody would vote against Urkel. :D
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 11:25 AM
I agree with you in principle, tracilicious. Remember, I said that I don't understand single issue voters.
As a support for my case, I'm going to (and I can't believe I'm doing this) talk about Geraldine Ferraro, who says she believes that Palin could be the difference maker exactly for the reason I'm talking about. Just so I'm not accused of becoming a Ferraro fan all of the sudden, I will say that I am only citing her to show that there are hard code democrat women that certainly see this along the same lines I do.
Even 3894 must think it is a possibility because she almost immediately posted "women, we are better than this".
Honestly, that's not at all what I meant. Her pick was a cynical move. McCain and his team must actually disdain the intelligence of women. That's what I was thinking.
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 11:45 AM
I'll accept that you meant that. However, it goes beyond that in terms of why she was selected....she isn't just a woman, she is a woman that has the effect of consolidating the conservative base. I don't pretend that being female, though, wasn't a major consideration on McCain's part.
Cadaverous Pallor
08-30-2008, 11:51 AM
Any person who votes for a ticket based on the VP is not thinking clearly. Any person who votes for a VP based on their gender, or the fact that they have a mentally challenged child are thinking even less clearly.
Of course this doesn't change the fact that they will vote the way they vote, which is why getting ACTUAL information out there is so important.
I'm not surprised that we have heard wack-job extremists online saying "I'll vote for any woman". Um, they're the most vocal crazies.
All I know is, Hillary better have her best speech writers working on this one. After her convention speech I'm sure she can put something good together in a few days.
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 11:58 AM
All I know is, Hillary better have her best speech writers working on this one. After her convention speech I'm sure she can put something good together in a few days.
You're assuming Hillary wants Obama to win. I still do not believe she does and is in the very difficult position of trying to act like she does without really helping him. The Clintons are very, very dirty politically and I am certain they have minions working behind the scenes to undermine him.
She wants to run again in 2012. She won't run against a democrat incumbant (unless he wins and is so completely inept that she thinks she can get away with it).
innerSpaceman
08-30-2008, 12:01 PM
That seems to be a very prevalent Hillary theory. So, I'm wondering ... will she garner some respect from Obama supporters, and even some from Conservative Hillary Tin-Hatters ... if she wholeheartedly uses her unique position and status to destroy the threat Palin's gender politics?
BDBopper
08-30-2008, 12:06 PM
So why are many people seeming to base their vote on the VP? I think there are several reasons
1. The primary season was very long and packed to the brim with candidates and the supporters of the candidates that lost had a bitter taste of their nominee in their mouth. The Democratic Primary season was long and bitter. Over in the GOP the least popular candidate beforehand ended up winning by default
2. Good, bad, or indifferent voting for a 3rd party Presidential candidate is now seen as a wasted vote and people were looking for an excuse to vote for either of the major parties.
3. It's very politically incorrect but no Senator who has been elected President has ever survived office (from various causes). With two Senators running against each other looking and even basing your decision on the VP makes a little more sense than usual in a morbid sort of way.
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 12:07 PM
OK, so if I understand what you're saying, you think Hillary gains political strength by campaigning harder for Obama by going after Palin? I agree that could definitely happen, but I wonder what it gains her considering her ultimate goal is the Presidency. Hillary will be.....69 in 2016? Is that right? Something like that anyway. I don't know if she believe she can wait that long, particularly not knowing what other young dems (like Obama) will be coming into the national mix.
I don't see Hillary being content with anything less than the Presidency. A cabinet position, and ambassadorship....nice, certainly, but not what she wants. If she resigns herself that she'll never have the Presidency and gives up on that, it certainly changes the near term political structure.
innerSpaceman
08-30-2008, 12:16 PM
Whether that's her goal or not, she's smart enough to know she doesn't have the power to sabotage Obama's bid. The only thing she can do in her own best interests is to maintain her status in the Democratic party and bide her time. That's best done by putting on a happy face and campaigning as hard as possible for Barack.
As big an ego as she's got, I bet she's even self-aware enough to know she doesn't have the power to tilt the election his way, so she's really got nothing to lose and everything to gain by appearing to do her party-loyal best.
She's been given a golden ticket to do that more in the public eye by being a perfect foil for McCain's chosen ticket-mate. She'd be stupid to pass that up, and she's anything but stupid.
tracilicious
08-30-2008, 12:19 PM
Besides that, call me naive, but I think Hillary might actually want what's best for the country. More Republicans are not what's best.
CoasterMatt
08-30-2008, 12:27 PM
I think more Republican governing is what the country needs, but not in the guise of McCain/Bush types.
The last good Republican president was Bill Clinton.
innerSpaceman
08-30-2008, 12:29 PM
Exactly. I never understood why the Republicans didn't adore him.
To me, that's when the Republicans revealed their true nature. Nothing to do with their principles of governance. Simply bickering party politics of competitive gamesmanship.
Bill Clinton was a Republican president through and through.
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 01:55 PM
Whether that's her goal or not, she's smart enough to know she doesn't have the power to sabotage Obama's bid.
It depends. If she had something really, really bad on him she would have used it in the primaries. So she may not be able to sabotage him. It's really, then, about what her state of mind is and how burning her desire for the power of the Presidency is.
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 02:07 PM
With Gustav storming toward the gulf coast and specifically New Orleans, McCain has said he may delay the start of the convention. I think he should, really.
Micheal Moore said that Gustav coming to shore at the start of the Republican convention is proof there is a god in heaven. While I think understand what's he's meaning, it's still pretty sick to say considering the how strong the storm currently is.....almost as if he's gleeful that one is about to wreak havoc. He was quick to add that he doesn't want anyone hurt, but being that I thnk he is a sick individual I wcan't help but think he's hoping there is widespread destruction. That may be unwarranted on my part.
Anyway, I wonder what is going to happen. First, is anyone going to be stupid enough not to evacuate this time when ordered, and will local authorities actually do anything to help them get out, particularly those who may not be able to? I really doubt it will be as mishandled as Katrina was, but I know, sadly, it will be used politically on both sides whether it is or not....great federal relief will be used as a proclamation by McCain that republicans do care, and will be spun by dems that only because they had to this time did it go well and they will constantly talk of the failures of Katrina (without talking about the failings of the locals pre Katrina). If it doesn't go well, the dems will, of course, use it to their advantage. And I do think that would be legit.
Motorboat Cruiser
08-30-2008, 02:14 PM
It's really, then, about what her state of mind is and how burning her desire for the power of the Presidency is.
With the exception of being very disappointed, I think her state of mind is just fine. I didn't see any irregular face twitching or uncontrolled manic laughter. Just someone trying to keep a smile on their face, while being disappointed inside.
And as far as her "burning desire for the Presidency," since when is that a bad thing? Personally, I like seeing determination in a person. And just because she is determined, it doesn't seem reason enough to start painting her as if she is some sinister character in a political novel.
If McCain wins, two things happen - First, Hillary almost certainly runs again in four years. And second, the country is subjected to another four years of Republican policies. And that likely means a severe shifting of balance on the Supreme Court, not to mention all of the other impending damage that four more years of failed policies would mean. Hillary understands that the implications of the latter outweigh the gains of the former.
Hillary realizes that this was her best chance, and that part is sure to be eating at her. But she also understands that it is imperative that a Democrat get elected, if things like Roe V Wade are important to her, or alternative energy, or health care, or anything else she holds dear. And were she to sabotage the Obama campaign, it would inflict far more damage than any positive gains. She isn't that stupid.
I would like to see her gain a cabinet position. And who knows, maybe Biden will only stick around for 4 years, then she could slip into the VP role and be ready for 2016. I don't know. What I do know is that she's not this bloodthirsty vampire that she is made out to be. And even if she were, she still isn't stupid.
JWBear
08-30-2008, 03:19 PM
There is also, as someone mentioned earlier, the thought that Clinton will redouble her efforts to see Obama elected so that some other woman isn't the first female VP or President....
innerSpaceman
08-30-2008, 03:33 PM
Haha, excellent points, JW and MbC. :cool:
Stan4dSteph
08-30-2008, 03:41 PM
Who all is saying that Clinton will sabotage Obama's campaign? The Fox News pundits?
Anyone who is pro-Creationism is off my list immediately. I hope women are not that shallow that they vote for her just to get a woman in the VP seat.
Not Afraid
08-30-2008, 05:20 PM
Micheal Moore said that Gustav coming to shore at the start of the Republican convention is proof there is a god in heaven.
That's a brilliant bit of irony given what was "purported" by some to be the cause of Katrina.
Cadaverous Pallor
08-30-2008, 05:41 PM
The speeches both Clintons gave at the Dem Convention were clear enough. Continuing to say that she is going to sandbag the campaign doesn't make sense in the light of those speeches.
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 06:25 PM
I don't think Hillary is as concerned with policy as she is concerned with power. I may very well be wrong. It seems to me as if she has always put her own ambitions ahead of what was in the best interests of party and others.
BDBopper
08-30-2008, 06:40 PM
Should Creationism be the only theory taught in schools? No. Nor should evolution. A theory can only be proven false - or so said my atheist Astrology professor in college before he noted that it ironically validated Creationism (which he obviously doesn't believe in). Personally I believe in a hybrid of both.
If you teach kids both there is obviously much more evidence that Evolution is correct and 9/10 students will concur. I bet the odds are lower than that today without it being included in the curriculum.
Besides if you don't expose students to Creationism...or other sensitive things it results in ignorance. It doesn't have to be presented as fact. It just needs to be understood.
Dang...that was quite the tangent...sorry gang.
JWBear
08-30-2008, 06:50 PM
Should Creationism be the only theory taught in schools? No. Nor should evolution. A theory can only be proven false - or so said my atheist Astrology professor in college before he noted that it ironically validated Creationism (which he obviously doesn't believe in). Personally I believe in a hybrid of both.
If you teach kids both there is obviously much more evidence that Evolution is correct and 9/10 students will concur. I bet the odds are lower than that today without it being included in the curriculum.
Besides if you don't expose students to Creationism...or other sensitive things it results in ignorance. It doesn't have to be presented as fact. It just needs to be understood.
Dang...that was quite the tangent...sorry gang.
Should we, then, teach about the Tooth Fairy in dental schools? Or astrology in astronomy classes? How about teaching chemistry students that, with the correct ingredients, they can turn lead into gold?
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 06:58 PM
I was actually thinking of this from another aspect. In 1996 Bob Dole was the republican nominee because no one wanted to run against Clinton. It could be that the school of thought is that McCain is going to lose so no one with future Presidential aspirations wishes to be on a losing ticket....whether that be Pawlenty, Romney, whomever. Instead of others being rejected BY McCain, perhaps the others rejected McCain. It actually may make sense since McCain had only met with Palin one time.
JWBear
08-30-2008, 07:01 PM
I was actually thinking of this from another aspect. In 1996 Bob Dole was the republican nominee because no one wanted to run against Clinton. It could be that the school of thought is that McCain is going to lose so no one with future Presidential aspirations wishes to be on a losing ticket....whether that be Pawlenty, Romney, whomever. Instead of others being rejected BY McCain, perhaps the others rejected McCain. It actually may make sense since McCain had only met with Palin one time.
I'll buy that. Makes sense.
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 07:21 PM
I'll buy that. Makes sense.
Oh sure. No one here ever buys my theories unless they bode ill for the republican...:)
JWBear
08-30-2008, 08:45 PM
Oh sure. No one here ever buys my theories unless they bode ill for the republican...:)
You got a problem with that? ;)
Sub la Goon
08-30-2008, 09:04 PM
They may have to put off the convention (and blame Gustav) while they sort out this scandalous rumor:
Sarah Palin's 5th child is actually her oldest daughter's (http://stupidcelebrities.net/2008/08/30/bristol-palin-pregnancy-is-vp-sarah-palins-5th-child-really-her-daughters-photos/)
Don't know if it has an ounce of truth, but that won't stop the speculating.
This pregnancy scandal is hitting the internet, and supposedly people “in the know” from Alaska are stating it is true, and that Sarah Palin hid her daughter’s pregnancy. And that the child, Trig Palin, might actually belong to her daughter, Bristol.
But could this just be a smear campaign?
I am not sure about the insurance fraud implications, but the juicy-ness of it alone make for excellent conjecture. And who is the dad I wonder? Inuit? Maybe not so Down's Syndrome after all... Or worst yet - a Chinatown scenario! "He's my brother" He's my son!.."
But then again, this is just my demented brain talking.
wendybeth
08-30-2008, 09:13 PM
Should we, then, teach about the Tooth Fairy in dental schools? Or astrology in astronomy classes? How about teaching chemistry students that, with the correct ingredients, they can turn lead into gold?
Hey, now- back off, mister. Astrology served the Reagan's very well during their tenure.;)
scaeagles
08-30-2008, 09:18 PM
So supposedly her whole pregnancy as governor was faked? That would be a trick.
If not true (and I'm suspecting it isn't), it's rather despicable.
wendybeth
08-30-2008, 09:24 PM
What if it were true?
I find it a bit unbelievable, but it is odd that she didn't announce it until she was nearly due, and that no one noticed. Oh, well- true or not, it's not the sort of thing one can hide for long. I'm more interested in the fact that she's in the midst of a scandal that could get her impeached, yet she's chosen to run as VP?:confused:
I dont' think i said "so many women". I agree with Morrigoon's assessment that in a close election it doesn't take a whole bunch to turn the tide. Even 3894 must think it is a possibility because she almost immediately posted "women, we are better than this".
I didn't mean that as a response to you specifically, but as a general thought on one of the supposed rationales for the pick. Sorry I didn't make that clear.
And I expect that Palin won't draw any measurable amount of women to the Republican ticket, at least not when you also consider those she will drive away. But we'll find out soon enough if that's the case.
So why are many people seeming to base their vote on the VP? I think there are several reasons
I think it is primarily that this is the news of the day. In another two months when it comes time to vote I think there'll be very few people who claim the VPs had much impact on their decision.
A theory can only be proven false - or so said my atheist Astrology professor in college before he noted that it ironically validated Creationism (which he obviously doesn't believe in).
If your professor said that, then he was wrong.
Gn2Dlnd
08-31-2008, 02:00 AM
First, is anyone going to be stupid enough not to evacuate this time when ordered, and will local authorities actually do anything to help them get out, particularly those who may not be able to?
I've already read that people who don't have the means to leave are staying. I hope the local authorities do step up this time, and offer everyone who needs one, a ride out of harm's way.
Not the hurricane thread, I know, but I wanted to comment.
Hurricane, John McCain. Hmmm.
flippyshark
08-31-2008, 05:00 AM
A theory can only be proven false - or so said my atheist Astrology professor in college
You had an Astrology professor?
Sub la Goon
08-31-2008, 06:34 AM
You had an Astrology professor?
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa152/ItachiRedeyes/Harry%20Potter/Teachers/Trelawney.jpg
"Economics is the 'science' that makes Astrology look good."
-my dad
Strangler Lewis
08-31-2008, 07:44 AM
I was actually thinking of this from another aspect. In 1996 Bob Dole was the republican nominee because no one wanted to run against Clinton. It could be that the school of thought is that McCain is going to lose so no one with future Presidential aspirations wishes to be on a losing ticket....whether that be Pawlenty, Romney, whomever. Instead of others being rejected BY McCain, perhaps the others rejected McCain. It actually may make sense since McCain had only met with Palin one time.
One of my favorite liberal thinkers made this point also. (http://www.loungeoftomorrow.com/LoT/showthread.php?p=235959#post235959)
BDBopper
08-31-2008, 09:03 AM
Sorry folks...I meant Astronomy...not astrology LOL
Wow that was quite the gaffe! :eek:
scaeagles
08-31-2008, 11:00 AM
Must have missed that, Strangler. My thoughts were original in my mind.:)
Cadaverous Pallor
08-31-2008, 12:39 PM
I don't think Hillary is as concerned with policy as she is concerned with power. I may very well be wrong. It seems to me as if she has always put her own ambitions ahead of what was in the best interests of party and others.You can say this over and over, but it might be better if you actually listened to what she said in her speech.
scaeagles
08-31-2008, 02:29 PM
I read it.:)
Seriously, though, one speech to me does not mean that her political history goes out the window. I somewhat doubt that if Bush came out with a speech contrary to what your current viewpoint is of him that it would sway you much. You'd wait to see what he actually did rather than what he said.
scaeagles
08-31-2008, 06:53 PM
One thing that does not seem to be good for Obama at present is that while Gallup had him up by 8 immediately after his speech, a recent poll by Zogby has McCain up 2 and CNN has Obama only up one. The reason I say that does not look good for Obama is that there will be a (small) bounce for McCain after the republican convention. McCain's announcment of Palin immediately after the Dem convention seems to have negated the expected Obama bounce (which it seems like he got - going up 8 in the Gallup poll) when Gallup had had it tied for the previous couple of days.
Granted, it's still very, very close, but I'm sure Obama and his team expected a lead to hold for a bit before the Republican convention.
alphabassettgrrl
08-31-2008, 09:04 PM
I'm appalled at his choice of running mate. Well, as someone hoping for an Obama presidency, I'm delighted, but trying to be neutral, I think Palin was a terrible choice.
scaeagles
08-31-2008, 09:06 PM
Why?
wendybeth
09-01-2008, 12:51 AM
Hey, ABG- you're a chick! You're supposed to vote for the side with the woman on it, don't you know that?;)
Morrigoon
09-01-2008, 04:41 AM
She missed the memo.
I was discussing polling today and I think this may be the year that the major polls gets bit in the ass by a major demographic change: the abandonment of landline telphones combined with the fact that it is illegal to poll cell phone numbers.
Those demographics most likely to have no landline and just a cell phone are going to be underrepresented in these polls and there is little the poll takers can do about it. This has been discussed in the last two elections but it is a trend that has really accelerated since the last one.
As of December 2006 the number was already up to nearly 30% of people 30 or younger no longer had a landline. And this is an age group that skews in Obama's favor. As does that fact that cell phone only is much more common in urban than suburban or rural areas.
Of course the polling companies attempt to balance their surveys to account for this but they are just guessing and guessing with a number that is changing quickly. On top of that they are also having to make guesses on how much they need to change the definition of "likely voter" since if Obama can deliver the youth vote he appears to be inspiring that is also uncounted since many will not have the historic voting pattern that surveys look for in defining "likely voter."
I'm not saying they will get it wrong, but I see a huge potential for it. And it could go either way, if they overweight for cell phone only or if they overstimate Obama's ability to get young people to vote rather than just wearing t-shirts then they'll be underestimating McCain.
scaeagles
09-01-2008, 09:13 AM
Very interesting....apparently Palin's 17 year old daughter is currently pregnant. 5 months. Apparently this shoots down the rumor of the 4 month old Trig being her daughter.
Apparently her support of abstinence only sex education didn't work out too well for her.
Gemini Cricket
09-01-2008, 10:42 AM
17, pregnant, not married... tsk tsk tsk. Good thing Palin's a Republican or else there'd be controversy.
:D
Cadaverous Pallor
09-01-2008, 10:50 AM
I read it.:)
Seriously, though, one speech to me does not mean that her political history goes out the window. The speech itself was insistent and made its point over and over and over. "Think of the future", "this isn't about me", "the issues are what matters", "every vote matters", "no one should wait on the sidelines", "can't afford 4 more years", "I'll campaign as hard as I can for O", etc etc etc. Not word one of it was contrary. I guess you can ignore the speech entirely if you like, but I can't, because it happened.
I was discussing polling today and I think this may be the year that the major polls gets bit in the ass by a major demographic change: the abandonment of landline telphones combined with the fact that it is illegal to poll cell phone numbers.I've read about this too, though when you mention it to doubters and conservatives all you get is "that's spin, wishful thinking, blah blah." Basic fact - many young people don't have landlines at all.
scaeagles
09-01-2008, 11:38 AM
I guess you can ignore the speech entirely if you like, but I can't, because it happened.
Sigh. Not ignoring her speech. Just trying to say that one speech does not change my opinion of her as someone who is concerned primarily with herself rather than her party. I believe the proof will be in what happens over the next two months, not what she said in one speech.
I would add , since McCain has moved significantly to the right on tax cuts and other such things, that I believe McCain, once in office, will act upon what he has been saying. Campaigns make people do and say all sorts of things that don't really mean much.
scaeagles
09-01-2008, 11:41 AM
I've read about this too, though when you mention it to doubters and conservatives all you get is "that's spin, wishful thinking, blah blah." Basic fact - many young people don't have landlines at all.
I don't regard this as wishful thinking at all, I just think pollsters have typically been pretty good at their craft, and since it is their livelihood, none want the stigma of getting it completely wrong. I figure they are doing all sorts of things to get the numbers right. This is certainly a new twist, and they may be completely wrong.
Strangler Lewis
09-01-2008, 12:23 PM
Very interesting....apparently Palin's 17 year old daughter is currently pregnant. 5 months. Apparently this shoots down the rumor of the 4 month old Trig being her daughter.
You Republicans: always a spare arrow in the quiver.
scaeagles
09-01-2008, 12:39 PM
HA! I have three and three is FAR too many for me.
scaeagles
09-01-2008, 12:57 PM
I would add , since McCain has moved significantly to the right on tax cuts and other such things, that I believe McCain, once in office, will act upon what he has been saying. Campaigns make people do and say all sorts of things that don't really mean much.
Sorry to quote myself - wanted to point out that I did not type what I intended. I meant to say that I do NOT believe McCain will act upon what he has been saying during the campaign, and will go back to pre campaign mode, as evidenced in his voting record and pre campaign speeches.
Not Afraid
09-01-2008, 01:05 PM
Nothing matches the glee I feel when someone so socially conservative has to eat a big piles of public humiliation. I love watching the little dance they always seem to do to get out of it.
scaeagles
09-01-2008, 01:29 PM
Are you talking about her daughter being pregnant? How has she danced regarding this? She's come right out and addressed it and asked for privacy for her daughter....and in fact brought it forth herself due to the quite spiteful and vicious left wing rumors that Trig is not hers.
alphabassettgrrl
09-01-2008, 01:38 PM
I am appalled at Palin being chosen in large part because she's demonstrated almost immediately on taking office that she is more than happy to use her office for personal reasons. She tried to get her sister's exhusband fired for nothing more than being involved in a nasty divorce. When that attempt failed, she got his boss fired. WTF? Not cool.
McCain has been harping on Obama for having no experience, and yet he picks this girl? Who has very little experience in government? She's been governor for two years, not very much time. And of Alaska, somewhat out of the way. What are her qualifications? She's a mom. I don't agree that that qualifies anybody for political office.
I guess she's a well-behaved Republican. She touts her husband and her children, she's a pretty girl, she's pro-life, and she has zero respect for the environment.
I'm appalled that if this goes badly, we'll have her as a Vice for 4 years. Not to mention McCain as president for those years. I shudder and hope we can survive it.
I'm sure he's trying to get the Hilary girls, but they're not conservative. They don't believe a woman's place is in the home, they demand to make their own reproductive choices and think nobody gets to tell them what to think, and they prefer a strong woman, not just a pretty face.
Bornieo: Fully Loaded
09-01-2008, 01:59 PM
Did McCain choose Palin or a Lohan for VP?
Does her daughter have a deal for her own Disney Channel series yet?
scaeagles
09-01-2008, 02:02 PM
That could perhaps be one of the most offensive posts I've ever read, alphabassetgrrl. Sorry I asked.
Sub la Goon
09-01-2008, 02:16 PM
I think ABgrrl's post was not offensive at all and just illustrates the disdain with which some (don't know how many or what percentage) progressive women view McCain's VP choice.
The submittal of this n00b Alaskan to answer/entice disappointed Hillary supporters?
That is the real offense.
scaeagles
09-01-2008, 02:30 PM
I cannot speak to what she said regarding the firings and all. I don't know anything of it...there could be something to it, i don't know.
It was her third and fifth pargraphs, particularly the fifth, that I find to be offensive and ridiculously ignorant. I'm a conservative and don't happen to think my wife's place is in the home, and if you think my wife is stupid and doesn't think for herself as a conservative, than you obviously don't know many conservative women. My wife teaches at a Christian school where she was (gasp!) even allowed to remain as a teacher after giving birth! Can you believe it?!?!?! ABG has insulted every conservative female I know. How dare they NOT think like her! That must mean they are under the thumb of a domineering male who has brainwashed her into thinking that way.
On top of that, I don't know personally know any conservative leaning men that like stupid women nor any who have chsined their wives to a stove.
Yep - pretty insanely insulting.
And Sub, she offers a lot more than being just a woman in terms of consolidating a very shaky conservative base for the republicans.
Strangler Lewis
09-01-2008, 02:34 PM
Keep it coming, ladies. My mother, who was going to vote for McCain, now says she'll vote for Obama because of McCain's selection of Palin, this pretty nobody. My wife's elderly great aunt, who's never voted for a Democrat, will sit this out. (Frankly, I think they'll both change their minds again by election day.)
I don't think too much sport should be made of Bristol's pregnancy. I am interested in learning if Levi is a 17-year-old Michael Cera type or a 30-year-old oil worker. Will we see him before the election? As far as the possibility of covering up Trig, I'm mildly sympathetic to a misguided attempt to protect her daughter. What concerns me on the "what kind of person are we electing here" front is whether Palin made/is making decisions that are actually damaging to her family in service of her own political ambition.
I also don't like seeing people who campaign in terms of moral absolutes not being able to live up to them. However, like Reagan and Clinton, she may be one of those people who can milk sympathy and approval by projecting herself as a sinner of personal limitations. We'll see.
But as with Clinton and all these dogs, the truth comes out. Would I object to seeing some trumped up legal proceeding where Palin and all involved have to answer questions under penalty of perjury? Not at all.
innerSpaceman
09-01-2008, 03:05 PM
She's come right out and ... brought it forth herself due to the quite spiteful and vicious left wing rumors that Trig is not hers.
So, are you admitting the candidate would likely not have revealed this little Family Values gaffe if there were no rumors that could be squelched only with this uncomfortable truth?
That could perhaps be one of the most offensive posts I've ever read, alphabassetgrrl. Sorry I asked.
Sometimes, scaeagles, i have to wonder what planet you're on. alphabassetgrrl put it all together concisely, with conviction, and quite patriotically. :)
Are you saying none of that stuff about Palin is true? Using her office to fire people for personal reasons has been well-documented in the press. You asked here for a follow-up example to her disregard for the environment, and you were provided one.
What are you trying to claim about Ms. Palin??? That's she's not a corrupt hyprocrit lacking in experience and stewardship??? On.What.Planet?
E.T.A.: scaeagles has already expanded on his position while i was typing this, so disregard as necessary
wendybeth
09-01-2008, 04:01 PM
I cannot speak to what she said regarding the firings and all. I don't know anything of it...there could be something to it, i don't know.
It was her third and fifth pargraphs, particularly the fifth, that I find to be offensive and ridiculously ignorant. I'm a conservative and don't happen to think my wife's place is in the home, and if you think my wife is stupid and doesn't think for herself as a conservative, than you obviously don't know many conservative women. My wife teaches at a Christian school where she was (gasp!) even allowed to remain as a teacher after giving birth! Can you believe it?!?!?! ABG has insulted every conservative female I know. How dare they NOT think like her! That must mean they are under the thumb of a domineering male who has brainwashed her into thinking that way.
On top of that, I don't know personally know any conservative leaning men that like stupid women nor any who have chsined their wives to a stove.
Yep - pretty insanely insulting.
And Sub, she offers a lot more than being just a woman in terms of consolidating a very shaky conservative base for the republicans.
Sorry, dude. Maybe you're not aware of any- you're not a Neanderthal and I've no doubt you and your spouse have a reasonably equitable relationship. I live in a very conservative area, and I know a lot of couples where the dynamic is exactly how ABG describes. Not a one of them is liberal. Most of the women are very unhappy as well, but their hubbies remain blissfully unaware until they leave them. Working in the business I do, and living in the neighborhood I do (predominantly Mormon), I see and hear things I doubt very much you are privy to. You want to know how women really feel? Ask their hairdresser.:D
Palin is a joke, and McCain will be sorry he chose her over the many others (male or female) that were better suited for such an important job. I'd say I am glad he chose her, as it only helps our side, but I care about my country enough to be very concerned that someone like that is even in the running.
wendybeth
09-01-2008, 04:06 PM
Oh, and I just had to say that yesterday we at a festival in our downtown park, which draws people from all over the area. The Democrat's booth was swamped, while the Repub's was deserted. The guy running the Dem booth said it had been that way since the start of the festival. As I stated before, this is a very conservative town and it was really cool to see so much interest in the Dems for a change. There are Obama/Biden stickers and signs everywhere. It's nice to have hope for once.
scaeagles
09-01-2008, 04:11 PM
What does "someone like that" mean? Someone who is conservative? She obviously has helped rally the conservative base who is less than thrilled with McCain. Someone with so little experience? If it experience that matters, then why be excited about Obama? Someone who has a track record of eliminating spending and opposing the party leadership, and calling out corrupt Republicans?
I really have no idea what is offensive about this woman in the least.
I have no doubt there are people exactly as have been described. I know people who support abortion because abortions have a higher rate among the african american population, and they are racists and want fewer african american people around. Pretty disgusting. But they exist. I don't think it would be a good idea to come on this board and say that people who support abortion do so for that reason. I think that mught rile a few people up. Apparently, though, painting with a broad brush like that is completely acceptable here when it comes to conservatives. It is offensive.
scaeagles
09-01-2008, 04:15 PM
As I stated before, this is a very conservative town
Didn't you guys have Tip O'Neill there? He was from Spokane, right?
scaeagles
09-01-2008, 04:22 PM
And while I realize there is doubt as to the polling, here (http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews1547.html) is some Zogby stuff taken after the selection of Palin.
wendybeth
09-01-2008, 04:23 PM
Nope- Tom Foley. And the idiots voted him out, while he was House Speaker (although he would have been minority leader should he have been re-elected) and voted in George Netherbutt, who ran on a term limits platform. Of course, he changed his mind about term limits when his was up, and ran again. Dick.
scaeagles
09-01-2008, 04:25 PM
Sorry - duh. Wrong speaker.
wendybeth
09-01-2008, 04:35 PM
Oh, and "someone like that" refers to her hypocrisy with regards to 'family values', her activities regarding her ex-brother-in-law, her determination to take away MY reproductive rights, and the fact that she obviously wears the pants in her family yet pretends that hubby is the Fearless Leader of the Clan. I'm sick of strong women having to take a backseat to their husbands for fear of emasculating them- why can't they just be partners? Why does someone have to be the leader, and if it is necessary, why would the person in the leadership role have to sit in the backseat and play all meek and mild just to make the other look and feel like the stronger one? This goes both ways- I know lots of men who do everything for their wives, yet present as a true couple without the whole leader/follower dynamic. I only wish they would teach their wives how to survive after they are gone. (Speaking about one of my clients in particular who just lost her hubby, and is absolutely helpless about even such simple things as check writing.)
Motorboat Cruiser
09-01-2008, 04:54 PM
....and in fact brought it forth herself due to the quite spiteful and vicious left wing rumors that Trig is not hers.
Interestingly enough, while that story was inaccurate (and it was never reported as anything more than speculation) it did bring out an interesting concern about Palin's judgment that is certainly more than a rumor. It's based on what she said after she gave birth.
As she tells the story, she was in Texas when she felt herself leaking amniotic fluid. Rather than check into a hospital immediately, which is what I understand is pretty standard procedure, she not only went on to give the speech, but then proceeded to board an 8-hour flight back to Alaska because "her and her husband didn't want the baby of an Alaskan Governor to be born in Texas." Landing in Alaska, they then made another 45 minute drive to small hospital, rather than go to the medical facilities that were close to the Anchorage airport.
She says that her doctor gave her the OK for the flight, but a number of doctors have weighed in on this and said that no doctor in his right mine would have. Besides the risk of the baby being born premature while in flight, there is also a very serious risk of infection setting in once the water has broken. Quite a few babies have died from these infections, which can set in within hours. No matter how you slice it, she put the baby at extreme risk by making this flight, rather than seeking medical attention at the location she was at. And if nothing else, I would say this falls under the category of extremely poor judgment as well.
sleepyjeff
09-01-2008, 05:12 PM
Boy that McCain is a real asshole stealing your moment in the sun. Will this change your vote?
You said it....but no, I am happy with his new choice.
Biden should go after Palin with everything he's got and she should go after him likewise. The fact that it was even brought up shows the perception of a less-qualified candidate in McCain's running mate.
Biden would be wise to lay off discussing experience or qualifications.......Palin has more executive experience(and the office of President is an executive position) then Biden, McCain, and Obama combined;)
I don't think any significant number of Hillary supporters will be drawn to Palin.
In a close state(such as Florida 2000) it won't take but a few score of such voters:D
I have seen no solid documentation in the press that she abused her position in regards to her ex-brother-in-law. I have seen plenty of documentation that there are accusations she has.
As I'm sure we're all aware, legislative "independent investigations" are easily spawned for purely political reasons with little merit in reality. I have no idea if the accusations have been true, I just haven't seen any strong evidence either way besides gleeful liberals saying "it's been accused, and since I oppose the candidate, it must be true!"
Biden would be wise to lay off discussing experience or qualifications.......Palin has more executive experience(and the office of President is an executive position) then Biden, McCain, and Obama combined;)
What I've found most interesting about this line of argument that has solidied in the last couple of days is that everybody is trying so hard to sell it that if bought into one must inevitably come to the conclusion that Palin is the most qualified presidential candidate on ticket. To that I ask, if rather than being selected for VP she had actually tried to campaign for president, would a single Republican anywhere in the country have bought the idea that her mayorship and 18 months as governor were great qualifications?
Now, I am fine with her qualifications because I don't think there is any such thing when it comes to being president; and generally the definition of suitable experience changes from person-to-person to magically align with whatever candidate they are currently supporting. I just think the facility with which Republicans are (on average) buying this line is a particularly amazing example of the art.
Sorry to quote a Democrat but I think Michael Kinsley said it well yesterday (and I apply this to both sides):
The whole "experience" debate is silly. Under our system of government, there is only one job that gives you both executive and foreign-policy experience, and that's the one McCain and Obama are running for. Nevertheless, it's a hardy perennial: If your opponent is a governor, you accuse him or her of lacking foreign-policy experience. If he or she is a member of Congress, you say this person has never run anything. And if, by any chance, your opponent has done both, you say that he or she is a "professional politician."
scaeagles
09-01-2008, 05:27 PM
So ABG implies that Palin is weak (she said that Hillary supporters like strong women, not this Palin), but you WB say she is strong but likes to pretend she isn't.
If she is taking a backseat to her husband, who do you suppose wants it that way - Palin herself, who is obviously wanting leadership in that she is the Governor of a state, or her husband, who may not want to appear as weak? I would suppose it would be her husband (if indeed thisis taking place), who is, I've read, a democrat. But wait! I thought only republican men thought in such ways!
What is her hypocrisy in the whole family values area?
MBC, I haven't read the account of which you speak, but that would definitely be seriously poor judgmet on her part.
And that was very well put by Kinsley.
Thinking about this more I wonder if sleepyjeff and others would agree that David Paterson, Governor of New York for these last 5.5 months is more qualified than John McCain, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden to be president since he has executive experience?
scaeagles
09-01-2008, 05:31 PM
I would argue that McCain and Biden are the most "qualified", with Obama and Palin running so far behind that it's tough to tell who would be third and fourth.
And while what I'm about to say is good for Obama and should be a talking point for him, no one person has enough experience to be President. Not possible. Too many things to be expert on. One must surround ones self with smartt, trusted, and knowledgable people in various areaa of expertise. With that being said, I do regard foreign policy credentials as the most important thing for a head of state.
sleepyjeff
09-01-2008, 05:48 PM
Thinking about this more I wonder if sleepyjeff and others would agree that David Paterson, Governor of New York for these last 5.5 months is more qualified than John McCain, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden to be president since he has executive experience?
Yes, I would.
Then again, I am still stunned that we have to choose between 2 US Senators(one of which chose another US Senator for his running mate) for President. .....and they have the gaul to say they are agents of "change".
wendybeth
09-01-2008, 05:49 PM
I've no doubt Palin is a strong woman- no way she could have gotten this far without being so. She is weak because she allows herself to be perceived as something less than she is. Some women may be content to be the power behind the throne, so to speak, but if you are putting yourself out as a leader of people it's going to go over very poorly with a good segment of the population. It's dishonest and it propagates that sort of old world attitude. There is no doubt Hillary is her own person, as was Thatcher and Meir and nearly all the other great female leaders that come to mind. (I don't have to agree with them politically to acknowledge their role in women's history). Even Benizir Bhutto, who hailed from one of the most patriarchal of societies, was a strong woman. Palin is not.
I find her family values skewed from my perspective due to the above- the willingness to be submissive in order to gain power is sad, and a bad example to her girl and others as well. Now, her child is with child, and luckily she has a family who will support her in this ordeal- I'm sure she will be fine, but what of all the other girls (and boys) who engage in unprotected sex? Is she going to help them out as well? Not with the party she's affiliated with- they are well known for cutting social services and casting unwed (or even young wed but poor) kids in a negative light. I agree with Obama- the best way to end abortion is to educate kids and provide access to birth control. Just hope you don't get a pharmacist who is sure Jesus doesn't want him/her to dispense said controls.
I could go on and on, but really- you don't care about my opinion, and this could just be yet another thread where we all do the same dance ad nauseaum. Suffice it to say that this is one woman who does not consider Palin a role model, in any way.
scaeagles
09-01-2008, 05:59 PM
I've no doubt Palin is a strong woman ..... Even Benizir Bhutto, who hailed from one of the most patriarchal of societies, was a strong woman. Palin is not.
Not trying to be a putz about this, but you start off saying you have no doubt she's a strong woman, then a few sentences later say she isn't a strong woman. Granted, after you say this you say is she is weak because she doesn't want to appear strong. I don't understand that, but OK. I dont' understand how she is trying to appear weak....obviosuly she's the governor of a state.
Like Alex has alluded to, I think those who dislike her politically will find all sorts of reasons to slam on her, and those that so will find all sorts of reasons to praise her.
But you're right....no one is going to convince anyone of anything here. I do care about your opinion, though. Why would I continue to question what you think if I didn't care why you think it?
wendybeth
09-01-2008, 06:12 PM
You are being a putz, or disingenuous- you know perfectly well what I mean and are nitpicking to elicit a reaction. I reiterate: she is a strong woman, but she is allowing herself to play a role antithetical to her character to achieve her aims. No doubt a hangover from her beauty pageant days, but it makes me ill. Oh, and your silly 'Gotcha!' regarding her husband does not provide support to your position. Perhaps she would not be where she is at if he were a Republican.;) Seriously, though- I mean how she projects her image outwardly- obviously they have a relationship that works, but she would have you and everyone else believe that they have a very different relationship: a good old fashioned Hubby rules the roost one. Do you seriously think that is the case? (Especially if she is elected VP, but even when considering her current job). If he were to tell her "No way you're going to that work related event- you're fixng me dinner, woman!" do you really think that would go over well? I get the feeling she's kick his ass from Juneau to Ketchikan.
scaeagles
09-01-2008, 06:13 PM
Whatever, WB.
Apparently she was gaining notice 13 months ago.....quite a write up (http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/851orcjq.asp) about her (I know, I know, doubters will shout Weekly Standard, blah, blah, but the facts are the facts).
wendybeth
09-01-2008, 06:17 PM
"Whatever?"
I thought you cared about my opinions there, Scaeagles.:p
scaeagles
09-01-2008, 06:20 PM
I sort of stop when I am called a "putz" (granted I suggested the word first) or disingenuous. ;)
wendybeth
09-01-2008, 06:22 PM
Oh, was that when you called yourself a putz, or when I agreed?
(Typically, I don't use that term, but when you posted it I kind of had to agree. I had just said I didn't want to continue, and then you posted and I bit. So, following my first instincts, I'll bow out like I intended).
Cadaverous Pallor
09-01-2008, 06:31 PM
Anyone who is against safe sex ed and ends up with a pregnant 17 year old in the house has some serious 'splainin to do. Anyone who goes back to work 3 days after they have their child can't claim to be on the "traditional family values" side of things. Even the craziest of feminatzis supports a 6 week minimum maternity leave.
Did someone post this already? Too true. (http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=183521&title=john-mccain-chooses-a-running)
alphabassettgrrl
09-01-2008, 06:49 PM
no one person has enough experience to be President. Not possible. Too many things to be expert on. One must surround ones self with smartt, trusted, and knowledgable people in various areas of expertise.
Leo, I did not mean to offend. The Republicans have built their public image (as I see it) around traditional values- Christian religion, women who don't work (mostly), anti-abortion, among other things. So by touting her husband and kids in her acceptance speech, she puts herself forward as following the party line. It's true that not all conservatives are the same, but they are operating with this public image.
I can't see the women that I know who are pro-Hilary voting for Palin.
I do agree that none of the candidates are qualified to be president- nothing but actually doing it gives that kind of experience. I just get a better feel that Obama will surround himself with better counselors than will McCain.
Not Afraid
09-01-2008, 08:47 PM
If Palin represents what the majority of women of this country believe, then women haven't come as far out of the dark ages as i thought we had.
I wouldn't vote for Palin - or anyone else touting her brand of extreme, dark ages, social conservatism - ever. Was Dan Quayle even this socially conservative?
Not Afraid
09-01-2008, 08:55 PM
Boy, as quickly as news about Palin is breaking, you have to wonder if she'll make it to November. It's come out that she has tight connections to an Alaskan political party that strongly advocates secession and is strongly anti-American:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9...477/878/581881 (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/1/4231/18477/878/581881)
Not Afraid
09-01-2008, 08:58 PM
The New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/us/politics/02vetting.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin)
Disclosures on Palin Raise Questions on Vetting Process
ST. PAUL — A series of disclosures about Gov. Sarah Palin, Senator John McCain’s choice as running mate, called into question on Monday how thoroughly Mr. McCain had examined her background before putting her on the Republican presidential ticket.
On Monday morning, Ms. Palin and her husband, Todd, issued a statement saying that their 17-year-old unmarried daughter, Bristol, was five months pregnant and that she intended to marry the father.
Among other less attention-grabbing news of the day: it was learned that Ms. Palin now has a private lawyer in a legislative ethics investigation in Alaska into whether she abused her power in dismissing the state’s public safety commissioner; that she was a member for two years in the 1990 of the Alaska Independence Party, which has at times sought a vote on whether the state should secede; and that Mr. Palin was arrested 22 years ago on a drunken-driving charge.
Aides to Mr. McCain said they had a team on the ground in Alaska now to look more thoroughly into Ms. Palin’s background. A Republican with ties to the campaign said the team assigned to vet Ms. Palin in Alaska had not arrived there until Thursday, a day before Mr. McCain stunned the political world with his vice-presidential choice.
Although the McCain campaign said that Mr. McCain had known about Bristol Palin’s pregnancy before he asked her mother to join him on the ticket and that he did not consider it disqualifying, top aides were vague on Monday about how and when he had learned of the pregnancy, and from whom.
While there was no sign that her formal nomination this week was in jeopardy, the questions swirling around Ms. Palin on the first day of the Republican National Convention, already disrupted by Hurricane Gustav, brought anxiety to Republicans who worried that Democrats would use the selection of Ms. Palin to question Mr. McCain’s judgment and his ability to make crucial decisions.
At the least, Republicans close to the campaign said it was increasingly apparent that Ms. Palin had been selected as Mr. McCain’s running mate with more haste than McCain advisers initially described.
Up until midweek last week, some 48 to 72 hours before Mr. McCain introduced Ms. Palin at a Friday rally in Dayton, Ohio, Mr. McCain was still holding out the hope that he could name as his running mate a good friend, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut, a Republican close to the campaign said. Mr. McCain had also been interested in another favorite, former Gov. Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania.
But both men favor abortion rights, anathema to the Christian conservatives who make up a crucial base of the Republican Party. As word leaked out that Mr. McCain was seriously considering the men, the campaign was bombarded by outrage from influential conservatives who predicted an explosive floor fight at the convention and vowed rejection of Mr. Ridge or Mr. Lieberman by the delegates.
Perhaps more important, several Republicans said, Mr. McCain was getting advice that if he did not do something to shake up the race, his campaign would be stuck on a potentially losing trajectory.
With time running out — and as Mr. McCain discarded two safer choices, Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota and former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, as too predictable — he turned to Ms. Palin. He had his first face-to-face interview with her on Thursday and offered her the job moments later.
“They didn’t seriously consider her until four or five days from the time she was picked, before she was asked, maybe the Thursday or Friday before,” said a Republican close to the campaign. “This was really kind of rushed at the end, because John didn’t get what he wanted. He wanted to do Joe or Ridge.”
Mr. McCain’s advisers said repeatedly on Monday that Ms. Palin was “thoroughly vetted,” a process that would have included a review of all financial and legal records as well as a criminal background check. A McCain aide said that the campaign was well aware of the ethics investigation and that it had looked into it.
People familiar with the process said Ms. Palin had responded to a standard form with more than 70 questions.
“It was obviously something that anybody Googling Sarah Palin knew was in the news and there was a very thorough vetting done on that and also on the daughter,” the aide said.
Mark Salter, Mr. McCain’s closest adviser, said in an e-mail message that Ms. Palin had been interviewed by Arthur B. Culvahouse Jr., a veteran Washington lawyer in charge of the vice-presidential vetting process for Mr. McCain, as well as by other lawyers who worked for Mr. Culvahouse. Mr. Salter did not respond to an e-mail message asking if Ms. Palin had told Mr. Culvahouse and his lawyers that her daughter was pregnant.
In Alaska, several state leaders and local officials said they knew of no efforts by the McCain campaign to find out more information about Ms. Palin before the announcement of her selection, Although campaigns are typically discreet when they make inquiries into potential running mates, officials in Alaska said Monday they thought it was peculiar that no one in the state had the slightest hint that Ms. Palin might be under consideration.
“They didn’t speak to anyone in the Legislature, they didn’t speak to anyone in the business community,” said Lyda Green, the State Senate president, who lives in Wasilla, where Ms. Palin served as mayor.
Representative Gail Phillips, a Republican and former speaker of the State House, said the widespread surprise in Alaska when Ms. Palin was named to the ticket made her wonder how intensively the McCain campaign had vetted her.
“I started calling around and asking, and I have not been able to find one person that was called,” Ms. Phillips said. “I called 30 to 40 people, political leaders, business leaders, community leaders. Not one of them had heard. Alaska is a very small community, we know people all over, but I haven’t found anybody who was asked anything.”
The current mayor of Wasilla, Dianne M. Keller, said she had not heard of any efforts to look into Ms. Palin’s background. And Randy Ruedrich, the state Republican Party chairman, said he knew nothing of any vetting that had been conducted.
State Senator Hollis French, a Democrat who is directing the ethics investigation, said that no one asked him about the allegations. “I heard not a word, not a single contact,” he said.
Mr. French, a former prosecutor, said that he was knowledgeable about background checks and that, he, too, was surprised that the campaign had not reached out to state legislative leaders.
A number of Republicans said the McCain campaign had to some degree tied its hands in its effort to keep the selection process so secret.
“If you really want it to be a surprise, the circle of people that you’re going to allow to know about it is going to be small, and that’s just the nature of it,” said Dan Bartlett, a former counselor to President Bush and an adviser in both of his presidential campaigns.
Former McCain strategists disagreed on whether it would have been useful for Ms. Palin’s name to have been more publicly floated before her selection so that issues like the trooper investigation and her daughter’s pregnancy might have already been aired and not seemed so new at the time of her announcement.
“Had the story been written about the state trooper three months ago, nobody would care about it anymore,” said Dan Schnur, a former McCain aide who now directs the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics at the University of Southern California. “It’s a risk. No matter how great the candidate, it’s a significant risk to put someone on the ticket” who hasn’t been publicly scrutinized.
“They obviously felt it was worth the risk to rev up the base and potentially reach out to Clinton supporters,” Mr. Schnur said.
But Howard Opinsky, another McCain veteran, said calling attention to Ms. Palin’s possible candidacy during the search process would have undermined the impact of her eventual selection.
“Had her name been played out in the press for months and months, she wouldn’t have been seen as so bold,” Mr. Opinsky said. “You either get freshness and you have to live with what you get in your vetting or you lose the freshness.”
Ghoulish Delight
09-01-2008, 09:00 PM
A 72-year old (btw, Happy Birthday, John) in an office that ages you at an alarming rate?
A black man who's going to bring out every crazy with a rifle to take pot-shots at him?
Yes, it's morbid. But assassination attempts will quadriplicate if Obama wins, and McCain can't take the first term's 10 years of aging without expiring of natural causes.
I still do not consider raised risk of assassination/natural cause death of particular import when looking at VP.
That said, I picked a bad time to see Oliver Stone's JFK for the first time.
Gn2Dlnd
09-01-2008, 09:31 PM
So, I wonder if the wags who came up with the 57 star lapel pin in response to Obama's slip of the tongue (http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/57states.asp)
http://www.snopes.com/politics/graphics/lapelpin.jpg
will come up with a 49 star pin for McPalin.
Sub la Goon
09-01-2008, 09:42 PM
Boy, as quickly as news about Palin is breaking, you have to wonder if she'll make it to November.
I will be surprised if she lasts the week.
JWBear
09-01-2008, 11:30 PM
I feel I must ask our conservative friends here... Do you really feel comfortable voting for a presidential candidate who has shown such an alarming lack of judgment, in both himself and in the advisers he surrounds himself with? If you truly want what's best for the country, why would you vote for someone who has already demonstrated such a high level of incompetence? Can you honestly - deep down in your heart - believe McCain would be a better, more competent leader than Obama? Or are you only voting for him because he's Republican?
scaeagles
09-02-2008, 05:04 AM
I would figure you're basing that largely on the choice of Palin?
I don't consider the Palin choice to show a lack of good judgement, so I can't really comment as to that. The only other thing I can think of is the advisor who said somehtng like "the economy is fine, Americans are whiners", which was certainly ill advised and ignored the fact that many Americans are hurting (however, there is always a segment of the population that is....while I loved Reagan, my dad was serially unemployes during the 80s).
So I am voting based on the policies I think are best for America. Fiscal conservatism (please understandthat I know Bush is no fiscal conservative).....well, no need to list tham all. I have before.
And honestly, what she did almost two decades ago as far as her political affiliations doesn't matter much to me, nor does a drunk driving charge 22 years ago, nor does the fact she smoked marijuana when it was legal (and she at least admitted to inhaling), nor does a pregnant daughter.....
Strangler Lewis
09-02-2008, 05:43 AM
I don't care about her husband's DUI or about the mere fact of her daughter's pregnancy. As we learn more about her family, and we will, I may conclude that her handling of the matter reflects poorly on her as a) a person, b) a politician or c) both.
I do think that her apparent support for Pat Buchanan's candidacy is pretty close to supporting David Duke's and merits questions. (Maybe she just liked his isolationism.) The same with her membership in a group advocating Alaska's secession as there is no mechanism for state secession in the U.S. Constitution.
innerSpaceman
09-02-2008, 06:51 AM
Well, i can't fault her for that. I'm a STRONG supporter of California secession ... but of course, I'm not running for any office of the (I-don't-want-them-to-be-) United States.
scaeagles
09-02-2008, 06:56 AM
Well, 20 years ago (well, 18 technically) is a long time ago. If she still thinks it's a good idea, then I might see an issue.
And i wouldn't mind seeing CA secede either, Ism.
For what it is worth, a Rasmussen poll (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/women-more-skeptical-of-palin-than-men.html) shows women view Palin's candidacy notably less favorably than men.
innerSpaceman
09-02-2008, 08:14 AM
Ah, the MILF factor.
scaeagles
09-02-2008, 08:18 AM
In our backwards country where republican men think women are lesser creatures, I'm actually surprised by this. I'd figure democrat men are solidly in the Obama camp, and republican men would be threatened by a woman in leadership.
JWBear
09-02-2008, 08:30 AM
Her association with the AIP did not end 18 years ago. She still has ties, and she sent a video greeting to their annual convention earlier this year, praising them.
He picked her without doing a thorough vetting. It was an impulsive choice aimed at pandering to women and the religious right extremists. That was very poor judgment.
BarTopDancer
09-02-2008, 08:34 AM
I really have no idea what is offensive about this woman in the least.
I find it offensive that she is OK with the government telling her what to do with her body. I find it offensive that she wants to tell other women what to do with their bodies. I find it offensive that she probably didn't promote safe sex, and instead promoted no sex with her child and now has a pregnant teen. I only find the previous offensive because it's proven that abstinence only education does not work. I don't care that her daughter is pregnant. Sh*t happens. I care about the hypocrisy in toting abstinence only education as the best method and having a pregnant daughter.
scaeagles
09-02-2008, 08:43 AM
Would you be offended by drug couselors who have addicted children? Or teachers or school administrators who have children who are poor students?
I get the whole abortion thing (with the caveat that the governent has numerous restrictions on what one can do to their bodies, even if I concede that abortion is just about a woman's body). The whole pregnant teen when she touts something else is to basically blame anyone who promotes one thing while their children do something else.
BarTopDancer
09-02-2008, 08:53 AM
Would you be offended by drug couselors who have addicted children? Or teachers or school administrators who have children who are poor students?
I get the whole abortion thing (with the caveat that the governent has numerous restrictions on what one can do to their bodies, even if I concede that abortion is just about a woman's body). The whole pregnant teen when she touts something else is to basically blame anyone who promotes one thing while their children do something else.
Nope, wouldn't be offended by drug counselors who have addicted children or teachers/school administrators who have students who are poor children. I don't even put those in the same category. Didn't Regan have a son who was addicted to drugs? And wasn't Betty Ford an alcoholic?
The problem with abstinence only education is toting that it works, when in reality STDs are on the rise and teen pregnancy is up again for the first time in several years. Instead of being told that STDs can also be spread through oral sex teens are having unprotected oral sex because it's not 'real sex'. The Republican party says abstinence only education is the way to go, when obviously, it isn't. If they want to be on the high horse that it is the way to go, they shouldn't have ended up with a VP candidate who has a minor pregnant child. I wonder if the father is going to get busted for statutory rape. He's 18.
Strangler Lewis
09-02-2008, 08:57 AM
I'm not offended by Bristol's pregnancy or any of your examples. I am offended by politicians who speak in moral absolutes and who do not temper their pronouncements with the recognition that sh*t happens.
Now, as I've said before, I think this style appeals to a certain constituency that likes to be lectured from the mountaintop but still manages to fall self-servingly short because we are all sinners.
And even if she was a member of the secession group 20 years ago, the statute of limitations on Clinton's youthful "disloyalty" did not run after 20+ years.
scaeagles
09-02-2008, 09:07 AM
Well, the drug counselor I would find to be in the same category, though I don't think either are deserving of criticism for what their children do. The whole just say no of drug counselors seems to be similar to the abstinence issue, but that's neither here nor there, nor am I trying to bring up a debate about drugs vs. sex.
And Strangler, those questions were directed specifically at BTD based on her post.
I find moral absolutes coming from the left all the time. I suppose it depends on whether the particular moral absolute happens to be agreed with or not.
Strangler Lewis
09-02-2008, 09:26 AM
Many leftist moral absolutes/sweeping generalizations are quite silly.
Morrigoon
09-02-2008, 09:44 AM
scaeagles: but even in the "just say no" program, they teach you about the specific drugs involved.
I see the parallel you're drawing, but given the dangerous and addictive nature of drugs, I don't think teaching "safe" drug use will fly. There is a safe way to have sex, there is not a way to do drugs where you aren't interacting with/touched by the chemicals involved.
But you're right... there's a VERY thin line between the two. My point is that there is a line.
(And of course, the drug counselor is in favor of educating their kid on drugs - the kid is deciding to use in spite of it, not in ignorance, as with kids who are not taught about safe sex)
innerSpaceman
09-02-2008, 09:46 AM
What tickles me is that Palin made the revelation to quelch rumors that her teen daughter had a child out of wedlock. So, um, now her teen daughter is having a child out of wedlock.
WTF? It doesn't even make Palin that much less of a liar, since she only came out with the "truth" to quelch the other rumors that differed from the truth by a hair's width.
JWBear
09-02-2008, 10:01 AM
...So I am voting based on the policies I think are best for America. Fiscal conservatism (please understandthat I know Bush is no fiscal conservative).....well, no need to list tham all. I have before......
I'm sorry, but if you want fiscal responsibility, you’re not going to find it in the current Republican Party. The last eight years have proven that!
One of the reasons I’m voting for Obama is that I feel he will actually do something about digging us out of the economic hole Bush and co. have dug for us.
scaeagles
09-02-2008, 10:04 AM
I think she came out with that to deny that Trig was not her child as was being reported....well, rumored on blogs, not really reported. I don't think it had anything to do with her teenage daughter having a child out of wedlock.
scaeagles
09-02-2008, 10:06 AM
I'm sorry, but if you want fiscal responsibility, you’re not going to find it in the current Republican Party. The last eight years have proven that!
You may not be familiar with my criticisms of Bush that I have posted. Indeed you are correct. Bush spends money in a fashion that would embarrass druken sailors. I hate it. The republican congress he held in his first term went along with what he wanted and it is embarrassing. Honestly that's one of the reasons I like Palin. Her line item veto record in Alaska is impressive in terms of eliminating spending.
Morrigoon
09-02-2008, 10:12 AM
Well said, scaeagles.
I can't say that I necessarily believe Obama can "dig us out" financially. However, that's not why I'm choosing to vote for him.
I'm not entirely confident McCain can "dig us out" either. I hope that if he does make it into office, he'll shed his sheep's clothing of pandering to the party and stick to who he originally said he was. But I'm also hoping it doesn't get to that point, because my biggest reason for not voting for him has to do with letting the rest of the party (eg: congress) know that 'business as usual' isn't acceptable. Whereas I think if he gets voted in, it'll be taken as a vote of approval for the way they've been doing things, and we'll see more of it. After all, if the Republicans can't be beaten on the heels of a Bush presidency, when CAN they be?
JWBear
09-02-2008, 10:20 AM
You may not be familiar with my criticisms of Bush that I have posted. Indeed you are correct. Bush spends money in a fashion that would embarrass druken sailors. I hate it. The republican congress he held in his first term went along with what he wanted and it is embarrassing. Honestly that's one of the reasons I like Palin. Her line item veto record in Alaska is impressive in terms of eliminating spending.
But Palin won't have that power (unless you are hoping for President McCain's untimely demise). McCain has indicated that he will continue Bush’s fiscal policies. And as you said, the republicans in Congress have made no moves towards fiscal responsibility. So if the Republican Party has demonstrated (for the last eight years) that they give a rat’s patooey about fiscal prudence – indeed, that they represent just the opposite – then why vote for them on that basis? It doesn’t make sense.
Tenigma
09-02-2008, 10:37 AM
Sarah Palin -- good lord, where do I start? 17-year-old unwed daughter... should've announced the pregnancy weeks ago locally so as to make it "old news". Instead, she was apparently shunted off and not seen in public until she had to. Do we need anymore proof that abstinence education doesn't work? Hello Mrs. Palin?
She's a rabid pro-lifer... but she has no trouble going back to work three days after giving birth to a special needs child.
OK so I was reading the NY Times online today and I read the following comment (http://community.nytimes.com/article/comments/2008/09/02/us/politics/02mother.html?permid=24#comment24), written by a reader, and my eyebrows went WAY high:
Sue Williams, an Alaska Republican who has a blog called Mudflats, posted some very interesting reflections recently on Palin and how she is handling the pressures of parenting 5 children including a recent special needs infant, while working as a governor and now campaigning as a Vice Presidential candidate:
"But it is the same vein - this lack of judgement - Sarah showed, on the campaign trail for governor, when asked who would raise her children should she win, she promptly stated that Todd would quit his job and stay at home with the kids (Todd works a "Slope" week on/week off schedule).
Sarah was elected and then - whoops. Todd didn't like the stay at home gig - so Sarah, citing they needed money for the kid's college (even though Track enlisted in the military) said Todd was returning to work. When asked about her statements on the campaign trail about how Todd would quit his job, Sarah said she'd actually never talked to him about what they would do if she was elected (in terms of his employment) and that she'd spoken out of turn when she spoke for him stating he'd quit his job.
Again, call me picky, but this is the kind of bizarre judgement Sarah routinely displays. Are you kidding me that she would run for governor and she and her husband would somehow not think to have a conversation about what to do with their four school aged kids? That's insane. So, either her judgement is super goofy, or she wasn't telling the truth. Either way, it's not reassuring to now think this is someone who would be one 72 year old heartbeat away from having to call shots for the country/world.
So Todd trots himself back to work and Sarah is busy traipsing around the state and the nation. The kids are "farmed out" (this is the word used by thier associates in "the Valley") to family and friends to raise while Todd and Sarah are off having their respective careers (Sarah is famously quoted as saying, "My mom does whatever I need her to").
During this period is when Bristol, Sarah's sixteen year old daughter, turns up pregnant. So, it's kind of interesting to note that the Republican Vice Presidential Nominee and her sixteen year old junior in high school unwed daughter were carrying babies at the same time. Once Bristol's condition became more obvious this summer, she was whisked out of sight and hasn't been seen in public until yesterday in Ohio. This is why Trig's blanket was strung across her entire abdomen and torso, but, when she walked down the stairs from the stage, in a profile shot, it was very clear to see she is well into her third trimester of her pregnancy.
...
For me, once again it speaks to judgement. We all - every single one of us - even Sarah's closest friends in the Valley (I know, I've been speaking to them) know she is in no way qualified for this position. At all.
...
How does one dash about the country for the next 66 days trying to pull off an image of the devoted mother of five when she, by and large, isn't the one raising them?
Whoa nelly!!
So I went to go look for this Mudflats blog. It's here (http://mudflats.wordpress.com/). Holy moly -- interesting stuff from a local!! I'm adding her to my RSS feed!
sleepyjeff
09-02-2008, 11:10 AM
Let me see if I have this straight......Obama(who is running for actual President) can't be called out for "judgements" he made when he was 17 years old but the daughter of the person McCain chose to the Vice-President is fair game??????
This is why I am not a liberal, I get too dizzy spinning that fast;)
innerSpaceman
09-02-2008, 11:12 AM
Um, no one's questioning the choices of the slut daughter. Oooops, did I say that?
No really, I think she's just a normal kid, with the normal faulty judgment of a 17-year-old.
It's her mom's judgment everybody's questioning. Point me to one instance here on the LoT of someone questioning the daughter's judgment.
Ghoulish Delight
09-02-2008, 11:15 AM
I think she came out with that to deny that Trig was not her child as was being reported....well, rumored on blogs, not really reported. I don't think it had anything to do with her teenage daughter having a child out of wedlock.
It's waaay too coincidental that this bizarre Trig rumor popped up just before the announcement that her 17 year old was pregnant out of wedlock.
At best, the Trig rumor was started because Palin's camp was probably scrambling to figure out the best way to spin the real story. Either someone got wind of some sort of baby "scandal" with her daughter and built the Trig thing based on whatever trace of leak they found, or someone maliciously leaked it.
At worst (and I'm aware this is my JFK-addled mind thinking, I don't actually believe this to be true), the Trig rumor was actually started by her camp so that when the true "scandal" was revealed it seemed downright pedestrian next to faking a pregnancy.
Instead, she was apparently shunted off and not seen in public until she had to. Do we need anymore proof that abstinence education doesn't work? Hello Mrs. Palin?More than a single bit of annecdotal evidence? Yes. Fortunately (or unfortunately), there's plenty more (http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/publications/PDFs/impactabstinence.pdf).
Strangler Lewis
09-02-2008, 11:18 AM
I've heard a rumor that Trig is actually half vampire.
Tenigma
09-02-2008, 11:38 AM
More than a single bit of annecdotal evidence? Yes. Fortunately (or unfortunately), there's plenty more (http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/publications/PDFs/impactabstinence.pdf).
Wouldn't it have been better for them to simply announce the engagement, with the pregnancy as just a side thing? I think trying to shed more light on the family is unnecessary.
I don't question the 17-year-old daughter. She sounds like a regular kid who got caught doing something she shouldn't have (although I'm sure it doesn't help that her parents never bothered to explain anything about birth control). I do have to wonder why Palin thought it was OK to go back to work three days after giving birth to a special needs baby. But according to the Mudflats blog, she and hubby just farm the kids out to be raised by other people. Whatev.
Keep in mind, people -- this woman wants schools to NOT teach sex ed, and to teach creationist theory. SCARY!!!
But most of all, I think she is just a distraction!
Tenigma
09-02-2008, 11:40 AM
PS: Does it piss off anyone else that Palin is going around talking about how she chose to "keep her baby" after she found out the child would have Down Syndrome, when they didn't find out until she was in the second trimester and thus too late to have an abortion?!?!?
Same thing with the daughter. She's also in her second trimester.
sleepyjeff
09-02-2008, 12:01 PM
It's her mom's judgment everybody's questioning. Point me to one instance here on the LoT of someone questioning the daughter's judgment.
Ok, fair enough I guess.........gotta wonder why the daughter is even being brought up then(where's the raise one eye-brow emoction?) if this is not about her judgement; if it's truly just about Palin's stance on abstinance education you would think facts and figures would be enough to prove she's wrong(unless.....well, we won't go there;) )
Strangler Lewis
09-02-2008, 12:06 PM
Depends on what Alaska's laws are. What's mildly ironic is that Palin claims to be proud of the decision her daughter made when she would take that decision away. Theoretically, of course. The children of governors will probably always be able to make decisions.
cirquelover
09-02-2008, 12:59 PM
PS: Does it piss off anyone else that Palin is going around talking about how she chose to "keep her baby" after she found out the child would have Down Syndrome, when they didn't find out until she was in the second trimester and thus too late to have an abortion?!?!?
Same thing with the daughter. She's also in her second trimester.
I found that statement ironic also! Plus if she doesn't believe in abortion what else was she going to do, give it up for adoption just because it is special needs?!
Tenigma
09-02-2008, 01:01 PM
Ok, fair enough I guess.........gotta wonder why the daughter is even being brought up then(where's the raise one eye-brow emoction?) if this is not about her judgement; if it's truly just about Palin's stance on abstinance education you would think facts and figures would be enough to prove she's wrong(unless.....well, we won't go there;) )
Hmm... here is how the scenario supposedly panned out over this past weekend:
Rumor: Palin's new baby is actually her daughter's, and Palin adopted her!
To quash this rumor, Palin's camp announces, "No, it's not possible for this, because look look! The daughter IS PREGGERS *NOWWWW* and count backwards! See?!? Proof! Oh wait... yeah um... she is still only 17 and um... she's unwed... BUT SHE'S GETTING MARRIED SOON! HAPPY DAYS ARE HERE AGAIN!"
Well, the embellishments are mine.
But supposedly the revelation about the daughter was in response to trying to squelch a rumor.
sleepyjeff
09-02-2008, 01:04 PM
Hmm... here is how the scenario supposedly panned out over this past weekend:
Rumor: Palin's new baby is actually her daughter's, and Palin adopted her!
To quash this rumor, Palin's camp announces, "No, it's not possible for this, because look look! The daughter IS PREGGERS *NOWWWW* and count backwards! See?!? Proof! Oh wait... yeah um... she is still only 17 and um... she's unwed... BUT SHE'S GETTING MARRIED SOON! HAPPY DAYS ARE HERE AGAIN!"
Well, the embellishments are mine.
But supposedly the revelation about the daughter was in response to trying to squelch a rumor.
Perhaps; but I am kinda thinking the media would have figured it out pretty quickly and she just wannted to beat them to the punch...my take anyway.
Tenigma
09-02-2008, 01:09 PM
Perhaps; but I am kinda thinking the media would have figured it out pretty quickly and she just wannted to beat them to the punch...my take anyway.
Actually, they tried what they could to try to conceal the pregnancy. They shunted the daughter off once she started to show, and during the VP announcement, she was holding Palin's baby and covering herself up with the drool blanket across her entire front:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00391/Famiy385_391935a.jpg
BarTopDancer
09-02-2008, 01:13 PM
Actually, they tried what they could to try to conceal the pregnancy. They shunted the daughter off once she started to show, and during the VP announcement, she was holding Palin's baby and covering herself up with the drool blanket across her entire front:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00391/Famiy385_391935a.jpg
They also showed her with a blanket or bag in front of her when she wasn't holding the baby. It looked like a bad editing job on a TV show when they are trying to hide a pregnancy.
Ghoulish Delight
09-02-2008, 01:13 PM
But supposedly the revelation about the daughter was in response to trying to squelch a rumor.
As I mentioned, I find it highly unlikely that the Trig rumor was birthed, so to speak, entirely separately from the truth about Bristol. What's most likely is that her camp was either working to hide Bristol's pregnancy, or at least hide it long enough to announce it under their own terms. Someone without any real details got clued into something fishy going on, saw some email or other about Bristol and a pregnancy, and jumped to a conclusion. That seems to me the most likely scenario.
innerSpaceman
09-02-2008, 01:14 PM
They should have just hired a double.
Moonliner
09-02-2008, 01:17 PM
Despite the public pronouncements on the issue I am still suspecting that the phrase "pregnant unwed teenage daughter" never came up in the vetting process.
For me her personal family issues are nothing more than a highlight to the much more important issue of her views on sex education.
Not Afraid
09-02-2008, 01:30 PM
Despite the public pronouncements on the issue I am still suspecting that the phrase "pregnant unwed teenage daughter" never came up in the vetting process.
I'm not sure McCain had time to even ask her this question given the timeline from meeting to offer.
tracilicious
09-02-2008, 01:36 PM
I'm most disconcerted by the fact that she's getting married.
Not Afraid
09-02-2008, 01:42 PM
Well, ALL good marriages start with pregnancy, right?
Chernabog
09-02-2008, 01:44 PM
I'm most disconcerted by the fact that she's getting married.
Yeah it's a little odd. I'm just picturing Agnes Gooch in Auntie Mame saying "I'm a briiiiiiiiide!!!" I mean, do people in this day and age still call them "bastard children"? It's odd, I tells ya.
If I had to marry each person that gave me a pokey, I'd be way beyond Mormon.
Morrigoon
09-02-2008, 01:52 PM
Well, ALL good marriages start with pregnancy, right?
Damn, is that what I've been doing wrong all this time? :rolleyes:
innerSpaceman
09-02-2008, 02:55 PM
If I had to marry each person that gave me a pokey, I'd be way beyond Mormon.
You'd be way beyond your own small nation, but let's not get into that. :p
And I guess McCain just didn't have time to get into a lot of things. Um, but what's up with this Palin woman not mentioning it to him? She's congenital in the liarhood. I feel kinda bad for her, but I love watching McCain's campaign implode during the GOP convention.
And I wouldn't feel like that if he'd remained McCain. Perhaps scaeagles is right, and he'd renege on all his campaign promises (like every other candidate in history) and simply govern as McCain. But even that's got its problems. The rundown of his history in this week's Time portrays a man with serious temper and tantrum problems. Eh, maybe the piece is a little slanted ... by a press core totally slighted by McCain. Time is giving him a cover story and an entire issue about his candidacy, and he doesn't break his new policy of being a dickhead to the press ... and is as far from the StraightTalk Express campaign he pledged to continue this time around as you can get.
He's got congenital liarhood problems, too. Pfft, polititians! They suck.
Which leads me back to Cherny's little nation. :p
JWBear
09-02-2008, 03:01 PM
Is it just me, or does anyone else think that Todd "The First Dude" Palin is a hottie?
innerSpaceman
09-02-2008, 03:02 PM
Haven't seen him. Feature him in your avatar and I'll let you know.
But he's gonna have to be pretty cute to beat Bow Biden.
JWBear
09-02-2008, 03:16 PM
Haven't seen him. Feature him in your avatar and I'll let you know.
But he's gonna have to be pretty cute to beat Bow Biden.
Sure... Then all the cool kids will tease me, thinking I'm endorsing Palin. No way buster! Google him yourself! :p ;)
Strangler Lewis
09-02-2008, 03:33 PM
Sure... Then all the cool kids will tease me, thinking I'm endorsing Palin. No way buster! Google him yourself! :p ;)
Done.
A video of Mr. Palin discussing politics. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0kJHQpvgB8)
Ghoulish Delight
09-02-2008, 03:35 PM
He wears sweater vests, which means he fails to qualify as a human being.
innerSpaceman
09-02-2008, 03:40 PM
Apparently I must spread some mojo around that I intended for Strangler Lewis's inspired Mr. Palin response.
JWBear
09-02-2008, 03:43 PM
He wears sweater vests, which means he fails to qualify as a human being.
I just said that he was hot, not that he had taste. (Really! Look who he married!)
innerSpaceman
09-02-2008, 04:05 PM
Eh, not my type.
Sigh, Bow.
JWBear
09-02-2008, 04:27 PM
Eh, not my type...
What? Just because he's over 20? :evil:
Sub la Goon
09-02-2008, 05:56 PM
The other (or another?) rumor is that Todd Palin, the secessionist oilworker, is quite popular with the ladies of the Great White North.
They have some long winters up there...
Northern Exposure indeed!
Tenigma
09-02-2008, 06:03 PM
BTW some reputable news article I read from England (The Times? I can try to find the link) mentioned that Daughter Palin's boyfriend had a MySpace page which has since been taken down... but which said something about how he never hoped to have kids.
BarTopDancer
09-02-2008, 06:09 PM
BTW some reputable news article I read from England (The Times? I can try to find the link) mentioned that Daughter Palin's boyfriend had a MySpace page which has since been taken down... but which said something about how he never hoped to have kids.
Eh, I don't give to much credit to MySpace profiles. How many 18 y/o guys have "someday" on their MySpace children section. I also think "don't want children" is the default setting. Either way, at 18 it probably was not at the top of his list.
€uroMeinke
09-02-2008, 07:21 PM
They should have just hired a double.
You'd think that would be one lesson we'd learn from the Chinese at the Olympics
Tenigma
09-02-2008, 08:00 PM
Thanks to my friend who posted this link elsewhere:
Since the views of Obama's pastor were such a huge deal...
meet Sarah Palin's pastor (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/02/palins-church-may-have-sh_n_123205.html).
innerSpaceman
09-02-2008, 08:44 PM
Well John certainly sucked all the political wind out of the air with his bold surprise move of tagging Palin as his running mate. Not a peep has been heard about Whathisface Obama since.
In fact, it's all I hear in the press, and all I hear anyone in the real world talking about politically. I wonder if John's happy about that.
:D
Surprise! John ... the surprise is on you.
scaeagles
09-02-2008, 09:04 PM
I actually think this is turning out well.....when Obama feels obligated to say he's got more experience than the VP on the republican side, that says something about his experience level.
I just find that to be somewhat amusing.
Not Afraid
09-02-2008, 09:39 PM
Thanks to my friend who posted this link elsewhere:
Since the views of Obama's pastor were such a huge deal...
meet Sarah Palin's pastor (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/02/palins-church-may-have-sh_n_123205.html).
Whatever happen to "Thy will not mine be done"?
alphabassettgrrl
09-02-2008, 10:29 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/02/palins-lawyer-stonewallin_n_123179.html
McCain's campaign is trying to stall the release of the ethics report until after the election. Palin's lawyer is trying to get the investigation into the hands of a committee appointed by the governor. Partiality, much?
Rational actions, by those making them, trying to protect their image. Not so much something I want in an elected leader. Yes, I know the democrats pulled a lot of the same junk, I'm not letting them off the hook, but when you *know* ahead of time this is what they do when they step over the ethics line?
She's not saying she's innocent. She's saying she wants to stack the deck.
The daughter's boyfriend describes himself as "a f-ing redneck". He just wants to go hunting and fishing with the boys. Ok, fine, except now you're gonna be a daddy, and you need to make sure baby is taken care of which tends to cut into the leisure time. Not sure if his "doesn't want kids" is a setting, or something he specifically stated.
Morrigoon
09-02-2008, 10:50 PM
Oooh, babydaddy's kinda cute:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/01/levi-johnston-bristol-pal_n_123089.html
innerSpaceman
09-02-2008, 11:11 PM
Let's see how he looks at the end of the GoP's biggest shotgun on his wedding day in October.
scaeagles
09-03-2008, 04:54 AM
I'll be interested to hear more about Obama's dealings with Ayers at the University of Illinois Chicago. I wonder why those records were selaed for so long at a public university?
Honestly, I don't much care about those. My point is EVERYONE has skeletons. The right will excuse and justify the skeletons of those on the right, and the left will do the same of those on the left. It's all about who you support.
innerSpaceman
09-03-2008, 06:44 AM
I disagree. I'm pretty far to the left, but I generally pull my support if the skeletons pile up or start coming back to life as flesh-eating zombies.
I think what makes it look as if we treat Conservatives' skeletons differently is the element of hypocracy that often uniquely accompanies theirs.
The problem with decrying human nature in the public sphere and attempting to control it in others, is that it can't be controlled in yourself. We are all human, and Progressives have the advantage of allowing for that. So when "we" fukup, at least we haven't railed against that same thing in speeches and legislation. Human nature goes down much easier that way.
Ya know, the homophobes that get arrested in tearooms. The Fundies with unwed teen pregnancies at the time of their nomination, that kind of thing. :p
That's why we yawn when Clinton gets his dick sucked under the Oval Office desk. I'm not aware he ever badmouthed blowjobs.
scaeagles
09-03-2008, 07:40 AM
I do see a bit of hypocrisy on the left, though. Let's talk about the Clinton example -
Palin is being slammed on in numerous areas regarding "bad judgment". I suppose I would regard the whole Clinton/Lewinsky thing as very poor judgment on the part of Clinton.
Clinton was accused of rape by...shoot, forgetting her name. This was seemingly glossed over by the left, whereas Clarence Thomas was crucified in hearings for supposedly talking about public hairs on a coke.
If an intern of some fortune 500 company had an intern doing the Lewinsky on him in his office, feminists would be claiming harrassment simply because he was a powerful male and she was his underling. No such thing with Clinton and Lewinsky.
So we can all find hypocrisy in our those we wish to because to some extent we are all hypocrits. Again, it just goes to where one looks to want to find it.
sleepyjeff
09-03-2008, 07:43 AM
Clinton was accused of rape by...shoot, forgetting her name. This was seemingly glossed over by the left, whereas Clarence Thomas was crucified in hearings for supposedly talking about public hairs on a coke.
Juanita Broderick if I am not mistaken.
innerSpaceman
09-03-2008, 08:16 AM
scaeagles, I believe you're talking about the hypocrisy of the observer, of those who judge, not those who are guilty of the offense.
Where is the hypocrisy of Clinton's blow-job? Poor judgment? Yes, certainly. Not hypocrisy. Harrassment of women? Perhaps, but there was no outrage in the Lewinsky case because we all knew better. The handsome, charming, most powerful man in the world has to fend them off, not harrass them into sleeping with him. But improper? Absolutely. Hypocrisy? Um, no.
Yes, it's hypocritical for lefties to apply different standards to rightwingers. But that's not my point. I'm just explaining why I personally don't do that, and I'm pointing out why it seems I take more issue with rightwing fukups than I do with left's. It's the element of hypocrisy. Theirs, not mine.
scaeagles
09-03-2008, 08:26 AM
scaeagles, I believe you're talking about the hypocrisy of the observer, of those who judge, not those who are guilty of the offense.
Hmmm....certainly worthy of thought.
Strangler Lewis
09-03-2008, 09:03 AM
I can't help but think that if the Democrats nominated a black woman to be vice president and it turned out her teen daughter was pregnant and the boyfriend was quoted saying the kind of macho things one would expect a black teen to say that there would not be this outpouring of sentiment from the conservative family values crowd.
Moonliner
09-03-2008, 09:11 AM
Interesting...
Apparently while McCain is making his acceptance speech tomorrow evening, Obama will be making an appearance on the The O'Reilly Factor.
Ghoulish Delight
09-03-2008, 09:13 AM
Interesting...
Apparently while McCain is making his acceptance speech tomorrow evening, Obama will be making an appearance on the The O'Reilly Factor.Good choice of timing by Obama. The 'pubs that will want to skewer him will be watching McCain, and the dems that want to skewer O'Reilly will be watching him.
scaeagles
09-03-2008, 09:15 AM
I can't help but think that if the Democrats nominated a black woman to be vice president and it turned out her teen daughter was pregnant and the boyfriend was quoted saying the kind of macho things one would expect a black teen to say that there would not be this outpouring of sentiment from the conservative family values crowd.
And I can't help but think that the dems would be shocked and outraged at the prying into a personal matter and linking it to the candidacy.
sleepyjeff
09-03-2008, 09:22 AM
I can't help but think that if the Democrats nominated a black woman to be vice president and it turned out her teen daughter was pregnant and the boyfriend was quoted saying the kind of macho things one would expect a black teen to say that there would not be this outpouring of sentiment from the conservative family values crowd.
Maybe, but you can also be sure that those same people who are so outraged(mock or otherwise) by the daughter of a Republican daring to get pregnant would be jumping down the throats of any conservative who questioned the "judgement" of this fictional candidate;)
sleepyjeff
09-03-2008, 09:23 AM
And I can't help but think that the dems would be shocked and outraged at the prying into a personal matter and linking it to the candidacy.
EXACTLY!
Ghoulish Delight
09-03-2008, 09:24 AM
McCain ads flat out lie about Obama's tax plan (http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/a_new_stitch_in_a_bad_pattern.html).
Personally, I'm no fan of Obama's tax plan. It's a feel-good tax cut that is going to just increase our deficit.
But disagreeing with the plan is one thing. Flat out lying to people about what the plan would do is pathetic.
scaeagles
09-03-2008, 09:33 AM
Along the lines of how she can be a good mom and care for the newborn....why was it never an issue that John Edwards had a cancer stricken wife? Edwards was lauded for being able to juggle so many things, and whether he was a good husband or not never came into play. While I'm sure that the argument will be that she is an adult while Trig is an infant, I'd point out that Palin isn't alone and has a husband who is perfectly capable of caring for the child.
Ghoulish Delight
09-03-2008, 09:36 AM
I'd point out that Palin isn't alone and has a husband who is perfectly capable of caring for the child.
A husband whom she promised would quit his job to do so, but didn't.
And yes, there is a huge difference between taking care of an adult recovering from cancer (they do not need 24 hr. supervision or help wiping their ass) and taking care of a developmentally disabled infant.
scaeagles
09-03-2008, 09:47 AM
And if you throw in the Edwards was taking care of a mistress and a newborn as well it's even more amazing how he could juggle it all!
JWBear
09-03-2008, 09:56 AM
Excuse me if this incoherent rambling doesn't make sense. I'm doped-up on cold medicine, and marshaling my thoughts right now is like herding cats.
The Republican party in general, and the religious right in particular, try to project an image of "holier-than-thou" moral superiority. So when a Republican politician has a little indiscretion, it appears to the rest of us as hypocrisy and laughably ironic. The Democratic party has never claimed to be superior when it comes to "family values" morality, so when a Democrat screws-up (sometimes literally) that hypocrisy and irony aren't there. They never claimed that moral superiority.
Everybody's human. Everybody fvcks up (I hate that filter thing). But, we also take a perverse pleasure in watching the mighty fall - especially if they fall in a way that highlights their hypocrisy.
McCain was very poor judgment. He picked a relative unknown for his VP without a thourough investigation in to her background. And now it's coming back to bite him on the ass.
Ooo.... Bacon!
Strangler Lewis
09-03-2008, 10:05 AM
And I can't help but think that the dems would be shocked and outraged at the prying into a personal matter and linking it to the candidacy.
Possibly, but these days I think you'd get one of the following:
1) simultaneous appeal to the center/right and the left by using the child's situation to call for the strengthening of our family and also for programs for the inner city because we have to stop babies having babies.
2) a long speech by Obama about teen sexuality, how we all remember what it felt like, and how our policies and attitudes should be more forgiving and how there should be more, not fewer resources for sex education and birth control.
sleepyjeff
09-03-2008, 10:12 AM
The Republican party in general, and the religious right in particular, try to project an image of "holier-than-thou" moral superiority. So when a Republican politician has a little indiscretion, it appears to the rest of us as hypocrisy and laughably ironic.
Which Republican politician had a "little indiscrection" here.....I thought we were talking about a 17 year old girl who has never run for elected office?
sleepyjeff
09-03-2008, 10:15 AM
McCain ads flat out lie about Obama's tax plan (http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/a_new_stitch_in_a_bad_pattern.html).
Personally, I'm no fan of Obama's tax plan. It's a feel-good tax cut that is going to just increase our deficit.
But disagreeing with the plan is one thing. Flat out lying to people about what the plan would do is pathetic.
McCain pulled this kind of crud against Romney...it was wrong then and it's wrong now. (Have I mentioned before how much I really dislike this guy and hate that I am going to have to vote for him?)
That being said; does anyone seriously think Obama intends to follow thru on his tax pledge?
Ghoulish Delight
09-03-2008, 10:16 AM
That being said; does anyone seriously think Obama intends to follow thru on his tax pledge?
I hope not.
tracilicious
09-03-2008, 10:18 AM
Which Republican politician had a "little indiscrection" here.....I thought we were talking about a 17 year old girl who has never run for elected office?
Well her Mom still seems pretty set on teaching abstinence only to teens. Maybe not an indiscretion, but not very intelligent.
scaeagles
09-03-2008, 10:24 AM
When Biden lost his wife and newborn in 1972 in the automobile accident (indeed a tragedy), was he encouraged to stay closer to home to raise his young sons, or did he go ahead and swear in as a Senator?
Tenigma
09-03-2008, 10:25 AM
I do see a bit of hypocrisy on the left, though. Let's talk about the Clinton example -
[I was no fan of Clinton. It's what made me bounce to voting for Bush in 2000.]
I think the point here is that the Republicans (or for my purpose here, "social conservatives") and Democrats ("social liberals") use two different measuring sticks for hypocrisy.
For social conservatives, it's hypocritical if a politician publicly denounces homosexuality but is found to be a closet gay. Or they have anonymous gay sex in airport bathroom stalls. Hypocrisy is when you are a huge Bible-thumping born-again Christian who espouses the importance of motherhood and abstinence... but who leaves nannies to tend to their six-month-old special needs baby with Down Syndrome or who ignores her own house and pays too little attention to a daughter who then goes on and gets pregnant while still in high school.
That's hypocrisy for social conservatives. Not living what you preach to others.
For Democrats, hypocrisy would be telling everyone they have to conserve natural resources... and then find out that the politician had a whole mountainside of pristine old growth oak cut down so he could get a new wooden house built. Or quietly supporting the tear-down of a homeless shelter so that he could help his friend build a high-class restaurant on the location.
The hypocrisy would not be on social things, but on things the liberals stand for. Protecting the environment, protecting natural resources, etc.
scaeagles
09-03-2008, 10:33 AM
For Democrats, hypocrisy would be telling everyone they have to conserve natural resources... and then find out that the politician had a whole mountainside of pristine old growth oak cut down so he could get a new wooden house built. Or quietly supporting the tear-down of a homeless shelter so that he could help his friend build a high-class restaurant on the location.
So you would regard Gore as a hypocrit? Or Edwards? Or Streisand? Or Robert Redford? I can give specific examples of those things, and have, but am often told that I just don't get it.
Morrigoon
09-03-2008, 10:35 AM
I have to agree with GD - some things I'd rather see remain empty promises
sleepyjeff
09-03-2008, 10:36 AM
Hypocrisy is when you are a huge Bible-thumping born-again Christian who espouses the importance of motherhood and abstinence... but who leaves nannies to tend to their six-month-old special needs baby with Down Syndrome or who ignores her own house and pays too little attention to a daughter who then goes on and gets pregnant while still in high school.
That's hypocrisy for social conservatives. Not living what you preach to others.
I am a little confused here; what law has she signed or proposed that is at odds with her(not her daughters) behaviour?
For Democrats, hypocrisy would be telling everyone they have to conserve natural resources... and then find out that the politician had a whole mountainside of pristine old growth oak cut down so he could get a new wooden house built. Or quietly supporting the tear-down of a homeless shelter so that he could help his friend build a high-class restaurant on the location.
The hypocrisy would not be on social things, but on things the liberals stand for. Protecting the environment, protecting natural resources, etc.
Sounds like Gore and Pelosi;)
sleepyjeff
09-03-2008, 10:39 AM
I have to agree with GD - some things I'd rather see remain empty promises
If one hopes they remain empty promises then why suggest people should vote for the person based on those promises?
Tenigma
09-03-2008, 10:41 AM
Along the lines of how she can be a good mom and care for the newborn....why was it never an issue that John Edwards had a cancer stricken wife?
Actually I'm in agreement with you on that one.
Ghoulish Delight
09-03-2008, 10:53 AM
Along the lines of how she can be a good mom and care for the newborn....why was it never an issue that John Edwards had a cancer stricken wife? And for the record, I don't care if she and her husband work while raising kids. I do care if she claims that lack of traditional family values are leading to the demise of morals in this country while they do so.
I am a little confused here; what law has she signed or proposed that is at odds with her(not her daughters) behaviour?
Most notably, her support of abstinence-only education. It's a policy that's proven to be ineffectual and is leading to an increase in the type of behavior it's purported to prevent. Her daughter's case is not proof of that trend, but it is indicative.
innerSpaceman
09-03-2008, 10:59 AM
When Biden lost his wife and newborn in 1972 in the automobile accident (indeed a tragedy), was he encouraged to stay closer to home to raise his young sons, or did he go ahead and swear in as a Senator?
Really stupid example, since: (1) He refused to leave his son's hospital bed to be sworn in, so they came to the hospital to swear him in, and (2) he is a Senator from Delaware, a few hours train ride from D.C. ... so he commuted to D.C., and still does, an an all-but daily basis.
Try again.
scaeagles
09-03-2008, 11:04 AM
I realize that, ISM. Would it not follow, though, that her family would move to DC with her, making her much closer to her children than Biden was to his? And also there is another parent involved?
I don't see how that is stupid at all.
sleepyjeff
09-03-2008, 11:07 AM
Most notably, her support of abstinence-only education. It's a policy that's proven to be ineffectual and is leading to an increase in the type of behavior it's purported to prevent. Her daughter's case is not proof of that trend, but it is indicative.
But how is that 'hypocrisy"?
Morrigoon
09-03-2008, 11:08 AM
If one hopes they remain empty promises then why suggest people should vote for the person based on those promises?
His tax policy is not why I prefer him over the other candidate. Just like someone could prefer McCain even if he doesn't support gay marriage. It takes more than one issue to make a candidate. You have to pick and choose which aspects of a candidate's position are most important to you, or which candidate falls more in line with your position than the other.
You could also call it the "two turds in the bowl" approach, although this year's crop are better candidates than we've been offered in the past.
sleepyjeff
09-03-2008, 11:11 AM
His tax policy is not why I prefer him over the other candidate. Just like someone could prefer McCain even if he doesn't support gay marriage. It takes more than one issue to make a candidate. You have to pick and choose which aspects of a candidate's position are most important to you, or which candidate falls more in line with your position than the other.
You could also call it the "two turds in the bowl" approach, although this year's crop are better candidates than we've been offered in the past.
I didn't mean you specifically......but others here have pointed to his tax cuts as a good reason to vote for him over McCain; if they hope those cuts never go into effect than are they not participating in false advertising?
JWBear
09-03-2008, 11:24 AM
Which Republican politician had a "little indiscrection" here.....I thought we were talking about a 17 year old girl who has never run for elected office?
I was speaking in general terms.
JWBear
09-03-2008, 11:25 AM
But how is that 'hypocrisy"?
Perhaps not, but it is damned ironic!
innerSpaceman
09-03-2008, 11:30 AM
I realize that, ISM. Would it not follow, though, that her family would move to DC with her, making her much closer to her children than Biden was to his? And also there is another parent involved?
I don't see how that is stupid at all.
Well, to be frank, I find it silly to argue she's unattentive to her kids because her hubby didn't do her bidding by quitting his job or because she only took a 3-day maternity leave ... so I guess you and I agree these are non-issues. I just took issue with your particular counter-example because it was ill-chosen.
sleepyjeff
09-03-2008, 11:32 AM
Perhaps not, but it is damned ironic!
That it is:)
scaeagles
09-03-2008, 11:40 AM
so I guess you and I agree these are non-issues.
Indeed.
Tenigma
09-03-2008, 01:00 PM
I can't help but think that if the Democrats nominated a black woman to be vice president and it turned out her teen daughter was pregnant and the boyfriend was quoted saying the kind of macho things one would expect a black teen to say that there would not be this outpouring of sentiment from the conservative family values crowd.
Try again (http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmNlZGFhNmI2Yzk1NzAzNDViM2VmZTA2NDRhN2ViN2Q):
If the Obamas had a 17 year-old daughter who was unmarried and pregnant by a tough-talking black kid, my guess is if that they all appeared onstage at a Democratic convention and the delegates were cheering wildly, a number of conservatives might be discussing the issue of dysfunctional black families.
And THAT is from an editorial at National Review.
Tenigma
09-03-2008, 01:05 PM
Lani's final straw: Palin tried to get books banned at the Wasila Public Library (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13084_Page2.html) when she was mayor. When the librarian refused, Palin tried to get the librarian fired. That didn't work... right away. The librarian was eventually pressured out of her job.
You want the country run by someone like that? She's going to make Bush look like a pansy.
Morrigoon
09-03-2008, 02:02 PM
Holy cow, she's like Bush with brains!
(err... the joke is there, it's obvious, I don't need to make it, do I?)
lashbear
09-03-2008, 03:32 PM
*Pops in*
Nope, no Alex here...
*Pops out*
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.