McCain picks Palin

[Name Lips]

Link (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25970882/)


McCain picks Palin as running mate
Alaska governor to be first female Republican VP nominee

WASHINGTON - Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain has chosen Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate, campaign officials told NBC News on Friday.

She would be the first woman to serve on a Republican presidential ticket. The pro-life Palin would also be the first Alaskan ever to appear on a national ticket.

Palin, 44, was elected Alaska's first woman governor in 2006. The state’s voters had grown weary of career politician Gov. Frank Murkowski, whom she defeated in the GOP primary.

“I've been blessed with the right timing here,” Palin said before the election. “There's no doubt that Alaskans right now are dealing in an atmosphere of distrust of government and industry.”

Palin's selection was a stunning surprise, as McCain passed over many other better-known prospects, some of whom had been the subject of intense speculation for weeks or months.

She is a generation younger than Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, who is Barack Obama's running mate on the Democratic ticket.

She is three years Obama's junior, as well, and McCain has made much in recent weeks of Obama's relative lack of experience in foreign policy and defense matters.

On Aug. 1, Palin scored a major victory when the Alaska legislature passed a bill that authorizes her administration to award a license to TransCanada Alaska to build a 1,715-mile natural gas pipeline from Prudhoe Bay on Alaska’s North Slope to a hub in Canada.

The pipeline would be the largest construction project in the history of North America. If completed as hoped within ten years, it would ship 4.5 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day. The United States imported about 10 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day in 2007.

Under investigation for firing
But Palin’s seemingly bright future was clouded in late July when the state legislature voted to hire an independent investigator to find out whether she tried to have a state official fire her ex-brother-in-law from his job as a state trooper.

The allegation was made by former Department of Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan, whom Palin fired in mid-July.

“It is a governor’s prerogative, a right, to fill that cabinet with members whom she or he believes will do best for the people whom we are serving,” Palin told CNBC’s Larry Kudlow in an interview on Aug. 1. “So I look forward to any kind of investigation or questions being asked because I’ve got nothing to hide.”

Palin also reacted to the indictment of Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens by calling it “very dismaying.” She added, “Hopefully though, this won’t be a distraction and get people’s minds off what has to be done in the grand scheme of things.”

As for the prospect of her being vice president, Palin told Kudlow that she could not answer the question of whether she wanted the job “until somebody answers for me what is it exactly that the VP does every day. I’m used to being very productive and working real hard in an administration. We want to make sure that that VP slot would be a fruitful type of position, especially for Alaskans and for the things that we’re trying to accomplish up here….”

Palin is married to Todd Palin, a lifelong Alaskan who is a production operator on the North Slope and a four-time champion of the Iron Dog, which is described as “the world's longest snow-machine race.”

Mother of five
They have five children. Their son, Track, enlisted in the U.S. Army on Sept. 11, 2007.

Palin gave birth to their fifth child, Trig, last April. The baby boy has Down syndrome, a genetic abnormality that impedes a child's intellectual and physical development.

"When we first heard, it was kind of confusing," Palin said, according to an account in the Anchorage Daily News. She called the news "very, very challenging."

But she added in a note, imagining what God would say to her family, "Children are the most precious and promising ingredient in this mixed-up world you live in down there on Earth. Trig is no different, except he has one extra chromosome."

Palin made a name for herself in Alaska politics by serving as mayor of Wasilla City for six years and going on to run unsuccessfully for the Republican nomination for lieutenant governor in 2002.

After her unsuccessful run, Palin received an appointment to the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, where she ended up serving a role in an ethics probe into Republican Party Chairman Randy Reudrich, who was questioned about conflicts of interest with the oil industry.

The investigation ultimately forced Ruedrich to resign from the commission.

Palin's role in the investigation left her a party outsider, but she was able to win the 2006 Republican gubernatorial primary against Murkowski, going on to win the 2006 general election by seven points over her Democratic opponent.

During one debate before the primary, Palin said she was in favor of capital punishment in especially heinous cases such as the murder of a child. "My goodness, hang 'em up, yeah,” she said.

Born in Idaho, Palin moved to Alaska with her parents in 1964, when they went there to teach school.

She received a degree in communications and journalism from the University of Idaho in 1987.
Trying to grab the female vote? The Hillary supporters who are iffy about Obama?

She seems a solid Republican, but has a history of ethics scandals that are difficult to overcome.

[Singularity]

Note to American rednecks everywhere: You will either have a black president or a woman VP (And with McCain's advanced years, very likely woman president before 8 years is up).

Suck it Rednecks!

[Trainz]

We live in interesting times.

[Utrecht]

This is the type of pick I was hoping Obama would make.

Now as far as Palin - I need to research her a bit more - but there are many positives here - but I need to go out and look for the negatives.

[FeatsofClay]

http://www.vpilf.com/

:lol:

[Utrecht]

She seems a solid Republican, but has a history of ethics scandals that are difficult to overcome.

huh? history??? Based off of the article - I can only see one thing that might be even close to a scandal (the firing of the state trooper). Now, I fully acknowledge that there might be more out there - but I don't know enough about her.

Further, the article pisses me off - what does Steven's investigation have to do with her nomination - that seem deliberatly put in there raise concerns. Did they solicite a comment from Biden about Steven's investigation???

[FeatsofClay]

What is funny os that a primary complaint about Obama has been inexperience, first term Senator in this posititon? So the man who would be our oldest president ever picked a first term Governor. :rolleyes:

[Ink Bleeder]

He picked a Quayle. I'm stunned.

Funny, because I've said all along that if the Republicans did the right thing, they'd choose a woman, because die-hard feminists like me would have a hard time not voting for a female candidate, no matter who she was. But now that it's a reality, I have no qualms at all.

She gave birth 4 months ago to a Downs' baby, and she thinks this is good timing?

And THIS makes me cringe: As for the prospect of her being vice president, Palin told Kudlow that she could not answer the question of whether she wanted the job “until somebody answers for me what is it exactly that the VP does every day. I’m used to being very productive and working real hard in an administration. We want to make sure that that VP slot would be a fruitful type of position, especially for Alaskans and for the things that we’re trying to accomplish up here….” :deedeedee:

[Utrecht]

What is funny os that a primary complaint about Obama has been inexperience, first term Senator in this posititon? So the man who would be our oldest president ever picked a first term Governor. :rolleyes:

Oh, I agree, it is definately a double take (and not more :shock: than the man of change picking Biden - anti-change)

Further, the experience issue is a little less because she would be VP - but given McCain's age, she is one faulty heart away....

Her speeches next week will be very important.

[Teve]

Palin is widely popular up here. The "scandal" as people call it has come to very little. The ex-brother in law had a abusive history, in police work, not to mention family. But his termination was due to his history on the police force. He needed to be sacked is all I have to say.

Of course I'm still new to Alaska politics, and perhaps it is the additional $1200 she tacked on to the permanent fund dividend to help people afford rising gas costs. (Making the PFD this year $3200) But I haven't heard anyone say anything bad about her these last few months.
It costs people outside of this city almost $10 a gallon to fill their cars, and not to mention the cost of gas to heat their homes. It's all diesel heat in the villages, and it's in the high teens per gallon up there.

Gun policy is a HUGE issue here, as most people (outside of Anchorage) rely on firearms for everyday life, hunting and protection. Palin is strong on protecting gun rights.

As for inexperienced, No one can argue that she is not-inexperienced, and that McCain is a little beyond his prime.

But it seems she has done well here this last year or so. What that means... that's a whole other issue. But don't let the "ethics" thing cloud your thinking.

Personally no running mate, no matter how good could convince me to vote for either major candidate.

Bob Barr, 2008

[Utrecht]

OK after a little bit more digging, I do have some concerns about her social conservatism and the thought that she might be another Quayle.

However, I think we can safely take the ethics concern off the table (unless there is some kind of scandal that no one knows about) - she bloody well ran on that platform.

Further, of all 4 of the big guns (McCain, Obama, Palin and Biden) she can best understand and relate to the common person. So at this point I am neutral - but curious about she does at the convention.

[Trainz]

Further, of all 4 of the big guns (McCain, Obama, Palin and Biden) she can best understand and relate to the common person.

By beeing pro life?

... no.

[Singularity]

By beeing pro life?

... no.

I fault her Idaho upbringing for that.

[Limper]

By beeing pro life?

... no.

Dude you are a liberal pinko commie Canadian what does it matter to you?

[Utrecht]

By beeing pro life?

... no.

sure - considering the how many people in the country are pro-life - but thanks anyway for mis-interpreting what I was saying.

She has worked (recently) as a feking commerical fisherman, her husband does the Ironman Snowmobile race (or what ever it called). Bottom line is that she is more blue collar than any of the other three. When was the last time that they did and work with their hands when there was not a camera around?

That will play well - especially in states like Ohio and Michigan.....

[Utrecht]

I fault her Idaho upbringing for that.

and yet you get pissed when McCain's campaign makes sterotypes about D&D players..... :boggle:

[Singularity]

and yet you get pissed when McCain's campaign makes sterotypes about D&D players..... :boggle:

I have a very special relationship with Idaho, having lived very close to it for most of my life. Unfortunately, my experience is that the stereotypes about Idaho tend to be true more often than not.

[AZRogue]

Gun policy is a HUGE issue here, as most people (outside of Anchorage) rely on firearms for everyday life, hunting and protection. Palin is strong on protecting gun rights.



One of the first things I look at. It's good to know, though I guess she has never hit my radar before because I don't know diddly about her. Lots of reading to do, I guess. I don't like that she may be too socially conservative. I would really like someone who's main focus is on getting the government to stop listening in on our calls, so to speak.

I was still hoping McCain would do something more surprising and choose Ron Paul for his VP. Mwahahaha! I would have loved that.

[FeatsofClay]

Everytime I see this thread I get an unconstitutional glimmer of hope....

[obryn]

This is the first time where I think McCain may actually win.

I mean, it solidifies his cred with the alienated Clinton-or-bust voters.

-O

[Lady Fury]

This is the first time where I think McCain may actually win.

I mean, it solidifies his cred with the alienated Clinton-or-bust voters.

-O

I think you're right. I have to do some more reading up on her before I decide for certain which way my vote is going to go. I'm really on the fence with this election but don't tell Sigularity that.

[Mr SmokeTooMuch]

Everytime I see this thread I get an unconstitutional glimmer of hope....

It looks like she's preparring for the Fish Slapping Dance though

[AZRogue]

It's a big move. I'm still digesting it. She apparently isn't an "Insider" which is great, IMO. I wonder how much her attitude will reflect the general independent nature of Alaska itself, considering that she won the governorship their and holds a fairly high opinion rating among Alaskans. Anyone know how she is when it comes to spending? All I can find right now are thousands of articles rehashing her nomination.

I've seen the pick called a Hail Mary in several articles already but it may just be a successful Hail Mary.

[AZRogue]

It looks like she's preparring for the Fish Slapping Dance though

Is that her? She can fish? Damn. That ... does something for me.

[Harry]

Bizarre choice. Hottie, yes. I'd hit it. But a bizarre choice. Does he really think to get Hillary supporters this way? And the inexperience is mind boggling. In her first term as Governor of a state with more bears than people! O_O People mock Southern governors, but there's a much larger population and a lot of foreign trade and such going on down here.

[Varaj]

This is the first time where I think McCain may actually win.

I mean, it solidifies his cred with the alienated Clinton-or-bust voters.

-O

See I think this was a mistake on McCain's part. The Clinton or bust voters are unlikely to switch based on her gender because of her strong social conservative leanings.

[Utrecht]

Bizarre choice. Hottie, yes. I'd hit it. But a bizarre choice. Does he really think to get Hillary supporters this way? And the inexperience is mind boggling. In her first term as Governor of a state with more bears than people! O_O People mock Southern governors, but there's a much larger population and a lot of foreign trade and such going on down here.

However, there is a shitload of oil and NG moving through that state and she has proved to be one to say fuck you to big oil - that along could tip the energy debate to McCain.

If you think about it further, it does a couple of things

1) it makes McCain safe with his social conservative base - remember, these folks were prepared to not vote, or were tepid voters - but after this and his perforance at the mega-church (forget its name) he can pretty safely count those votes as safe. as late as two weeks ago, this was not garunteed.

2) Reinforces his maverick reputation - hopefully (in the campaigns eye) telling the moderate voter that he is the one who actually follows up change

3) Westerner - An Alaskan plays a whole lot better in Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico than the someone east of the Mississippi - and McCain cant afford to lose all three states

4) Blue Coller - the women oozes it - she is a lifelong NRA member who eats moose burgers and worked commercial fishing

5) Woman element - there are indeed Hillary voters who will gravitate to this choice - heck if McCain pulls in 10% of the former Hillary voters, he just moved the national polls 1-2% points - and the folks like Interstaller Ink would never seriously vote for McCain anyway - so no harm

6) Experience - this becomes the elephant in the room - everytime the Dems try and pick on her experience (which is without a doubt thin) they are indirectly critisizing Obama - since you can make the case that she actually has more executive experience than Obama.

Whether this is a Brilliant or Foolish (Paul Bagela's comments are funny) move wont be known for a bit - based off of her performance, but if she comes out as a striaght shooter who demonstrates nuance in her answers - it could pay off big - if she misspells potatoe - well Obama can start to write his January 21st acceptance speach.

[Utrecht]

Oh, and it should be noted that the talk of the day is not on Obama's speech - but on the pick - that in itself was clever.

[FeatsofClay]

Whether this is a Brilliant or Foolish (Paul Bagela's comments are funny) move wont be known for a bit - based off of her performance, .


And there it is. He has picked a virtual unknown (Brilliant, in my opinion, look for Alaskan "Farther from Washington than Obama" references) and the country basically has 2 months to watch her talk. Her speech at the RNC will likely be one of the strong turning points of the campaign.

[Alpha Ralpha]

but there's a much larger population and a lot of foreign trade and such going on down here.

??? I thought all you Southerners did was sit on porches with your banjo and bloodhounds...

[Alpha Ralpha]

Oh, and it should be noted that the talk of the day is not on Obama's speech - but on the pick - that in itself was clever.

bingo!, that goal was achieved

[Ink Bleeder]

Oh, and it should be noted that the talk of the day is not on Obama's speech - but on the pick - that in itself was clever.

If by "clever" you mean "so obvious it was predicted a week ago," then I agree.

[FeatsofClay]

I just saw her speak for the first time. I disagreed with damned near everything she said and still came out in awe.

I think he may have hit this one out of the park. People look for charisma and clear speaking with lofty goals, she put all that across like a champ.

[Lady Fury]

I honestly didn't think he'd choose a woman. I'm surprised and now that's what has me wavering on my vote.

[FeatsofClay]

I honestly didn't think he'd choose a woman. I'm surprised and now that's what has me wavering on my vote.

With all respect, and to you AS A FRIEND, terrible reason to vote for someone. Not that you are alone there. ;)

[Lady Fury]

With all respect, and to you AS A FRIEND, terrible reason to vote for someone. Not that you are alone there. ;)

I was going to vote for McCain until I saw who he put up. Now I'm wavering.

[Utrecht]

If by "clever" you mean "so obvious it was predicted a week ago," then I agree.

Do you think that Tom Ridge, Romney or the Minn Govenors (forget his name - p something) would have generated this kind of buzz?


With all respect, and to you AS A FRIEND, terrible reason to vote for someone. Not that you are alone there. ;)

Why? I see this as being just as valid as agreeing with Obama's health care philosphy.

[FeatsofClay]

I was going to vote for McCain until I saw who he put up. Now I'm wavering.

Based on gender. Terrible reason.

For, against, up, down. I am disagreeing with your reasoning, not your choice. :)

[FeatsofClay]

Why? I see this as being just as valid as agreeing with Obama's health care philosphy.

You see gender and policy as being equally weihted in choosing a governmental leader?

[Utrecht]

You see gender and policy as being equally weihted in choosing a governmental leader?


I see that it can be a strong motivator - after all who better to identify with woman's issues than a woman? It is important to remeber that many people vote based off of emotion than on facts.

Personally, I vote on facts - but I am one vote in 300 million.....

[Lady Fury]

Based on gender. Terrible reason.

For, against, up, down. I am disagreeing with your reasoning, not your choice. :)

You don't know women all that well do you? ;) As a woman I know that if I have a very bad day, watch out world. Could you image what would happen if we had someone like me in charge? Now if she hadn't just had a baby maybe I'd consider it. Right now she has to still have some serious raging hormones and not to mention the stress of having a baby with a condition that she wasn't expecting. I know that I was a wreck for a long while after I found out my son wasn't exactly the way I thought he'd be when he was born.

Yes I know this should have my views based off her politics and not her gender or life situation. But you know what, it's my vote and I can base it off any reason I'd like.:tongue:

But to be fair I'm still going to do a lot of reading and research to make I'm not throwing away my vote this time around.

[FeatsofClay]

I see that it can be a strong motivator - after all who better to identify with woman's issues than a woman? It is important to remeber that many people vote based off of emotion than on facts.

Preach! I cannot deny this, but it is terrible. :)

And LF is saying she will be voting AGAINST the woman, for being a woman. Did you catch that?

Personally, I vote on facts - but I am one vote in 300 million.....


Let's hold hands, we are now two. I could easily invite several other posters here to our little fact-filled cast-fest. Some of them are even Americans. :)

[Lady Fury]

So does it bother you that people vote off of emotion? I think facts are good to have but are not the only factor. Take book smart people for instance, they know all the facts but have no charisma or common sense to use what they know. Does this mean you should hire them because they ace the "test" so to speak?

The thing about elections is that not everyone gets voted for the right reasons.

[FeatsofClay]

You don't know women all that well do you? ;) As a woman I know that if I have a very bad day, watch out world. Could you image what would happen if we had someone like me in charge? Now if she hadn't just had a baby maybe I'd consider it. Right now she has to still have some serious raging hormones and not to mention the stress of having a baby with a condition that she wasn't expecting.

This makeme very sad. :(

Yes I know this should have my views based off her politics and not her gender or life situation. But you know what, it's my vote and I can base it off any reason I'd like.:tongue:

I would never argue your right. :)


But to be fair I'm still going to do a lot of reading and research to make I'm not throwing away my vote this time around.


This gives me hope. :)

[Lady Fury]

This makeme very sad. :(


Which part? The part that you don't know women or the part that women have raging hormones? :tongue: I know men can be moody too but not to the same degree us women can be. Or maybe it's just me who can be too moody. Hell I don't even know women all that well.:o


I would never argue your right. :)


QFT! :D




This gives me hope. :)

Wonderful.

[Singularity]

So does it bother you that people vote off of emotion?

YES!


I think facts are good to have but are not the only factor. Take book smart people for instance, they know all the facts but have no charisma or common sense to use what they know. Does this mean you should hire them because they ace the "test" so to speak?

The thing about elections is that not everyone gets voted for the right reasons.

And people who vote for someone for the wrong reason, you might end up with a disasterous presidency, like the one we're just coming off of. I'm not saying Palin is a bad choice, in fact, there's something about the choice that I like, and I'm not saying that McCain would be a bad president, but the right to vote should be coupled with the requirement that you vote responsibly. People who support bullshit candidates are just fucking themselves and everyone around them over.

[Lady Fury]

YES!




And people who vote for someone for the wrong reason, you might end up with a disasterous presidency, like the one we're just coming off of. I'm not saying Palin is a bad choice, in fact, there's something about the choice that I like, and I'm not saying that McCain would be a bad president, but the right to vote should be coupled with the requirement that you vote responsibly. People who support bullshit candidates are just fucking themselves and everyone around them over.


And yet you do a lot of things based off of emotional feeling. IT'S PART OF BEING HUMAN! With that said, you are very passionate about who you vote for. You don't vote for someone just because they look good on paper.

[Limper]

And yet you do a lot of things based off of emotional feeling. IT'S PART OF BEING HUMAN! With that said, you are very passionate about who you vote for. You don't vote for someone just because they look good on paper.

I'm with Singy on this one. Keep emotion out of it and stick to rationality in all decisions and the world will be better for it.

Emotions lie and obscure the truth.

[Freedom Canadian]

And yet you do a lot of things based off of emotional feeling. IT'S PART OF BEING HUMAN!

And yet you want to exclude women from power because of hormones ? :tongue:

Not that I buy it. I think PMS have been used as an excuse by a lot of women to lessen their accountability. I know a lot of women who seem perfectly able to keep their hormones in check in their professional lives.

[Singularity]

I think PMS have been used as an excuse by a lot of women to lessen their accountability. I know a lot of women who seem perfectly able to keep their hormones in check in their professional lives.

This.

[Edena_of_Neith]

Frack. Rush Limbaugh is having an orgasm. He's ecstatic. They're all ecstatic. All the Republicans.

[Lady Fury]

Frack. Rush Limbaugh is having an orgasm. He's ecstatic. They're all ecstatic. All the Republicans.

Not all the Republicans. Really. I know a lot of them that are less than thrilled at the moment.

[Schizm]

It's the exact kind of desperate, scummy move that I was hoping McCain wouldn't make.

But no, everything from the timing of the nomination release to the person chosen smacks of fear and desperation - he'll do anything to get into office, and this move pretty much shows it.

[Lady Fury]

And yet you want to exclude women from power because of hormones ? :tongue:

Not that I buy it. I think PMS have been used as an excuse by a lot of women to lessen their accountability. I know a lot of women who seem perfectly able to keep their hormones in check in their professional lives.

I don't get PMS.:tongue:

[Freedom Canadian]

I don't get PMS.:tongue:

You mean there's more than one source of female insanormones ? :sweatdrop:

[Lady Fury]

You mean there's more than one source of female insanormones ? :sweatdrop:

I don't have the parts to get PMS anymore. I don't know how my hormones work now. :tongue:

[obryn]

See I think this was a mistake on McCain's part. The Clinton or bust voters are unlikely to switch based on her gender because of her strong social conservative leanings.
You haven't talked with many Clinton-or-Bust voters, I take it. ;) Lots of them are only nominally democrat. At least, the ones around here are.

On the other hand, I like the fact that the experience card has basically been taken off the table. I mean, I hate to sound crass, but there's a realistic chance for both presidential candidates that they won't live out their terms. Obama, as a black man, will be a continual target for assassination attempts if I know my rednecks. McCain is more than a few years past his prime, and much likelier than Obama to have health problems. I honestly would trust Biden more than Palin as President.

-O

[Singularity]

On the other hand, I like the fact that the experience card has basically been taken off the table. I mean, I hate to sound crass, but there's a realistic chance for both presidential candidates that they won't live out their terms. Obama, as a black man, will be a continual target for assassination attempts if I know my rednecks. McCain is more than a few years past his prime, and much likelier than Obama to have health problems. I honestly would trust Biden more than Palin as President.

-O

So this is the election of the vice presidents? I guess that sets another first.

[FeatsofClay]

The more I read the more she looks like a disatrous choice!



http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/29/21034/4861/159/579549

She opposes same-sex marriage, but has said she has gay friends. Palin complied with an Alaskan state Supreme Court order and signed an implementation of same-sex benefits into law under protest, stating that legal options to avoid doing so had run out.

She appears to have editted her own Wikipedia entry to say she is:"a politician of eye-popping integrity."

http://www.adn.com/news/politics/story/510249.html
Fellow Republican in Alaska and State Senate President: The reaction wasn't so rosy elsewhere. State Senate President Lyda Green said she thought it was a joke when someone called her at 6 a.m. to give her the news.

"She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president?" said Green, a Republican from Palin's hometown of Wasilla. "Look at what she's done to this state. What would she do to the nation?"


And what do Democrats who have helped pushed through legislation WITH here think?

Democrats helped give Palin her victories on oil taxes and the natural gas pipeline deal, over the opposition of many of Palin's fellow Republicans in the Legislature.

But Anchorage Democratic state Sen. Hollis French said it's a huge mistake by McCain and "reflects very, very badly on his judgment." French said Palin's experience running the state for less than two years hasn't prepared her for this.


The House Speaker?

State House Speaker John Harris, a Republican from Valdez, was astonished at the news. He didn't want to get into the issue of her qualifications.

"She's old enough," Harris said. "She's a U.S. citizen."


http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/08/palin-global-wa.html

on global warming? In an interview for the September issue of the conservative magazine Newsmax, Gov. Sarah Palin, R-Alaska, said she does not believe climate change is caused by human behavior.

“A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I'm not one though who would attribute it to being man-made,” Palin said in the interview, which was posted online Friday.
:rolleyes:

I like how she speaks, but this is looking like a seriously bone-headed move by McCain's camp.

[Harry]

What blows my mind is that she was mayor of Wasilla. I've got a good friend from high school who lives there. She comes back to town about once or twice a year and we hook up, and she takes me through her more recent photos.

Wasilla is not even a town. It's a village. And a small village at that.

[FeatsofClay]

<10k residents. That is small.

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

Total MILF - she has my vote.

[Ergeheilalt]

She's so scientifically backward - there is no way I could vote for the McCain ticket.

Makes me ill to think we could have another four years of people who want to write off sound environmental policy.

[Utrecht]

She's so scientifically backward - there is no way I could vote for the McCain ticket.

Makes me ill to think we could have another four years of people who want to write off sound environmental policy.

Now, my question to you (and any of the other "concerned" about Palin - was there a VP pick that McCain would have made that would have both:

1) Satisfied the Republican base
2) Satisfied you

Next, where do you get scientifically backwards? Is it the fact that she supports Creationism being taught in schools? To me that is hardly backwards (silly sure - but backwards seems a stretch)

Where, anywhere does it mention that she is willing to write of environmentalism? I assume you are reading into the fact that she does not beleive that global warmin is caused by humans - correct?



Now Feats - wanted to respond to your comments

"She opposes same-sex marriage, but has said she has gay friends. Palin complied with an Alaskan state Supreme Court order and signed an implementation of same-sex benefits into law under protest, stating that legal options to avoid doing so had run out. "

One can also read that she is a constitutionalist and a big beleiver in the rule of law - given the complaints about the Bush adminsitration, this should be a good thing.

On the experience - again, that is a realy slippery slope for the dems because every time someone comments about her experience, they have to explain how Obama has more - further, she has more direct executive experience than Biden.....


"In an interview for the September issue of the conservative magazine Newsmax, Gov. Sarah Palin, R-Alaska, said she does not believe climate change is caused by human behavior.

“A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I'm not one though who would attribute it to being man-made,” Palin said in the interview, which was posted online Friday. "

As I mentioned above, I see nothing in here that would preclude her from supporting environmental agendas - only that she happens to agree with a significant portion of the scientific community that global warming is not a man-made issue.


Further, what many of my fellow posters are forgetting is that National Elections are decinded by the thinnest of margins - a percentage point in Michigan can be the tipping point. Picking a "safe" pick does little to change the game - this pick does - it appeals to the Ron Paul supporter, it appeals to a significant portion of the Hillary supporters, it appeals to Blue Coller (hell, her husband is Union - dont think that is not going to get some play). So if McCain is able to keep his base and pull 5-6% away from Obama - a very close election becomes a landlide (2-3 % is really all he needs)

Again, she coule come out as stumble badly - and it is game over - but there is tremendous upside.

[FeatsofClay]

Next, where do you get scientifically backwards? Is it the fact that she supports Creationism being taught in schools? To me that is hardly backwards (silly sure - but backwards seems a stretch)

I disagree strongly here. Creationism is backwards. And ignorant, unscientific, nearly unteachable (no real research is done in the field)



Now Feats - wanted to respond to your comments

"She opposes same-sex marriage, but has said she has gay friends. Palin complied with an Alaskan state Supreme Court order and signed an implementation of same-sex benefits into law under protest, stating that legal options to avoid doing so had run out. "

One can also read that she is a constitutionalist and a big beleiver in the rule of law - given the complaints about the Bush adminsitration, this should be a good thing.

If she opposes same-sex marriage she is not a constitutionalist. Denying rights to a segment without a cause in the constitution excludes her here.


On the experience - again, that is a realy slippery slope for the dems because every time someone comments about her experience, they have to explain how Obama has more - further, she has more direct executive experience than Biden.....

Which isn't hard to do when you consider he had 4 times in state senate what she has leading a government that only meets 90 days a year.


"In an interview for the September issue of the conservative magazine Newsmax, Gov. Sarah Palin, R-Alaska, said she does not believe climate change is caused by human behavior.

“A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I'm not one though who would attribute it to being man-made,” Palin said in the interview, which was posted online Friday. "

As I mentioned above, I see nothing in here that would preclude her from supporting environmental agendas - only that she happens to agree with a significant portion of the scientific community that global warming is not a man-made issue.

How about massive ignorance? How will limate change affect Alaska more than any other state? Is she saying this to the majority of Floridians ready to go under with rising ocean levels?


Further, what many of my fellow posters are forgetting is that National Elections are decinded by the thinnest of margins - a percentage point in Michigan can be the tipping point. Picking a "safe" pick does little to change the game - this pick does - it appeals to the Ron Paul supporter, it appeals to a significant portion of the Hillary supporters, it appeals to Blue Coller (hell, her husband is Union - dont think that is not going to get some play). So if McCain is able to keep his base and pull 5-6% away from Obama - a very close election becomes a landlide (2-3 % is really all he needs)

Again, she coule come out as stumble badly - and it is game over - but there is tremendous upside.

I don't necessarily see adding a woman being a huge help on a Republican ticket.

McCain has played very safely so far. Wisely in my opinion. I thik he has been trying to make this a short race. Giving Obama June, July and now August to stick his foot in his mouth in a major way. It didn't happen.


I believe he has made a mistake here. Nonetheless, I still have tons of trouble seeing Obama winning.

Edit: I am proably gonna vote for Obama, but it won't matter here. :)

[Singularity]

Is it the fact that she supports Creationism being taught in schools? To me that is hardly backwards (silly sure - but backwards seems a stretch)

That is so fundamentally backwards, it's disturbing. If people want to believe in superstition on their own time, that's one thing, but to teach it as fact is unscientific, which defeats the entire point of science. We will never make progress if we continue to cling to outdated concepts and wishful thinking.

Where, anywhere does it mention that she is willing to write of environmentalism? I assume you are reading into the fact that she does not beleive that global warmin is caused by humans - correct?

"In an interview for the September issue of the conservative magazine Newsmax, Gov. Sarah Palin, R-Alaska, said she does not believe climate change is caused by human behavior.

That's kind of a big one. Every reputable environmental scientist in the world believes that global warming is related to the burning of fossil fuels. The ones that don't are fringe whackjobs and those who are on the payroll of big oil. How in the world can any responsible politician conscientiously mislead the people whom they serve? This isn't an issue that you can simply pretend doesn't exist. It does and attitudes like this are what's contributing to the worsening of the situation.

"She opposes same-sex marriage, but has said she has gay friends. Palin complied with an Alaskan state Supreme Court order and signed an implementation of same-sex benefits into law under protest, stating that legal options to avoid doing so had run out. "

Same-sex laws may be a step in the right direction, but the fact is that the only possible justification for opposing same-sex marriage is once again based on a superstitious belief system. There is no constitutional reason why it shouldn't be legal. In fact, the 9th amendment is what makes the denial of same-sex marriage unconstitutional.

* Ninth Amendment – Protection of rights not specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

To translate that into plain English, it means that any rights they forgot to mention in the Bill of Rights are still covered.

One can also read that she is a constitutionalist and a big beleiver in the rule of law - given the complaints about the Bush adminsitration, this should be a good thing.

To listen to him talk, Bush seems to think he's a constitutionalist. That's just so much empty rhetoric.

As I mentioned above, I see nothing in here that would preclude her from supporting environmental agendas - only that she happens to agree with a significant portion of the scientific community that global warming is not a man-made issue.

The significant portion of the scientific community that believes that global warming is not a man made issue is a fiction created by oil lobbyists. It's Santa Claus. It's God. It doesn't exist.

[Harry]

My god, there are more people in the city of Memphis than in all of the state of Alaska, and my father's making a big deal out of her qualifications as a Commander of the National Guard. Guess that didn't count for Clinton or Carter, eh?

[Trainz]

Next, where do you get scientifically backwards? Is it the fact that she supports Creationism being taught in schools? To me that is hardly backwards (silly sure - but backwards seems a stretch)

:boggle:

I get it, you're trolling.

Nice.

:D

[Utrecht]

That is so fundamentally backwards, it's disturbing. If people want to believe in superstition on their own time, that's one thing, but to teach it as fact is unscientific, which defeats the entire point of science. We will never make progress if we continue to cling to outdated concepts and wishful thinking.

This really comes down to how it is presented doesn't it? If it is presented in the sense of Intelligent Design (which from my research Palin does not subscribe to) and attempted to be vetted as an actual theory, then yes, it is backward. However, if it is mentioned as an alternate beleif structure, then no it is not backwards.



That's kind of a big one. Every reputable environmental scientist in the world believes that global warming is related to the burning of fossil fuels. The ones that don't are fringe whackjobs and those who are on the payroll of big oil. How in the world can any responsible politician conscientiously mislead the people whom they serve? This isn't an issue that you can simply pretend doesn't exist. It does and attitudes like this are what's contributing to the worsening of the situation.

Absolute 100% bunk - the sceintific community is deeply divided over the raise in climate to fossile fuels. But, please keep up the talking points about linking anyone who disagrees with big oil (Palin sure as hell aint a friend).

Is global warming happening yes (Palin does not disagree there) - is mankind causing it - jury is very much out - and as a responsible politician - should she devote significant state/national resources towards remedying something that can'e be stopped? This approach is equally as valid as dropping everything and fighting it.



Same-sex laws may be a step in the right direction, but the fact is that the only possible justification for opposing same-sex marriage is once again based on a superstitious belief system. There is no constitutional reason why it shouldn't be legal. In fact, the 9th amendment is what makes the denial of same-sex marriage unconstitutional.


Lol - nice straw man calling Religon a superstitions beleif system - Christianity (et all) is signifcantly more than that. Actually, there is another pretty significant reason for baring it - will of the people.

Further, there is no constitutional right to that (which we will discuss below)


To translate that into plain English, it means that any rights they forgot to mention in the Bill of Rights are still covered.


Bullshit - Where is my consitutional right to yell fire in a theater? Where is my consitutional right to exceed the speed limit. This is an area where you and I need to tread lightly - neither of us are Constitutional Lawyer - perhaps we play one on TV - but neither of us know what the hell we are talking about.



To listen to him talk, Bush seems to think he's a constitutionalist. That's just so much empty rhetoric.


You mean like Change we can Believe in???? I understand what you are saying here - bbut Bush through action has demonstrated that he is not a friend of the constitution - Palin, through action has demonstated (admittedly via a very thin resume) that she does.

[Lady Fury]

:boggle:

I get it, you're trolling.

Nice.

:D

http://www.happyordnance.com./images/smilies/popcorn.gif

[Singularity]

This really comes down to how it is presented doesn't it? If it is presented in the sense of Intelligent Design (which from my research Palin does not subscribe to) and attempted to be vetted as an actual theory, then yes, it is backward. However, if it is mentioned as an alternate beleif structure, then no it is not backwards.

Belief structures are not scientific and have no place in a science class. Next.


Absolute 100% bunk - the sceintific community is deeply divided over the raise in climate to fossile fuels. But, please keep up the talking points about linking anyone who disagrees with big oil (Palin sure as hell aint a friend).

Bullshit. Cite a reputable scientific publication that shares this view. Stop buying into big oil's rhetoric. Scientists know that warmth is tied to CO2 levels. We can accurately gauge how much CO2 we are releasing. We can also look at soil and ice core samples to measure CO2 levels up to hundreds of thousands of years in the past. We conclusively KNOW that there is more CO2 in the atmosphere now than there ever has been at any point in time in the past. We also KNOW that global temperatures are rising. This is not coincidence and anyone who thinks otherwise really needs to get their fucking head examined.

Is global warming happening yes (Palin does not disagree there) - is mankind causing it - jury is very much out - and as a responsible politician - should she devote significant state/national resources towards remedying something that can'e be stopped? This approach is equally as valid as dropping everything and fighting it.

No, the jury is not out. The only jury that's out is the one of public opinion, and that is an unselected jury, because again, they are not environmental scientists. The public is being intentionally misled by leaders who want the keep the flow of oil going to line their own pockets.

As for whether or not it can be stopped is the real questions. Is it your position that we should just keep making the problem worse until it eventually leads to an atmosphere that is incompatible with human life? Do you think that Florida doesn't have a right to exist, that the prime agricultural areas of this country should become desert, and that the prime real-estate should move to Canada? That's what will eventually happen if governments don't work together to find cleaner alternatives. If there are no alternatives, then is it right to use the world up and then just leave the carcass for future generations rather than making the unavoidable changes now while we can do so in slow measured steps?

Lol - nice straw man calling Religon a superstitions beleif system - Christianity (et all) is signifcantly more than that. Actually, there is another pretty significant reason for baring it - will of the people.

The people can will there to be a god all they want, but that does not make it so. The same people are not allowed by the constitution to enact mob rule when it comes to the denial of rights. Next.

Bullshit - Where is my consitutional right to yell fire in a theater? Where is my consitutional right to exceed the speed limit. This is an area where you and I need to tread lightly - neither of us are Constitutional Lawyer - perhaps we play one on TV - but neither of us know what the hell we are talking about.

So you're saying that the right for two people who love each other to get married is equivalent to yelling "Fire!" in a theater. That's the strawman argument to say the least. And to say that a lay person can't debate constitutional matters is essentially the same as saying that we have to defer to the opinions of our betters on this issue. Sorry. This government doesn't work that way. I have studied the constitution at the college level, and yes, this amendment does apply.

You mean like Change we can Believe in???? I understand what you are saying here - bbut Bush through action has demonstrated that he is not a friend of the constitution - Palin, through action has demonstated (admittedly via a very thin resume) that she does.

On this point we mostly agree. Bush claims to be a friend of the constitution, though his actions say otherwise. It's hard to tell exactly where Palin falls, but based on the thin evidence that you cite, she seems to be on the Bush side of the argument.

[Name Lips]

I'm with Singularity here. Science class is for science. If you want a Bible as Literature class or Philosophy or Comparative Religions or something, then sure, talk about intelligent design and creationism.

[Utrecht]

Belief structures are not scientific and have no place in a science class. Next.

Couple of points - First I see no harm in mentioning Creationism at the beginning on the segment on evolution - and it sounds like you and I are going to have to agree to disagree on this point

Two, it appears that my research on Intelligent design and Palin might not be 100% accurate - I have seen a couple of references of her beleiving in it (NT Times being one) - so the jury might be out on this one.



Bullshit. Cite a reputable scientific publication that shares this view. Stop buying into big oil's rhetoric. Scientists know that warmth is tied to CO2 levels. We can accurately gauge how much CO2 we are releasing. We can also look at soil and ice core samples to measure CO2 levels up to hundreds of thousands of years in the past. We conclusively KNOW that there is more CO2 in the atmosphere now than there ever has been at any point in time in the past. We also KNOW that global temperatures are rising. This is not coincidence and anyone who thinks otherwise really needs to get their fucking head examined.

Here are a bunch. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scienti fic_assessment_of_global_warming

and no, we don't know that CO2 is higher than any time in the past - higher than in the past 130k years, yes, I would agree with that. However, they started raising 20,000 years ago (this is based off of Ice core samples taken in Vostok Greenland (Jouzel, 2007)

So if you are going to seriously argue that mankind caused the raise in CO2 levels 20,000 years ago, then you need (and I quote) to get your fucking head examined.


No, the jury is not out. The only jury that's out is the one of public opinion, and that is an unselected jury, because again, they are not environmental scientists. The public is being intentionally misled by leaders who want the keep the flow of oil going to line their own pockets.


Ooookay, I really have no other response to this than to say that you might need another layer on that tin hat - this is akin to saying that the world is controlled by the 9 Jews in Switzerland.


As for whether or not it can be stopped is the real questions. Is it your position that we should just keep making the problem worse until it eventually leads to an atmosphere that is incompatible with human life? Do you think that Florida doesn't have a right to exist, that the prime agricultural areas of this country should become desert, and that the prime real-estate should move to Canada? That's what will eventually happen if governments don't work together to find cleaner alternatives. If there are no alternatives, then is it right to use the world up and then just leave the carcass for future generations rather than making the unavoidable changes now while we can do so in slow measured steps?


Not at all - I beleive in a blanced environmental policy that manages both the economic impact with the environmental impact. I believe that every FEDERALLY mandated Green dollar be justified against its benefit - I dont want the goverment to spend $1 to make a 10 cent cumulative benefit. Private enterprise can do what ever they want.


The people can will there to be a god all they want, but that does not make it so. The same people are not allowed by the constitution to enact mob rule when it comes to the denial of rights. Next.


So effectively, you are advocating that the tyrany of the minority should hold sway. Very Simply, Marriage is not a Governmental issue - they should stay out of it - effectively, Palin has done that.


So you're saying that the right for two people who love each other to get married is equivalent to yelling "Fire!" in a theater. That's the strawman argument to say the least.
from a legal perspective, yes that is what I am saying - love has NOTHING to do with Law


And to say that a lay person can't debate constitutional matters is essentially the same as saying that we have to defer to the opinions of our betters on this issue. Sorry. This government doesn't work that way. I have studied the constitution at the college level, and yes, this amendment does apply.


All I am saying here is that both your and my arguments are inherently flawed since neither of us are constitutional scholars and that we are both arguing from an emotional standpoint coupled with an imcomplete undertanding and that we both need to understand that we are on very shakey ground.


On this point we mostly agree. Bush claims to be a friend of the constitution, though his actions say otherwise. It's hard to tell exactly where Palin falls, but based on the thin evidence that you cite, she seems to be on the Bush side of the argument.

Not sure what you are getting at here - are you saying that she is a wolf in sheeps clothing? On that, I disagree, her behaviour thus far has been as a reform minded constitutionalist - hardly what Bush is.

[Singularity]

Couple of points - First I see no harm in mentioning Creationism at the beginning on the segment on evolution - and it sounds like you and I are going to have to agree to disagree on this point

Agreeing to disagree is what causes wars. You are saying that there should be a discussion of religious beliefs in a classroom that teaches science. Whether you happen to buy into it or not, religion is not science. If it is to be talked about at all, it should be in a social studies class.

Here are a bunch. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scienti fic_assessment_of_global_warming

Have you looked at that list? How many of those people are former professors, retired, or in a completely different field of study? This reads like a who's who of scientific quackery.

and no, we don't know that CO2 is higher than any time in the past - higher than in the past 130k years, yes, I would agree with that. However, they started raising 20,000 years ago (this is based off of Ice core samples taken in Vostok Greenland (Jouzel, 2007)

It is higher than in recordable history and temperatures are on the rise. It's amazing how the CO2 levels happen to be going up as our emissions are going up as the temperature is going up. To quote a friend of mine, "Environmental modification through the uncontrolled release of CO2 into the atmosphere is the greatest scientific experiment of all time, and we're all in the test tube."

So if you are going to seriously argue that mankind caused the raise in CO2 levels 20,000 years ago, then you need (and I quote) to get your fucking head examined.

Why would I argue that we were responsible for a naturally occuring spike in CO2? What we are currently experiencing isn't naturally occurring.

Ooookay, I really have no other response to this than to say that you might need another layer on that tin hat - this is akin to saying that the world is controlled by the 9 Jews in Switzerland.

:rolleyes:

Not at all - I beleive in a blanced environmental policy that manages both the economic impact with the environmental impact. I believe that every FEDERALLY mandated Green dollar be justified against its benefit - I dont want the goverment to spend $1 to make a 10 cent cumulative benefit. Private enterprise can do what ever they want.

Suppose that you have to make a choice. We can have a clean environment and a healthy world for the future, but our economy will go into a depression while we adjust to life without oil, or we can have an environment that is deadly and inhospitable, but the rich will still be comfortable in their nice expensive environmentally managed mansions. Suppose that you have to make a choice because there is no balance to be struck and there is no compromise. Which future would you choose?

So effectively, you are advocating that the tyrany of the minority should hold sway. Very Simply, Marriage is not a Governmental issue - they should stay out of it - effectively, Palin has done that.

The Bill of Rights and the courts were created to protect the minority. This is one of the fundamental principles of the founding of the US.

All I am saying here is that both your and my arguments are inherently flawed since neither of us are constitutional scholars and that we are both arguing from an emotional standpoint coupled with an imcomplete undertanding and that we both need to understand that we are on very shakey ground.

If by constitutional scholar, you mean someone who has studied the constitution at the college level, then yes, I am.

Not sure what you are getting at here - are you saying that she is a wolf in sheeps clothing? On that, I disagree, her behaviour thus far has been as a reform minded constitutionalist - hardly what Bush is.

I'm saying that her creationist, anti-abortion leanings look very neocon to me, and without more information on her stance in relation to specific issues, I'm inclined to not give her the benefit of the doubt at this time. That could change if more of her actual stances become known.

[FeatsofClay]

Either noone did their vetting or Daily KOS is off the deep fucking end-

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/30/9336/15731/279/579413

The Palin pregnancy
by SantaFeMarie
Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 06:03:36 AM PDT
Here is a list of oddities:

Palin says she was informed in December that the baby might have Downs syndrome. Palin is opposed to abortion in all cases. So, why was she having the tests done?

Also in December, she posed for photos to appear in Vogue. Here name begins to be mentioned in connection with the VP slot. She makes no mention of the pregnancy.

SantaFeMarie's diary :: ::
Palin attracted more media attention in February 2008 at a National Governors Association meeting in DC, where she meets John McCain for the first time. The press and the other govs don't notice she is pregnant. Here is a photo from the meeting, just 7 weeks before the baby arrives.


In March she announces that she is 7 months pregnant.
Link to ADN story. People who worked with her were amazed, because they had not noticed any signs. This includes women who had been through the experience and therefore would be very familiar it.

In late April (putting her into the 8th month) she flew to Dallas to address another National Governor's Association meeting. The Anchorage Daily News provides an astonishing account:

On Thursday "she consulted with her doctor" at 4AM. She was "leaking amniotic fluid" and "felt some contractions". Nevertheless, she goes to the conference and gives the luncheon keynote address. She then gets on a plane for Seattle, changes planes, and heads on for Anchorage. Minimum travel time: 9 hours. The flight attendants don't notice she is pregnant/in labor.

They landed in Anchorage around 10:30 p.m. Thursday. Despite the fact that she knows she might be having a child with special medical needs, she and her husband drive out of Anchorage and an hour later were at the Mat-Su Regional Medical Center in Wasilla - a hospital that doesn't have a NICU.

The baby is born at 6:30AM Friday. Despite being one month premature, he weighs 6lb 2ou.

[If you read the ADN story, notice how very careful the doctor is about her words.]

Palin is back at her office on Monday.


OK, now I come out and say it: every weird element of this whole story is cleared up by the assumption that it was the daughter who was pregnant, she wasn't sure of the date she conceived, and the parents were in the dark about everything until March. With that in mind, go to the ADN story about the birth - it all makes sense, doesn't it?

I would have liked to have seen an introduction of the Palin girls yesterday - but we didn't get much. See video link here. The Palin family comes on at about 8:20 minutes. It is weird, but there always seems to be someone standing between the camera and the daughter who is holding the baby. Have a look - lots of shots of Cindy McCain's backside - very odd. And the poor girl - whose idea was it to drape that blanket all over her? A discrete little drool catcher over one should should suffice, no?

I will say this: Sarah Palin herself looks so trim I can hardly believe she was ever pregnant.



Site has many dark, unclear, vague photos and sense of desperation and bullshit I haven't seen since prom night. I would, generally, put this in league with the bigfoot in a freezer. Is anyone here familiar with Daily KOS? I have read maybe half a dozen articles form there and they seemed reasonable, if terrible left-boased. This, this is National Enquirer type shit.

[Hatter]

I would not turn to DailyKOS for any type of reliable information.

[Hatter]

I'm giving Palin a week before things fall apart. She has so little experience that it disarms the GOP strategy used against Obama so far, she has no foreign policy, she has no domestic record, she's pretty much a non-entity politically and given John McCains age it has to be considered that she could be President within the next 4 years. That's frightening to me.

This choice seems to have been made for political reasons and with political timing geared to put McCain back into the news. It's a surprise choice done for shock value. I thought McCain was about putting the country before politics. Seriously, this looks like a mistake.

[Schizm]

I thought McCain was about putting the country before politics.

:grey: 2004 :grey:

[Utrecht]

Agreeing to disagree is what causes wars.

Sure if you take my position to its illogical extreme

You are saying that there should be a discussion of religious beliefs in a classroom that teaches science. Whether you happen to buy into it or not, religion is not science. If it is to be talked about at all, it should be in a social studies class.


So, first and formost, this is not an issue that I think is terribly important - so quite frankly, I could care less if there is a discussion about creationism before the segment on evolution - as to your belief that each discipline should be kept seperate is silly IMO - social issue touch science which touches language which touches...... It is all inter-related.


Have you looked at that list? How many of those people are former professors, retired, or in a completely different field of study? This reads like a who's who of scientific quackery.


yes, I read the list and it is nothing like what you describe - and certainly reflects roughly the same % of the folks who do tie human activities to global warming. You need to accept (which i doubt you are willing to do - but I will hope for understand) that this is not the open and shut case you seem to think it is.


It is higher than in recordable history and temperatures are on the rise. It's amazing how the CO2 levels happen to be going up as our emissions are going up as the temperature is going up. To quote a friend of mine, "Environmental modification through the uncontrolled release of CO2 into the atmosphere is the greatest scientific experiment of all time, and we're all in the test tube."


yep I agree with your statement up until your tie emmissions to global warming - while many, maybe even over 50% of scientist agree with it -I (and many scientists with me) dont accept that connection.


Why would I argue that we were responsible for a naturally occuring spike in CO2? What we are currently experiencing isn't naturally occurring.


You understand that the average Volcanic eruption puts out more CO2 into the atmosphere than a decades worth of human emmission - right? Look into the the 1991 eruption of Mt. Pinatubo for more information. In a period of increased volcanic activity - it is expected that CO2 increase (oh, and btw, it appears that volcanic activity has been on the rise for the last 20k years)

Further, you seemed to have completely ignored my comment on how CO2 has been steadily rising for the last 20k years(no spiking - but a steady rise) - again WELL before any humans could have affected


Suppose that you have to make a choice. We can have a clean environment and a healthy world for the future, but our economy will go into a depression while we adjust to life without oil, or we can have an environment that is deadly and inhospitable, but the rich will still be comfortable in their nice expensive environmentally managed mansions. Suppose that you have to make a choice because there is no balance to be struck and there is no compromise. Which future would you choose?


First, you are assuming a zero sum game and infer that my approach leads to a "deadly and inhospitible world". But given your choice, of course I would pick the clean environment - but your strawman argument is so out of wack as to be assinine - and I like how you threw classism into there.

I accept a third way where humans work towards a more environmental approach as a evolutionary approach rather than revolutionary.




The Bill of Rights and the courts were created to protect the minority. This is one of the fundamental principles of the founding of the US.


A bit of a stretch - but I accept the spirit of your argument. However, this is also balanced by societal norms (remember, at one point it was deamed constitutional to tell you what you could not drink)- and at this point (rightly or wrongly) society is not ready to accept same-sex marriages (it is close - and I beleive that in our lifetimes we will get there) - and the efforts by people fighting to get it are certainly worthy - just like the efforts of people who disagree.


If by constitutional scholar, you mean someone who has studied the constitution at the college level, then yes, I am.


Fair enough - you are ahead of me.


I'm saying that her creationist, anti-abortion leanings look very neocon to me, and without more information on her stance in relation to specific issues, I'm inclined to not give her the benefit of the doubt at this time. That could change if more of her actual stances become known.

Fair enough, but let me ask you this question (asked it before, but I suspect you missed it):

Was there ever any chance that you could have voted for McCain over Obama? and (I am presuming that your answer is NO) given that - do you think that this VP choice has any effect on you?

[Ink Bleeder]

Which part? The part that you don't know women or the part that women have raging hormones? :tongue: I know men can be moody too but not to the same degree us women can be. Or maybe it's just me who can be too moody. Hell I don't even know women all that well.:o

:shock: My friend, you leave me speechless. Nearly.

Biology first: yes, women have hormone cycles. But did you know that men have them, too - only they're more erratic than women's cycles? Which would you rather have; a commander in chief whose knows her body and can anticipate its changes in a given month, or a leader who is never sure when he'll be subject to the mood-altering chemicals surging through his body?

Now for the part that is going to get me in trouble. Let me state up front that as a feminist, I believe feminism liberates men as well as women from the stereotypes we assign to sex roles - and that it will take a lot of work, but isn't impossible.

And yes, yes - there are exceptions to every rule, and several are my closest friends.

Lady F, I want you to think about the sex of the vast majority of abusers, thiefs, rapists, and murderers. Are they women or men?
Are you really going to tell me that women are moodier than men? That women are less capable of managing their emotions than men? That men can control their impulses better than women? Really?
My dad is a rageaholic abuser who would never dare to treat a man or anyone bigger than him the way he does women and children. My mother is utterly unflappable and incredibly pragmatic. Now, I'm not saying she doesn't have any issues; clearly she does, or she wouldn't be married to my dad! But I've never seen my mother cry, and she is the voice of sanity in an emergency, as many women are. One of the reasons I liked Hillary Clinton as a candidate is that she reminded me of my mom: I knew she was tough as nails, and that no one could push her around. When I look around me, by and large, it's the women who bear up when things go to hell. It's women who raise the children their own kids have abandoned. It's women who make those trips to the hospital and sit with the bodies. You're a mother with a large family - you know how much management and scheduling is part of that job! As they age, women care for other women - and men - who need help. They sift through bills, call insurance, comfort during chemo, pack up houses, make funeral arrangements. I'm not saying men can't do these things - they can. And in a more balanced culture, women wouldn't carry the burden of being expected to do these things. But the way things are now, in this country? I think it's the women who are really trained to be leaders - and then are never given the chance to lead.

I think Palin is a ridiculous choice for VP, and I'd never vote for her. But not because she's a woman.

[Lady Fury]

Maybe my experiences with most women has me skewed. It's just my own personal belief based on what I've experienced in my life.

[Ink Bleeder]

Maybe my experiences with most women has me skewed. It's just my own personal belief based on what I've experienced in my life.

You certainly have experienced more than your fair share of shitty women. :(
Still, take a look at the news. The prisons. Who are you afraid of when you walk across a parking lot at night?

[Merganser]

Personally, I vote on facts - but I am one vote in 300 million.....

Dude, if you think there are 300 million votes in this country, then your command of the facts is weak. ;)




hee hee hee

[Singularity]

Sure if you take my position to its illogical extreme

It isn't that I'm taking it to the most illogical extreme. There is a trend in this culture to brush our disagreements under the carpet and pretend that they don't exist. For this reason, like minded people tend to clump together to the exclusion of those who disagree with them, which ends up factionalizing the country more than an open dialogue would. And yes, taken to the extreme, wars are started over agreeing to disagree.

So, first and formost, this is not an issue that I think is terribly important - so quite frankly, I could care less if there is a discussion about creationism before the segment on evolution - as to your belief that each discipline should be kept seperate is silly IMO - social issue touch science which touches language which touches...... It is all inter-related.

The reason I think that it is terribly important is because there is a history or scientific discovery being suppressed because it disagrees with religious teachings. If you happen to believe in religion, then you should also accept what most churches say about it - that being that the bible is a collection of stories. It isn't to be taken literally, and that it is the message that is to be believed and embraced. I don't see why we live in a world where believing in god means that you cannot believe in evolution. I don't want to live in a world where we can't achieve our maximum potential because something non-tangible is holding us back.


yep I agree with your statement up until your tie emmissions to global warming - while many, maybe even over 50% of scientist agree with it -I (and many scientists with me) dont accept that connection.

You understand that the average Volcanic eruption puts out more CO2 into the atmosphere than a decades worth of human emmission - right? Look into the the 1991 eruption of Mt. Pinatubo for more information. In a period of increased volcanic activity - it is expected that CO2 increase (oh, and btw, it appears that volcanic activity has been on the rise for the last 20k years)

Let's suppose that you're right for a moment. Let's suppose that volcanic activity is the real culprit, but that the cause is still CO2 emissions. Wouldn't you agree that the amount of CO2 we're dumping into the atmosphere is at least contributing to the problem? Should we continue to do this or should we minimize its impact?

To put it another way, say you take your family camping in the woods and when you get there, you find the place littered with cans, wrappers, and other garbage that people have left behind. Let's also say that you don't have the inclination to pick up the mess that's already there. Now, over the course of a weekend outing, you add your own junk to the mess. Do you clean up your own junk to at least make it the same experience for the next people to use that location, or do you leave it and shrug your shoulders, because, hey, it was already littered?

Further, you seemed to have completely ignored my comment on how CO2 has been steadily rising for the last 20k years(no spiking - but a steady rise) - again WELL before any humans could have affected

If it has risen over the last 20K years, that still doesn't account for the current spike. Frankly, I'm not keen on another ice age, so some global warming isn't the worst thing in the world, but we really might not want to see what happens if this trend is allowed to continue to its ultimate conclusion. I like living in a country that can provide food for the rest of the world. I'd hate for us to have to give that advantage away to Canada (suck it C'nooks!)

First, you are assuming a zero sum game and infer that my approach leads to a "deadly and inhospitible world". But given your choice, of course I would pick the clean environment - but your strawman argument is so out of wack as to be assinine - and I like how you threw classism into there.

I accept a third way where humans work towards a more environmental approach as a evolutionary approach rather than revolutionary.

I made it a hypothetical zero sum game to see where you stood on the issue. What your answer establishes is that it isn't that you aren't willing to make the changes needed to correct the problem, but that you need to be sufficiently convinced that the problem is really as serious as it is. You need to be convinced that it really is a problem that we are contributing to, and that it really will make a significant change in the health of this country over the long run. If you were so convinced, could you then justify spending the money on cutting our emissions?

A bit of a stretch - but I accept the spirit of your argument. However, this is also balanced by societal norms (remember, at one point it was deamed constitutional to tell you what you could not drink)- and at this point (rightly or wrongly) society is not ready to accept same-sex marriages (it is close - and I beleive that in our lifetimes we will get there) - and the efforts by people fighting to get it are certainly worthy - just like the efforts of people who disagree.

If societal norms state that it is OK to deny rights to a small minority then the societal norms are wrong. It's really that simple. People were able to adjust to black people gaining equal rights and granting the right to vote to women. This is just another struggle in the name of true equality that we should all enjoy in this country. The problem is that the women's movement and the civil rights movements of the '60s should have taught people that society improves when all groups are treated equal under law. Using societal norms as an argument is just another way of saying that certain forms of hatred are OK. I believe that this country is better than that.


Fair enough, but let me ask you this question (asked it before, but I suspect you missed it):

Was there ever any chance that you could have voted for McCain over Obama? and (I am presuming that your answer is NO) given that - do you think that this VP choice has any effect on you?

I've said it before and I'll say it again - I like McCain. Of all the high ranking republicans in congress, he is one of the few that could have a chance of swaying my vote. I think he's as genuine a politician as you're going to find in Washington, he seems to extend professional courtesy to his opponents, and he seems to care about the average person in this country. More importantly, he's one of the intelligent republicans who comes to his decisions more because of reasoning than dogmatic beliefs. Those are high marks coming from me.

Now, what I don't like about McCain is the thing that Obama cited in his speech the other night - his voting record. All but 10% of the time, he voted with George W. Bush. That makes me wonder if he's really the maverick he portrays himself as. If he can bring about change, why did he take the side of so many bad policy decisions?

There's also the question of his VP choice because of his age. To me, she seems too conservative. At the age he's at, people just die sometimes. Things will be fine one minute and they'll be checking out the next. We really need to at least partially evaluate McCain by his running mate. Now I do think that he made a good choice by not picking so many of the other Republican candidates. The current crop of top contenders seem to run from too conservative to downright scary. He also made a good choice by picking someone young. My problem with Palin is that she seems to be too much of an unknown right now. Her pro-life, pro-creationist stance doesn't do anything to help endear her to me.

Oddly enough, I might have actually swung towards McCain if he would have picked Giulianni as a running mate. Yes, he is also conservative in the same ways Palin is, but he has a proven track record of solving some nearly impossible problems in a city that is larger than many countries. He's a known quantity.

By comparison, Biden really doesn't do anything to change my thoughts on Obama. He is old guard, but maybe having someone with his experience can help Obama in the one area he is lacking.

[Varaj]

Utrecht can you provide any vetted journal research papers on global warming not being contributed to by humans instead of a list of people? More interesting, list the percentage of vetted journal research papers on each side.

Utrecht I agree creation and ID should be taught in the science room.
Teacher: "Class we are going to cover Creationism and ID today. You will learn exactly why they are not science and what the difference between scientific belief and religious belief."


Utrecht how can you possibly say marriage is not government business? Try this, go get married in a church and don't get a government marriage license and then file your taxes as "married" or apply for any government status that has a difference for married vs single.
In the US marriage is 100% a government thing and not a religious thing, at least in the eyes of the law.
Go get married to three different women by a church and see if you are guilty of bigamy. Now go married by the state to three different women and see how long you stay out of jail.

[FeatsofClay]

I believe Creationism has a place in a biological science classroom the same way Flat Earth Theory belongs in a geology or Geography classroom. It belongs in the same place Spontaneous Generation (which I was taught) belongs. Much like I teach Kuros Boy before David and Rodin's Balzac.

It does belong in the classroom as a lesson in the progression of thought. I do not, however, believe this is anything near what Creationist mean, Ms. Palin included, when they call for Creationism to be presented in schools. The constant drumbeat of this movement has been 'Equal time'.

'Equal time' is a short hop (to use an anti-gay marraige argument) to Flat Earth theories getting equal time. Spontaneous Generation and the Theory of Humours would have to be taught as well and then it is chaos. Education is not about presenting all opinions equally. Otherwise aliens and pyramids would add too much time to my classes. :)

-Isn't Implying Anything But Art Dorkiness With Professor Reference Spikey

[Freedom Canadian]

I don't see the harm in covering the bible's theory that pi = 3 in math class. :)

[obryn]

If you rearrange the letters in Sarah Heath Palin, you can get...

Ha Ha, Alpine Trash

or, my personal favorite,

Ahh shit, anal rape

You heard it here first! Or maybe second!

-O

[Kyle Voltti]

I might be parranoid but what if this is just political shuck and jive? Palin brings the Right Wing base cred and she's stolen the news cycle but the woman is no Margret Thatcher, Hell she'd hardley a Kim Campbell. What if she's just in it to help McCain win and then after the election she's going to step down and be replaced with the "real" VP pick.

[Utrecht]

It isn't that I'm taking it to the most illogical extreme. There is a trend in this culture to brush our disagreements under the carpet and pretend that they don't exist. For this reason, like minded people tend to clump together to the exclusion of those who disagree with them, which ends up factionalizing the country more than an open dialogue would. And yes, taken to the extreme, wars are started over agreeing to disagree.

I suspect that this is a glass half empty/full kind of thing. Is see the country engaged in the same level of discssions as it always has - I think that you have some manner of romantic vision of the US' past.



The reason I think that it is terribly important is because there is a history or scientific discovery being suppressed because it disagrees with religious teachings. If you happen to believe in religion, then you should also accept what most churches say about it - that being that the bible is a collection of stories. It isn't to be taken literally, and that it is the message that is to be believed and embraced. I don't see why we live in a world where believing in god means that you cannot believe in evolution. I don't want to live in a world where we can't achieve our maximum potential because something non-tangible is holding us back.


OK, I think that I see where we are diverging - I just don't see the current approach supressing scientific discovery - and certainly not in schools. Sure are there ID folks who would like to go there, yes, but they are no where close to succeeding. And again, the idea of having a healthy discussion about Creation vs Evolution is a good thing IMO. Where I would immediately agree with you is if they present Evolution as fact or as an alternative theory (as opposed to an alternative view held by people)


Let's suppose that you're right for a moment. Let's suppose that volcanic activity is the real culprit, but that the cause is still CO2 emissions. Wouldn't you agree that the amount of CO2 we're dumping into the atmosphere is at least contributing to the problem? Should we continue to do this or should we minimize its impact?


I am going to respond to this in another thread


To put it another way, say you take your family camping in the woods and when you get there, you find the place littered with cans, wrappers, and other garbage that people have left behind. Let's also say that you don't have the inclination to pick up the mess that's already there. Now, over the course of a weekend outing, you add your own junk to the mess. Do you clean up your own junk to at least make it the same experience for the next people to use that location, or do you leave it and shrug your shoulders, because, hey, it was already littered?


Same as above


If it has risen over the last 20K years, that still doesn't account for the current spike. Frankly, I'm not keen on another ice age, so some global warming isn't the worst thing in the world, but we really might not want to see what happens if this trend is allowed to continue to its ultimate conclusion. I like living in a country that can provide food for the rest of the world. I'd hate for us to have to give that advantage away to Canada (suck it C'nooks!)


another thread


I made it a hypothetical zero sum game to see where you stood on the issue. What your answer establishes is that it isn't that you aren't willing to make the changes needed to correct the problem, but that you need to be sufficiently convinced that the problem is really as serious as it is. You need to be convinced that it really is a problem that we are contributing to, and that it really will make a significant change in the health of this country over the long run. If you were so convinced, could you then justify spending the money on cutting our emissions?


OK, in generalities that is fair.


If societal norms state that it is OK to deny rights to a small minority then the societal norms are wrong. It's really that simple. People were able to adjust to black people gaining equal rights and granting the right to vote to women. This is just another struggle in the name of true equality that we should all enjoy in this country. The problem is that the women's movement and the civil rights movements of the '60s should have taught people that society improves when all groups are treated equal under law. Using societal norms as an argument is just another way of saying that certain forms of hatred are OK. I believe that this country is better than that.


I dont disagree with you - but something else that the 60s taught us what that these changes take time - and that the reason why it is necessary for the continuous pushing - but it is important to realize that this pushing is going to cause resistance. But that is a more than fair to dismiss a candidate.


I've said it before and I'll say it again - I like McCain. Of all the high ranking republicans in congress, he is one of the few that could have a chance of swaying my vote. I think he's as genuine a politician as you're going to find in Washington, he seems to extend professional courtesy to his opponents, and he seems to care about the average person in this country. More importantly, he's one of the intelligent republicans who comes to his decisions more because of reasoning than dogmatic beliefs. Those are high marks coming from me.

OK, that is fair - and the follow up question that I was going to put in - do you see it possible for McCain have picked a VP that would have worked for his base and for you?


Now, what I don't like about McCain is the thing that Obama cited in his speech the other night - his voting record. All but 10% of the time, he voted with George W. Bush. That makes me wonder if he's really the maverick he portrays himself as. If he can bring about change, why did he take the side of so many bad policy decisions?


That is fair in the abstract - but that 90% is not quite as bad as it originally appears - after all Obama has voted with Bush 45% (or there abouts) of the time. Many of these votes are proceedural/pro-forma votes.

Further, Obama, the self styled agent of change has voted with the Democratic Congress a crazy 97% of the time - hardly change - especially with Congress approval at 9% and it being as much (if not more) culpable with the current failed policy as Bush.


There's also the question of his VP choice because of his age. To me, she seems too conservative. At the age he's at, people just die sometimes. Things will be fine one minute and they'll be checking out the next. We really need to at least partially evaluate McCain by his running mate. Now I do think that he made a good choice by not picking so many of the other Republican candidates. The current crop of top contenders seem to run from too conservative to downright scary. He also made a good choice by picking someone young. My problem with Palin is that she seems to be too much of an unknown right now. Her pro-life, pro-creationist stance doesn't do anything to help endear her to me.


Also more than fair - and I agree - if McCain kicks off next April we are fucked - but if he is given 1 - 2 years of governance (and time to season Palin we should be fine). That is compared to Obama who people are prepared to put into office next January - which just seems worse to me...


Oddly enough, I might have actually swung towards McCain if he would have picked Giulianni as a running mate. Yes, he is also conservative in the same ways Palin is, but he has a proven track record of solving some nearly impossible problems in a city that is larger than many countries. He's a known quantity.


I find this odd since Guiliani could not identify with the country as a whole (similar to Biden) - so effectively what you are saying here is that experience would trump ideology?


By comparison, Biden really doesn't do anything to change my thoughts on Obama. He is old guard, but maybe having someone with his experience can help Obama in the one area he is lacking.

As I said before, I the Biden pick to me was as much, if not more cynical than the Palin one - and proved to me that Obama is more interested in winning than actual CHANGE! (which is a big duh... I know)



Utrecht can you provide any vetted journal research papers on global warming not being contributed to by humans instead of a list of people? More interesting, list the percentage of vetted journal research papers on each side.

I am going to start a new thread on this


Utrecht I agree creation and ID should be taught in the science room.
Teacher: "Class we are going to cover Creationism and ID today. You will learn exactly why they are not science and what the difference between scientific belief and religious belief."


I am more than OK with that - and further, that is far as I am willing to go


Utrecht how can you possibly say marriage is not government business? Try this, go get married in a church and don't get a government marriage license and then file your taxes as "married" or apply for any government status that has a difference for married vs single.
In the US marriage is 100% a government thing and not a religious thing, at least in the eyes of the law.
Go get married to three different women by a church and see if you are guilty of bigamy. Now go married by the state to three different women and see how long you stay out of jail.

Marriage, is a Religious societal construction. Civil Unions, however are governement business - and I believe that it should extend to everyone.

[Varaj]

Marriage, is a Religious societal construction. Civil Unions, however are governement business - and I believe that it should extend to everyone.

Marriage in the US is 100% government. What happens in the examples I listed?

You might want marriage to be a religious social construction and not a government business but that is not the way it is. You cannot be legally married in the US without a government permit, period.

[Dacke]

What if she's just in it to help McCain win and then after the election she's going to step down and be replaced with the "real" VP pick.
A replacement VP has to be confirmed by both houses of Congress. Both are controlled by democrats at the moment, and it's not likely that's going to change in November.

[Kyle Voltti]

A replacement VP has to be confirmed by both houses of Congress. Both are controlled by democrats at the moment, and it's not likely that's going to change in November.
But would they act to leave the seat of Vice President open if Palin were to resign? That would lead to Nacy Pelosi being the next in line for the Presidency and Republicans would surely complain that the Democrats were hopeing for a back door into the office by barring an Republican VP.

[FeatsofClay]

Either noone did their vetting or Daily KOS is off the deep fucking end-

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/30/9336/15731/279/579413



Site has many dark, unclear, vague photos and sense of desperation and bullshit I haven't seen since prom night. I would, generally, put this in league with the bigfoot in a freezer. Is anyone here familiar with Daily KOS? I have read maybe half a dozen articles form there and they seemed reasonable, if terrible left-boased. This, this is National Enquirer type shit.

Debunkified- http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/31/234157/516/1017/581734

[Ergeheilalt]

http://localgibson.com/remote/sa/palin3.jpg

[obryn]

Also, she apparently believes that Alaska should have the right to secede from the United States.

-O

[Schizm]

Debunkified- http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/31/234157/516/1017/581734

yup. turns out her daughter is pregnant instead. :grey:

[Singularity]

http://www.dailytech.com/Sun+Makes+History+First+Spotless+Month+in+a+Centur y/article12823.htm

NYT: Palin disclosures raise questions
Alaskans say no one from McCain camp asked them about eventual VP pick
By Elisabeth Bumiller
The New York Times
updated 8:10 p.m. PT, Mon., Sept. 1, 2008

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 1990s of the Alaska Independence Party, which has at times sought a vote on whether the state should secede; and that Mr. Palin was arrested 22 years ago on a drunken-driving charge.

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.

A rushed pick?
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.

Locals say no one talked to them
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.”

Trying to keep a secret
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.

Catch-22
“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.”

This article, Disclosures on Palin Raise Questions on Vetting Process, originally appeared in the New York Times.

Copyright © 2008 The New York Times

Heh, oops. This nomination is starting to look like a serious misstep. :lol: Besides, this woman is a poster child for why her beliefs are harmful to the country. Anti-abortion - get your very own down's syndrome baby! Abstinence only education? Your daughter too can be a mother at 17. :lol:

Now McCain is probably thinking twice about her pick, and yet his balls would be nailed to the wall if he were to choose someone else. I look forward to the swearing in of President Obama early next year.

[obryn]

I was scared a few days ago, but the more I learn about her, the less concerned I get.

It looks more and more like shallow pandering to (1) Clinton supporters, who they presume aren't smart enough to realize that, while Mrs. Palin is indeed a woman, she also stands against almost everything women have achieved in Washington; and (2) fundies, who are scrambling right now to explain how this is really no big deal.

And you know - it isn't a big deal in the long run. But, frankly, the conservative press would be all over any Democrat whose daughter got pregnant, 17 and unmarried. If Obama had a pregnant 17-year-old? Hell, they'd scream it from the rooftops.

-O

[Dr. Paragon]

Well, Edena is in my "Ignore closet" for a while. I hope he Utrecht,
and Atticus can all get along in there.

This has been brought to you by the letter: :rolleyes:

[Edena_of_Neith]

Hmmmm (wonders why he is on Doctor Paragon's Ignore list??? WTF? ... hasn't even posted to this thread.)

[Lady Fury]

This has been brought to you by the letter: :rolleyes:

Can tomorrow's letter be :fryingpan:? I think it would be a lot more effective for some of these threads.

[Dr. Paragon]

No, no You don't understand Edena, when you are in the "Ignore Closet"
I can't read your posts. That's whole point.

Can tomorrow's letter be :fryingpan:? I think it would be a lot more effective for some of these threads.
I'll discuss it with management.
:D

[Edena_of_Neith]

I have nothing to say about Palin, one way or another.

The only relevant thing I've said is on my other thread, where I said I thought the Democrats should be further ahead in the polls. That is all.

(wonders if Dr. Paragon is a Republican?)

[Harry]

Wonders if Dr. Paragon is a dipshit?

[Lady Fury]

Wonders if Dr. Paragon is a dipshit?

I must be still tired because I read that and immediately imagined pulling out a dipstick from him to check the shit level. :boggle:


Come to think of it, that would be a cool way to see Singularity's levels and to make sure I add more fiber and prune juice to his diet when he reaches the critical point of bull shit. :tongue:

[Dr. Paragon]

Ain't nobody pullin' anythin' outta me to measure nothin'
:shakefist:





Edit: Spellin'

[Ink Bleeder]

I'll admit, I've been cackling over the pregnant teen. What a disaster for the campaign.

But on the other hand, I'm truly bothered by a mother who would accept the nomination, fully knowing that her daughter would be dragged through the muck and made a laughingstock. WTF? The more I think about this (and the fact that she has a newborn with special needs), the more outrageous her comment that "the timing was perfect."

[Hatter]

So now I hear she used to be a member of a fringe Alaskan separatist group. Not sure how accurate that is, but there's a left wing pundit feeding frenzy.

[Name Lips]

So now I hear she used to be a member of a fringe Alaskan separatist group. Not sure how accurate that is, but there's a left wing pundit feeding frenzy.

It's true. She served on a pro-Alaska committee that occasionally tried to push separatist bills. I don't think anything ever made it to vote, though.

And her first response to being tapped for VP was that she didn't want to take the job until she knew it was something that would benefit Alaska. That just confuses me. She'll be VP for the whole country, not just Alaska. Is she saying that as VP she'll hold Alaskan needs higher than national needs?

And her daughter... frankly, that's a non-issue in itself. Teens get pregnant, and being the daughter of a politician doesn't make a teen more responsible. But like IB I can't help but chortle. It shouldn't be an issue, but it is. Just because the Right claims moral superiority, so it's funny when their own families can't live up to their ideals. We all know it's a strawman to say "If she can't set a good example for her own daughter, how can she set a good example for the country?" but we still say it because it's so much fucking fun to chortle. And there might even be some right-wingers for whom this would be a deal-breaker. Probably not enough to make much of a difference, though, realistically.

[Ink Bleeder]

I'm hearing speculation that she'll withdraw her name this week. They almost have to yank her at this point.

[FeatsofClay]

I'm hearing speculation that she'll withdraw her name this week. They almost have to yank her at this point.

I think she is making the right very defensive. Thus solidifying them. I am not sure this debate is going to go away OR that McCain wants it to. Backlash against finger pointers brings possible voters into the leave the house and vote category.

[obryn]

I think she is making the right very defensive. Thus solidifying them. I am not sure this debate is going to go away OR that McCain wants it to. Backlash against finger pointers brings possible voters into the leave the house and vote category.
My gut feeling stills says that this will turn out to be an unmitigated disaster for McCain's campaign. I don't think she'll withdraw - but if she does, that would be even more damaging in the long run. "McCain makes snap decisions, and they turn out poorly."

They're brazenly hoping to snare the Clinton vote, which I am thinking less and less will happen. The more the media turns the spotlight on her, the clearer it is that she's nothing like Clinton, ideologically.

In hope, the Dems can persuade Clinton to make a commercial highlighting this. Who knows, though.

I think someone like Lieberman would have been far more dangerous in the McCain's VP slot. "See, I picked a Democrat (*cough* bullshit *cough*). I'm the uniter!"

-O

[PWD]

I'm the uniterer!"

-O

Fixed it for Dubya.

[Singularity]

My gut feeling stills says that this will turn out to be an unmitigated disaster for McCain's campaign. I don't think she'll withdraw - but if she does, that would be even more damaging in the long run. "McCain makes snap decisions, and they turn out poorly."

I'm right there with you on this. I think it would be more of a disaster for them to withdraw her than it would to just ride it out. That said, it's taking all the things that she stands for in regards to reproductive rights and education and shows how IT DOESN'T WORK!

[Lady Fury]

I'll admit, I've been cackling over the pregnant teen. What a disaster for the campaign.

But on the other hand, I'm truly bothered by a mother who would accept the nomination, fully knowing that her daughter would be dragged through the muck and made a laughingstock. WTF? The more I think about this (and the fact that she has a newborn with special needs), the more outrageous her comment that "the timing was perfect."


I couldn't agree with you more. Apparently her own personal gain is more important than the privacy of her children and family.

[Hatter]

I couldn't agree with you more. Apparently her own personal gain is more important than the privacy of her children and family.

I think it would be a rare politician to put their ambitions second to anything.

[Varaj]

I'm pretty impressed how Obama is handling the girls pregnancy. He is taking the media to task for making it an issue.

[Name Lips]

I'm pretty impressed how Obama is handling the girls pregnancy. He is taking the media to task for making it an issue.

It's brilliant. He gets to talk about it, thus increasing awareness of the (non) issue, while bashing sensationalist media and looking classy.

[obryn]

It's brilliant. He gets to talk about it, thus increasing awareness of the (non) issue, while bashing sensationalist media and looking classy.
Yep, it's perfect, AND he gets to talk about his own background.

I, however, have decided to be douchebaggy about this. I'm sick of Republicans being the only ones who get to be nasty and personal about public figures.

-O

[Merganser]

And her first response to being tapped for VP was that she didn't want to take the job until she knew it was something that would benefit Alaska. That just confuses me. She'll be VP for the whole country, not just Alaska. Is she saying that as VP she'll hold Alaskan needs higher than national needs?

Well, that is typically the modus operandi of your average Alaska politician.

[Radu]

True, Merg, but it's just too fucking bad for her that Alaska doesn't get its own separate Vice President. They have to put up with the same one the other 49 states get.

[Singularity]

Yep, it's perfect, AND he gets to talk about his own background.

I, however, have decided to be douchebaggy about this. I'm sick of Republicans being the only ones who get to be nasty and personal about public figures.

-O

Again, totally in agreement with you. I'm sick of seeing the Republicans pounce on every weakness. It's time for some fucking payback, bitches.

[Varaj]

Again, totally in agreement with you. I'm sick of seeing the Republicans pounce on every weakness. It's time for some fucking payback, bitches.

Can I be all high horse and talk about not lowering to their level, blah, blah, blah...;)

[Singularity]

Can I be all high horse and talk about not lowering to their level, blah, blah, blah...;)

You can, but not lowering to their level doesn't win elections.

[Ascarel]

So, the NY Times writes that McCain cancelled (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/mccain-cancels-larry-king-interview/?hp) a Larry King interview because he didn't like how CNN treated his spokesman. Man, that is hilarious. Here's what happened:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ohkdj1Gw9Ac

[Dr. Paragon]

McCain's a bit old to be pouting. At least I would have thought...
:rolleyes:

[obryn]

So, the NY Times writes that McCain cancelled (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/mccain-cancels-larry-king-interview/?hp) a Larry King interview because he didn't like how CNN treated his spokesman. Man, that is hilarious. Here's what happened:

Campbell Brown has never been hotter.

Holy crap, how can you watch that and think, "Yes, this guy answered the questions well."

-O

[FeatsofClay]

Campbell Brown has never been hotter.

Holy crap, how can you watch that and think, "Yes, this guy answered the questions."

-O

FIFY.

[Singularity]

So she called him on his spin. This should be incentive for McCain to go there and try to set them straight on the matter rather than avoid it. The problem is that it's a legitimate point and they have nothing that they can really use to dismiss their own hypocrisy. To me, this whole Palin thing looks like a misstep and they're taking some serious, legitimate, heat over the decision. This could be the thing that costs them the election.

[FeatsofClay]

O'Reilly has weighed in-

On the pinhead front, 16-year-old XXXXXX XXXXXX is pregnant. The sister of XXXXXX says she is shocked. I bet.

Now most teens are pinheads in some ways. But here the blame falls primarily on the parents of the girl, who obviously have little control over her or even over XXXXXXXXXX XxXXXX. Look at the way she behaves.


Oh, wait!

On the pinhead front, 16-year-old Jamie Lynn Spears is pregnant. The sister of Britney says she is shocked. I bet.

Now most teens are pinheads in some ways. But here the blame falls primarily on the parents of the girl, who obviously have little control over her or even over Britney Spears. Look at the way she behaves.


Evidently it is only a problem, and worth admonishing the parents in the media when it is the Spears family!


However, when it is Palin if the new parent doesn't require public assistance it is a private matter, not personal-http://www.foxnews.com/oreilly/index.html Talking points, Sept 2.

[FeatsofClay]

Slip of the toungue? Harmless err? Freudian slip?Behind the scenes nickname? McCain campaign manager calls Palin 'Governor Failin' on live TV.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpXcQjNMG1M&eurl=http://cgi.fark.com/cgi/fark/vidplayer.pl?IDLink=3844557

[FeatsofClay]

None of the Republicans can say this womans name!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btX1RVbgvzg&eurl=http://cgi.fark.com/cgi/fark/vidplayer.pl?IDLink=3844747

[Harry]

Whoever that Brown chick is, I love her to death for asking "What command decisions has [Palin] made as "commander" of the Alaska National Guard?"

And I wonder why that wasn't a qualification for any Governor running for President up to now? Dukakis? Clinton? Carter? etc, etc...

[Hatter]

Palin slashed funding for teen mothers (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/02/palin_slashed_funding_to_help.html)

The hits just keep coming on this one.

[Dr. Paragon]

Palin slashed funding for teen mothers (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/02/palin_slashed_funding_to_help.html)

The hits just keep coming on this one.
Heh...

[Radu]

... wow.

Last week after the DNC, I heard some rumblings to the effect of Sen. Obama lifted his speech from The American President. Some thematic elements are certainly similar, to be sure, but I had said that it wasn't Barack's fault American politics resembles the plot of an old movie. Now the plot of American politics is starting to look more like a farce than a drama.

[FeatsofClay]

Oh, but it gets worse!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/02/palins-church-may-have-sh_n_123205.html

Palin's Church May Have Shaped Controversial Worldview



Three months before she was thrust into the national political spotlight, Gov. Sarah Palin was asked to handle a much smaller task: addressing the graduating class of commission students at her one-time church, Wasilla Assembly of God.

Her speech in June provides as much insight into her policy leanings as anything uncovered since she was asked to be John McCain's running mate.

Speaking before the Pentecostal church, Palin painted the current war in Iraq as a messianic affair in which the United States could act out the will of the Lord.

"Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God," she exhorted the congregants. "That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan."

Religion, however, was not strictly a thread in Palin's foreign policy. It was part of her energy proposals as well. Just prior to discussing Iraq, Alaska's governor asked the audience to pray for another matter -- a $30 billion national gas pipeline project that she wanted built in the state. "I think God's will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that," she said.

Palin's address, much of which was spent reflecting on the work of the church in which she grew up and was baptized, underscores the notion that her world view is deeply impacted by religion. In turn, her remarks raise important questions: mainly, what is Palin's faith and how exactly has it influenced her policies?

A review of recorded sermons by Ed Kalnins, the senior pastor of Wasilla Assembly of God since 1999, offers a provocative and, for some, eyebrow-raising sketch of Palin's longtime spiritual home.

The church runs a number of ministries providing help to poor neighborhoods, care for children in need, and general community services. But Pastor Kalnins has also preached that critics of President Bush will be banished to hell; questioned whether people who voted for Sen. John Kerry in 2004 would be accepted to heaven; charged that the 9/11 terrorist attacks and war in Iraq were part of a war "contending for your faith;" and said that Jesus "operated from that position of war mode."

It is impossible to determine how much Wasilla Assembly of God has shaped Palin's thinking. She was baptized there at the age of 12 and attended the church for most of her adult life. When Palin was inaugurated as governor, the founding pastor of the church delivered the invocation. In 2002, Palin moved her family to a nondenominational church, but she continues to worship at a related Assembly of God church in Juneau.

Moreover, she "has maintained a friendship with Wasilla Assembly of God and has attended various conferences and special meetings here," Kalnins' office said in a statement. "As for her personal beliefs," the statement added, "Governor Palin is well able to speak for herself on those issues."

Clearly, however, Palin views the church as the source of an important, if sometimes politically explosive, message. "Having grown up here, and having little kids grow up here also, this is such a special, special place," she told the congregation in June. "What comes from this church I think has great destiny."

And if the political storm over Barack Obama's former pastor Jeremiah Wright is any indication, Palin may face some political fallout over the more controversial teachings of Wasilla Assembly of God.

If the church had a political alignment, it would almost surely be conservative. In his sermons, Kalnins did not hide his affections for certain national politicians.

During the 2004 election season, he praised President Bush's performance during a debate with Sen. John Kerry, then offered a not-so-subtle message about his personal candidate preferences. "I'm not going tell you who to vote for, but if you vote for this particular person, I question your salvation. I'm sorry." Kalnins added: "If every Christian will vote righteously, it would be a landslide every time."

Months after hinting at possible damnation for Kerry supporters, Kalnins bristled at the treatment President Bush was receiving over the federal government's handling of Hurricane Katrina. "I hate criticisms towards the President," he said, "because it's like criticisms towards the pastor -- it's almost like, it's not going to get you anywhere, you know, except for hell. That's what it'll get you."

Much of his support for the current administration has come in the realm of foreign affairs. Kalnins has preached that the 9/11 attacks and the invasion of Iraq were part of a "world war" over the Christian faith, one in which Jesus Christ had called upon believers to be willing to sacrifice their lives.

What you see in a terrorist -- that's called the invisible enemy. There has always been an invisible enemy. What you see in Iraq, basically, is a manifestation of what's going on in this unseen world called the spirit world. ... We need to think like Jesus thinks. We are in a time and a season of war, and we need to think like that. We need to develop that instinct. We need to develop as believers the instinct that we are at war, and that war is contending for your faith. ... Jesus called us to die. You're worried about getting hurt? He's called us to die. Listen, you know we can't even follow him unless you are willing to give up your life. ... I believe that Jesus himself operated from that position of war mode. Everyone say "war mode." Now you say, wait a minute Ed, he's like the good shepherd, he's loving all the time and he's kind all the time. Oh yes he is -- but I also believe that he had a part of his thoughts that knew that he was in a war.
As for his former congregant and current vice presidential candidate, Kalnins has asserted that Palin's election as governor was the result of a "prophetic call" by another pastor at the church who prayed for her victory. "[He made] a prophetic declaration and then unfolds the kingdom of God, you know."

Even Palin expressed surprise at that pastor's advocacy for her candidacy. "He was praying over me," she said in June. "He's praying, 'Lord make a way, Lord make a way...' And I'm thinking, this guy's really bold, he doesn't even know what I'm gonna do, he doesn't know what my plans are, and he's praying not, 'Oh Lord, if it be your will may she become governor,' or whatever. No, he just prayed for it. He said, 'Lord, make a way, and let her do this next step.' And that's exactly what happened. So, again, very very powerful coming from this church."

In his sermons, Pastor Kalnins has also expressed beliefs that, while not directly political, lie outside of mainstream Christian thought.

He preaches repeatedly about the "end times" or "last days," an apocalyptic prophesy held by a small but vocal group of Christian leaders. During his appearance with Palin in June, he declared, "I believe Alaska is one of the refuge states in the last days, and hundreds of thousands of people are going to come to the state to seek refuge and the church has to be ready to minister to them."

He also claims to have received direct "words of knowledge" from God, providing him information about past events in other people's lives. During one sermon, he described being paired with a complete stranger during a golf outing. "I said, I'm a minister from Alaska and I want you to know that your wife left you -- you know that your wife left you and that the Lord is gonna defend you in a very short time, and it wasn't your fault. And the man drops his clubs, he literally was about to tee off and he dropped his clubs, and he says, 'Who the blank are you?' And I says, 'well, I'm a minister.' He says, 'how do you know about my life? What do you know?' And I started giving him more of the word of knowledge to his life and he was freaked out."

Kalnins has, of course, preached on a bevy of topics ranging from humility to "overcoming bitterness." But the more controversial remarks reported above were not out of the norm, appearing in numerous sermons spanning the four years of available recordings.

As for Palin, her views on these topics is more opaque. In the wake of the controversy over Jeremiah Wright, a debate has raged about whether political figures should be held responsible for the comments of their religious guiders. Clearly, however, Kalnins, like many national conservative religious leaders, sees Alaska's governor as one of his own. "Gov. Sarah Palin is the real deal," he told his church this past summer. "You know, some people put on a show...but she's the real deal."




So, God wants war in Iraq and voting for Kerry sends you to hell.

You'd think after the Obama pastor flap this could have been vetted?

[Ink Bleeder]

And now I'm hearing that that pastor at Wasilla Bible Church, which she also attends, has a problem with Jews. This just gets better and better.

[Trainz]

If, IF the Reps win this election, you know what this means right?

It means my life is a fantasy and all the people in it are figments of my imagination.

Weeeeeee!!!

[PWD]

And now I'm hearing that that pastor at Wasilla Bible Church, which she also attends, has a problem with Jews. This just gets better and better.

Please please please provide linkage, I must slap izzy in the face with this!

[Hatter]

Please please please provide linkage, I must slap izzy in the face with this!

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13098.html

[PWD]

Thanks! :D

He'll have fun grinding gears on that one.

[FeatsofClay]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QG1vPYbRB7k&eurl=http://cgi.fark.com/cgi/fark/vidplayer.pl?IDLink=3845739

"God's will has to be done in getting that pipeline built."

Paved roads, eqipped police and better public schools "Mean nothing if the people of Alaska's hearts aren't right with God."

National leaders are sending soldiers out "On a task from God"

And speaks on her son's tattoos in church! (Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD.
Leviticus 19:28)

[Singularity]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26527513/

McCain: Stop questions on Palin background
GOP campaign spokesman lashes out at media's ‘old boys' network’
The Associated Press
updated 9:33 a.m. PT, Wed., Sept. 3, 2008

ST. PAUL, Minn. - John McCain’s campaign on Wednesday angrily called for an end to questions about its review of Sarah Palin’s background, deriding a “faux media scandal designed to destroy the first female Republican nominee” for vice president.

“This nonsense is over,” declared senior campaign adviser Steve Schmidt in a written statement.

The statement stood out for its admission that Palin is under siege — it condemns “this vetting controversy” — and for its attempt to blunt questions about how rigorously McCain and his campaign explored the background of a candidate who may get the nation’s second most powerful job. It also suggested that Palin is a victim of gender bias in the media.

“The McCain campaign will have no further comment about our long and thorough process,” Schmidt said, lashing out at “the old boys’ network” that he says runs media organizations.

Top McCain advisers said they welcome and expect a review of Palin’s mayoral and gubernatorial record but that the media has crossed that line with its inquiries.

“Certainly, her record deserves scrutiny, but I think we ought to look at her record,” campaign manager Rick Davis told reporters on a conference call. He condemned “the salacious nature” of some news stories designed to “throw dirt at our candidate.” He also lamented a “frenzied” mentality on Palin and urged the media to “dial it back.”

Davis also called for the same level of scrutiny on Democrats Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

Spotlight on private life
McCain shook up the presidential race last Friday by picking Palin, a little-known governor serving her first term in Alaska. Since then, the self-styled “hockey mom” with a record of bucking the state’s political establishment has had a bright spotlight trained on her private and public life.

First, she announced that her unmarried 17-year-old daughter, Bristol Palin, was pregnant. Among the other revelations:

—A private attorney is authorized to spend $95,000 of state money to defend her against accusations of abuse of power.

—Palin sought pork-barrel projects for her city and state, contrary to her reformist image.

—Her husband once belonged to a fringe political group in Alaska, with some members supporting secession from the United States.

—She has acknowledged smoking marijuana in the past.

None of the revelations seen to have shaken McCain’s confidence or undermined her support among GOP delegates.

After four days of intense scrutiny, Palin gets a chance to respond with a televised speech at the Republican National Convention on Wednesday. In addition to accepting the nomination, the first woman to do so for the GOP, Palin will tell her story: small-town mayor with a taste for mooseburgers; the wife of a blue-collar North Slope oil worker; and the mother of five, including one born this spring with Down syndrome.

Said Tucker Eskew, a senior McCain adviser: “She will speak as a governor, a former mayor and someone with both hands on the steering wheel of America’s energy economy. She will detail her record of shaking up the status quo in Alaska and standing up to entrenched interests to put the government back on the side of the people.”

Defending his choice and the team that helped pick her, McCain said Tuesday that “the vetting process was completely thorough.” Advisers said Palin went through a rigorous process that included a three-hour interview and a survey with some 70 questions, including: Have you ever paid for sex? Have you been faithful in your marriage? Have you ever used or purchased drugs? Have you ever downloaded pornography?

Republicans close ranks
McCain’s aides rejected suggestions from Democrats that her selection was a hurried, last-minute attempt to shake up the campaign and wrest female voters from Obama. They insisted Palin was a strong contender from the start.

But one senior Republican familiar with the search, who requested anonymity because McCain did not authorize the conversation, said Palin had virtually fallen from the radar. Only late in the summer, when McCain asked for more alternatives, was she made a finalist.

As conservatives closed ranks behind their like-minded foe of abortion, Schmidt accused the media of essentially being sexist.

“This vetting controversy is a faux media scandal designed to destroy the first female Republican nominee for vice president of the United States who has never been a part of the old boys’ network that has come to dominate the news establishment of this country,” his statement said.

Palin portrayed as maverick
When she was introduced as McCain’s running mate last week, Palin portrayed herself as a political maverick in McCain’s mold: “I’ve stood up to the old politics as usual, to the special interests, to the lobbyists, the big oil companies and the good old boy network,” she said.

But Alaska’s first female governor has at times benefited from Alaska’s entrenched political system.

For one thing, Palin accepted at least $4,500 in campaign contributions in the same fundraising scheme at the center of a public corruption scandal that led to the indictment of Sen. Ted Stevens.

The contributions, made during Palin's failed 2002 bid to become Alaska's lieutenant governor, were not illegal for her to accept. But they show how Palin, who has bucked Stevens and his allies, has been linked, at least in the past, to Alaska’s old guard.

Schmidt dismissed the idea that a few campaign contributions years ago diminished Palin’s record as a reformer. “Gov. Palin’s record fighting corruption and taking on these issues in Alaska speaks for itself,” he said Tuesday.

Indeed, Palin has had her share of run-ins with Stevens, including a dustup earlier this year in which Stevens accused Palin of not being enthusiastic enough about his efforts to bring federal earmark money to Alaska. She has also called on Stevens’ son, Ben, to resign as national committeeman for the state party.

She was among the first Alaska Republicans to urge Stevens to answer questions about the FBI investigation.

Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

This is just fucking hillarious! Is this the same Republican party that laughed at AL Gore for "inventing the internet," or brought Clinton up on charges for getting a consensual BJ from Lewinsky, or swiftboated Kerry? Get real! The Republicans wrote this playbook. Now that they're having it used against them they're crying foul? It doesn't work that way!

[there_is_no_bob]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26527513/

Said Tucker Eskew, a senior McCain adviser: “She will speak as a governor, a former mayor and someone with both hands on the steering wheel of America’s energy economy. She will detail her record of shaking up the status quo in Alaska and standing up to entrenched interests to put the government back on the side of the people.”

So it's her fault, then?

[FeatsofClay]

This is just fucking hillarious! Is this the same Republican party that laughed at AL Gore for "inventing the internet," or brought Clinton up on charges for getting a consensual BJ from Lewinsky, or swiftboated Kerry? Get real! The Republicans wrote this playbook. Now that they're having it used against them they're crying foul? It doesn't work that way!

This could not be more different. By comparing oral sex, speech slips and lying to an honest vetting of a sepratist who is corrupt you are diminishing both the charges against her and the indecency of past Republican attacks.

[Lady Fury]

If, IF the Reps win this election, you know what this means right?

It means my life is a fantasy and all the people in it are figments of my imagination.

Weeeeeee!!!

I thought it meant you'll have more neighbors soon because I'm sure there will be a lot of Americans considering leaving the country.

[Trainz]

I thought it meant you'll have more neighbors soon because I'm sure there will be a lot of Americans considering leaving the country.

Fucking 'migrants mrrrmblrrg....

[obryn]

http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-earmarks3-2008sep03,0,6145252.story


McCain had criticized earmarks from Palin

Three times in recent years, the Arizona senator's lists of 'objectionable' pork spending have included earmarks requested by his new running mate.

By Tom Hamburger, Richard Simon and Janet Hook, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers

September 3, 2008
WASILLA, ALASKA -- For much of his long career in Washington, John McCain has been throwing darts at the special spending system known as earmarking, through which powerful members of Congress can deliver federal cash for pet projects back home with little or no public scrutiny. He's even gone so far as to publish "pork lists" detailing these financial favors.

Three times in recent years, McCain's catalogs of "objectionable" spending have included earmarks for this small Alaska town, requested by its mayor at the time -- Sarah Palin.

Now, McCain, the likely Republican presidential nominee, has chosen Palin as his running mate, touting her as a reformer just like him.

McCain has made opposition to pork-barrel spending a central theme of his 2008 campaign. "Earmarking deprives federal agencies of scarce resources, at the whim of individual members of Congress," McCain has said.

But records show that Palin -- first as mayor of Wasilla and recently as governor of Alaska -- was far from shy about pursuing tens of millions in earmarks for her town, her region and her state.

This year, Palin, who has been governor for nearly 22 months, defended earmarking as a vital part of the legislative system. "The federal budget, in its various manifestations, is incredibly important to us, and congressional earmarks are one aspect of this relationship," she wrote in a newspaper column.

In 2001, McCain's list of spending that had been approved without the normal budget scrutiny included a $500,000 earmark for a public transportation project in Wasilla. The Arizona senator targeted $1 million in a 2002 spending bill for an emergency communications center in town -- one that local law enforcement has said is redundant and creates confusion.

McCain also criticized $450,000 set aside for an agricultural processing facility in Wasilla that was requested during Palin's tenure as mayor and cleared Congress soon after she left office in 2002. The funding was provided to help direct locally grown produce to schools, prisons and other government institutions, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan watchdog group.

Wasilla received $11.9 million in earmarks from 2000 to 2003. The results of this spending are very apparent today. (The town also benefited from $15 million in federal funds to promote regional rail transportation.)

The community transit center is a landmark: a one-story, tile-fronted building with a drive-through garage. Its fleet of 10 buses provides service throughout the region. Mat-Su Community Transit Agency officials say the building was made possible with a combination of federal money and matching gifts from a private foundation.

Taylor Griffin, a McCain campaign spokesman, said that when Palin became mayor in 1996, "she faced a system that was broken. Small towns like Wasilla in Alaska depended on earmarks to take care of basic needs. . . . That was something that Gov. Palin was alarmed about and was one of the formative experiences that led her toward the reform-oriented stance that she has taken as her career has progressed."

Palin, he said, was "disgusted" that small towns like hers were dependent on earmarks.

Public records paint a different picture:

Wasilla had received few if any earmarks before Palin became mayor. She actively sought federal funds -- a campaign that began to pay off only after she hired a lobbyist with close ties to Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), who long controlled federal spending as chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. He made funneling money to Alaska his hallmark.

Steven Silver was a former chief of staff for Stevens. After he was hired, Wasilla obtained funding for several projects in 2002, including an additional $600,000 in transportation funding.

That year, a local water and sewer project received $1.5 million, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, which combs federal spending measures to identify projects inserted by congressional members.

When Palin spoke after McCain introduced her as his running mate at a rally in Ohio last week, she made fun of earmarking. She said she had rejected $223 million in federal funds for a bridge linking Ketchikan to an island with an airport and 50 residents, referring to it by its derogatory label: the "bridge to nowhere."

In the nationally televised speech, she stood by McCain and said, "I've championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. In fact, I told Congress thanks, but no thanks, on that bridge to nowhere. If our state wanted a bridge, I said, we'd build it ourselves."

However, as a candidate for governor in 2006, Palin had backed funding for the bridge. After her election, she killed the much-ridiculed project when it became clear the state had other priorities. She said she would use the federal funds to fill those needs.

This year she submitted to Congress a list of Alaska projects worth $197.8 million, including $2 million to research crab productivity in the Bering Sea and $7.4 million to improve runway lighting at eight Alaska airports. A spokesman said she cut the original list of 54 projects to 31.

"So while Sen. McCain was going after cutting earmarks in Washington," said Steve Ellis of Taxpayers for Common Sense, "Gov. Palin was going after getting earmarks."

Oh, how embarrassing.

-O

[Kyle Voltti]

http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-earmarks3-2008sep03,0,6145252.story



Oh, how embarrassing.

-O
I remember that bridge.... the one that would have paid to improve the levies in New Orleans and probably spaired that city the worst of what happened in Katrina..... Yeah I'f the Reps win this year I'm seriously going to wonder about America. and also look forward to those new Canadians that I'm sure this time will actualy be coming north.

[Hatter]

And the right continues to implode:

I'm stunned - couldn't the Republican Party find one competent female with adult children to run for Vice President with McCain? I realize his advisors probably didn't want a "mature" woman, as the Democrats keep harping on his age. But really, what kind of role model is a woman whose fifth child was recently born with a serious issue, Down Syndrome, and then goes back to the job of Governor within days of the birth?

I am haunted by the family pictures of the Palins during political photo-ops, showing the eldest daughter, now pregnant with her own child, cuddling the family's newborn. When Mom and Dad both work full-time (no matter how many folks get involved with the children), it becomes a somewhat chaotic situation. Certainly, if a child becomes ill and is rushed to the hospital, and you're on the hotline with both Israel and Iran as nuclear tempers are flaring, where's your attention going to be? Where should your attention be? Well, once you put your hand on the Bible and make that oath, your attention has to be with the government of the United States of America.

source: http://www.drlaurablog.com/2008/09/02/sarah-palin-and-motherhood/

[Lady Fury]

And the right continues to implode:



source: http://www.drlaurablog.com/2008/09/02/sarah-palin-and-motherhood/

I agree with the Dr.Laura. She said it better than I could. That's what I was trying to convey when I found out Palin was McCain's running mate.

[Utrecht]

Sorry that I have not been able to join the fun for the last couple of days - were in Minneapolis on business (and no, was nowhere near the convention, thank god)

and I am curious why I am Dr. Paragon's ignore list.....:boggle:

As far as Palin - I am definately curious about her speech tonight - but I too am concerned about her overall level of qualification and while I have not tipped over to deciding back to Obama - I am moving back into the undecided catagory.

I will say though, this thread has definately turned into a dog pile :) and a humerous read it is.

[Ergeheilalt]

And speaks on her son's tattoos in church! (Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD.
Leviticus 19:28)

I'm pretty sure that went out the window with the whole Christianity thing - it's on par with eating a cheeseburger (

[Freedom Canadian]

If, IF the Reps win this election, you know what this means right?

It means my life is a fantasy and all the people in it are figments of my imagination.

Dude !

We need to talk. :grey:

[Random Encounter]

A friend sent this to me yesterday.

http://lh5.ggpht.com/JoralG/SL9c35oOpQI/AAAAAAAAAUA/_Dk2Z0MPL-s/s800/mcsame-milf.jpg

As far as Palin goes I think the pick is doing what they wanted in getting the conservative base to close ranks and defend one of their own. I understand there was a fear that a significant portion of the republican base were going to sit the election out, not liking McCain enough to even vote at all. Without a mobilized right-wing base McCain couldn't win even if he got more support from the middle.
But I really think that they underestimate how much of a turn off Palin is to a lot of swing voters. They can get their conservatives back in the game with this but risk losing the election by alienating the votes that turn the tide every election. Unless I'm overestimating how divisive a choice she is.

Of course this could be the choice of the Republican party not McCain himself. I wouldn't put it past them to throw the presidential election in this political climate while getting more conservatives into the voting booths for the sake of the local and congressional races that might be close otherwise.

[FeatsofClay]

Her Speech-

Mr. Chairman, delegates, and fellow citizens: I am honored to be considered for the nomination for Vice President of the United States...

I accept the call to help our nominee for president to serve and defend America.

I accept the challenge of a tough fight in this election... against confident opponents ... at a crucial hour for our country.

And I accept the privilege of serving with a man who has come through much harder missions ... and met far graver challenges ... and knows how tough fights are won - the next president of the United States, John S. McCain.

It was just a year ago when all the experts in Washington counted out our nominee because he refused to hedge his commitment to the security of the country he loves.

With their usual certitude, they told us that all was lost - there was no hope for this candidate who said that he would rather lose an election than see his country lose a war.

But the pollsters and pundits overlooked just one thing when they wrote him off.

They overlooked the caliber of the man himself - the determination, resolve, and sheer guts of Senator John McCain. The voters knew better.

And maybe that's because they realize there is a time for politics and a time for leadership ... a time to campaign and a time to put our country first.

Our nominee for president is a true profile in courage, and people like that are hard to come by.

He's a man who wore the uniform of this country for 22 years, and refused to break faith with those troops in Iraq who have now brought victory within sight.

And as the mother of one of those troops, that is exactly the kind of man I want as commander in chief. I'm just one of many moms who'll say an extra prayer each night for our sons and daughters going into harm's way.

Our son Track is 19.

And one week from tomorrow - September 11th - he'll deploy to Iraq with the Army infantry in the service of his country.

My nephew Kasey also enlisted, and serves on a carrier in the Persian Gulf.

My family is proud of both of them and of all the fine men and women serving the country in uniform. Track is the eldest of our five children.

In our family, it's two boys and three girls in between - my strong and kind-hearted daughters Bristol, Willow, and Piper.

And in April, my husband Todd and I welcomed our littlest one into the world, a perfectly beautiful baby boy named Trig. From the inside, no family ever seems typical.

That's how it is with us.

Our family has the same ups and downs as any other ... the same challenges and the same joys.

Sometimes even the greatest joys bring challenge.

And children with special needs inspire a special love.

To the families of special-needs children all across this country, I have a message: For years, you sought to make America a more welcoming place for your sons and daughters.

I pledge to you that if we are elected, you will have a friend and advocate in the White House. Todd is a story all by himself.

He's a lifelong commercial fisherman ... a production operator in the oil fields of Alaska's North Slope ... a proud member of the United Steel Workers' Union ... and world champion snow machine racer.

Throw in his Yup'ik Eskimo ancestry, and it all makes for quite a package.

We met in high school, and two decades and five children later he's still my guy. My Mom and Dad both worked at the elementary school in our small town.

And among the many things I owe them is one simple lesson: that this is America, and every woman can walk through every door of opportunity.

My parents are here tonight, and I am so proud to be the daughter of Chuck and Sally Heath. Long ago, a young farmer and habber-dasher from Missouri followed an unlikely path to the vice presidency.

A writer observed: "We grow good people in our small towns, with honesty, sincerity, and dignity." I know just the kind of people that writer had in mind when he praised Harry Truman.

I grew up with those people.

They are the ones who do some of the hardest work in America ... who grow our food, run our factories, and fight our wars.

They love their country, in good times and bad, and they're always proud of America. I had the privilege of living most of my life in a small town.

I was just your average hockey mom, and signed up for the PTA because I wanted to make my kids' public education better.

When I ran for city council, I didn't need focus groups and voter profiles because I knew those voters, and knew their families, too.

Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska, I was mayor of my hometown.

And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves.

I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a "community organizer," except that you have actual responsibilities. I might add that in small towns, we don't quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they are listening, and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren't listening.

We tend to prefer candidates who don't talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco.

As for my running mate, you can be certain that wherever he goes, and whoever is listening, John McCain is the same man. I'm not a member of the permanent political establishment.< br>
And I've learned quickly, these past few days, that if you're not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone.

But here's a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I'm not going to Washington to seek their good opinion - I'm going to Washington to serve the people of this country. Americans expect us to go to Washington for the right reasons, and not just to mingle with the right people.

Politics isn't just a game of clashing parties and competing interests.

The right reason is to challenge the status quo, to serve the common good, and to leave this nation better than we found it.

No one expects us to agree on everything.

But we are expected to govern with integrity, good will, clear convictions, and ... a servant's heart.

I pledge to all Americans that I will carry myself in this spirit as vice president of the United States. This was the spirit that brought me to the governor's office, when I took on the old politics as usual in Juneau ... when I stood up to the special interests, the lobbyists, big oil companies, and the good-ol' boys network.

Sudden and relentless reform never sits well with entrenched interests and power brokers. That's why true reform is so hard to achieve.

But with the support of the citizens of Alaska, we shook things up.

And in short order we put the government of our state back on the side of the people.

I came to office promising major ethics reform, to end the culture of self-dealing. And today, that ethics reform is the law.

While I was at it, I got rid of a few things in the governor's office that I didn't believe our citizens should have to pay for.

That luxury jet was over the top. I put it on eBay.

I also drive myself to work.

And I thought we could muddle through without the governor's personal chef - although I've got to admit that sometimes my kids sure miss her. I came to office promising to control spending - by request if possible and by veto if necessary.

Senator McCain also promises to use the power of veto in defense of the public interest - and as a chief executive, I can assure you it works.

Our state budget is under control.

We have a surplus.

And I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending: nearly half a billion dollars in vetoes.

I suspended the state fuel tax, and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress.

I told the Congress "thanks, but no thanks," for that Bridge to Nowhere.

If our state wanted a bridge, we'd build it ourselves. When oil and gas prices went up dramatically, and filled up the state treasury, I sent a large share of that revenue back where it belonged - directly to the people of Alaska.

And despite fierce opposition from oil company lobbyists, who kind of liked things the way they were, we broke their monopoly on power and resources.

As governor, I insisted on competition and basic fairness to end their control of our state and return it to the people.

I fought to bring about the largest private-sector infrastructure project in North American history.

And when that deal was struck, we began a nearly forty billion dollar natural gas pipeline to help lead America to energy independence.

That pipeline, when the last section is laid and its valves are opened, will lead America one step farther away from dependence on dangerous foreign powers that do not have our interests at heart.

The stakes for our nation could not be higher.

When a hurricane strikes in the Gulf of Mexico, this country should not be so dependent on imported oil that we are forced to draw from our Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

And families cannot throw away more and more of their paychecks on gas and heating oil.

With Russia wanting to control a vital pipeline in the Caucasus, and to divide and intimidate our European allies by using energy as a weapon, we cannot leave ourselves at the mercy of foreign suppliers.

To confront the threat that Iran might seek to cut off nearly a fifth of world energy supplies ... or that terrorists might strike again at the Abqaiq facility in Saudi Arabia ... or that Venezuela might shut off its oil deliveries ... we Americans need to produce more of our own oil and gas.

And take it from a gal who knows the North Slope of Alaska: we've got lots of both.

Our opponents say, again and again, that drilling will not solve all of America's energy problems - as if we all didn't know that already.

But the fact that drilling won't solve every problem is no excuse to do nothing at all.

Starting in January, in a McCain-Palin administration, we're going to lay more pipelines ... build more new-clear plants ... create jobs with clean coal ... and move forward on solar, wind, geothermal, and other alternative sources.

We need American energy resources, brought to you by American ingenuity, and produced by American workers. I've noticed a pattern with our opponent.

Maybe you have, too.

We've all heard his dramatic speeches before devoted followers.

And there is much to like and admire about our opponent.

But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform - not even in the state senate.

This is a man who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting, and never use the word "victory" except when he's talking about his own campaign. But when the cloud of rhetoric has passed ... when the roar of the crowd fades away ... when the stadium lights go out, and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot - what exactly is our opponent's plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet? The answer is to make government bigger ... take more of your money ... give you more orders from Washington ... and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world. America needs more energy ... our opponent is against producing it.

Victory in Iraq is finally in sight ... he wants to forfeit.

Terrorist states are seeking new-clear weapons without delay ... he wants to meet them without preconditions.

Al Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America ... he's worried that someone won't read them their rights? Government is too big ... he wants to grow it.

Congress spends too much ... he promises more.

Taxes are too high ... he wants to raise them. His tax increases are the fine print in his economic plan, and let me be specific.

The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes ... raise payroll taxes ... raise investment income taxes ... raise the death tax ... raise business taxes ... and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars. My sister Heather and her husband have just built a service station that's now opened for business - like millions of others who run small businesses.

How are they going to be any better off if taxes go up? Or maybe you're trying to keep your job at a plant in Michigan or Ohio ... or create jobs with clean coal from Pennsylvania or West Virginia ... or keep a small farm in the family right here in Minnesota.

How are you going to be better off if our opponent adds a massive tax burden to the American economy? Here's how I look at the choice Americans face in this election.

In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers.

And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change.

They're the ones whose names appear on laws and landmark reforms, not just on buttons and banners, or on self-designed presidential seals.

Among politicians, there is the idealism of high-flown speechmaking, in which crowds are stirringly summoned to support great things.

And then there is the idealism of those leaders, like John McCain, who actually do great things. They're the ones who are good for more than talk ... the ones we have always been able to count on to serve and defend America. Senator McCain's record of actual achievement and reform helps explain why so many special interests, lobbyists, and comfortable committee chairmen in Congress have fought the prospect of a McCain presidency - from the primary election of 2000 to this very day.

Our nominee doesn't run with the Washington herd.

He's a man who's there to serve his country, and not just his party.

A leader who's not looking for a fight, but is not afraid of one either. Harry Reid, the Majority Leader of the current do-nothing Senate, not long ago summed up his feelings about our nominee.

He said, quote, "I can't stand John McCain." Ladies and gentlemen, perhaps no accolade we hear this week is better proof that we've chosen the right man. Clearly what the Majority Leader was driving at is that he can't stand up to John McCain. That is only one more reason to take the maverick of the Senate and put him in the White House. My fellow citizens, the American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of "personal discovery." This world of threats and dangers is not just a community, and it doesn't just need an organizer.

And though both Senator Obama and Senator Biden have been going on lately about how they are always, quote, "fighting for you," let us face the matter squarely.

There is only one man in this election who has ever really fought for you ... in places where winning means survival and defeat means death ... and that man is John McCain. In our day, politicians have readily shared much lesser tales of adversity than the nightmare world in which this man, and others equally brave, served and suffered for their country.

It's a long way from the fear and pain and squalor of a six-by-four cell in Hanoi to the Oval Office.

But if Senator McCain is elected president, that is the journey he will have made.

It's the journey of an upright and honorable man - the kind of fellow whose name you will find on war memorials in small towns across this country, only he was among those who came home.

To the most powerful office on earth, he would bring the compassion that comes from having once been powerless ... the wisdom that comes even to the captives, by the grace of God ... the special confidence of those who have seen evil, and seen how evil is overcome. A fellow prisoner of war, a man named Tom Moe of Lancaster, Ohio, recalls looking through a pin-hole in his cell door as Lieutenant Commander John McCain was led down the hallway, by the guards, day after day.

As the story is told, "When McCain shuffled back from torturous interrogations, he would turn toward Moe's door and flash a grin and thumbs up" - as if to say, "We're going to pull through this." My fellow Americans, that is the kind of man America needs to see us through these next four years.

For a season, a gifted speaker can inspire with his words.

For a lifetime, John McCain has inspired with his deeds.

If character is the measure in this election ... and hope the theme ... and change the goal we share, then I ask you to join our cause. Join our cause and help America elect a great man as the next president of the United States.

Thank you all, and may God bless America.

I didn't change the 'Nuclear' to 'New-clear', it came from CBS that way as her prepared remarks. Makes me wonder if it wasn't a reminder not to pronounce in 'new-cue-lar' like W.

I have only been able to see the first 9 minutes via MSNBC but she seems to have hit one way the fuck out of the park.

I still think she was a stupid choice, but I think America doesn't.

[Trainz]

I have only been able to see the first 9 minutes via MSNBC but she seems to have hit one way the fuck out of the park.

Did we read the same speech???

Let's see:

"How are you going to be better off if our opponent adds a massive tax burden to the American economy?"

Obama wants to give a much bigger tax break to most of the population than McCain.

She lies.

"He said, quote, "I can't stand John McCain." Ladies and gentlemen, perhaps no accolade we hear this week is better proof that we've chosen the right man. Clearly what the Majority Leader was driving at is that he can't stand up to John McCain."

That's a "Does not, does too" phrase. Very infantile.

And note that she doesn't adress the charges of the last week, and thus lets them float, for the media to do their thing with. She's a known abstinance-education advocate and couldn't enforce it in her own family. She didn't address that.

All I see is pretty words with no substance.

[AZRogue]

She did much better than I was expecting. Of course, she had an easy crowd, but she did decently well.

[obryn]

Well, it looks like the Republican party is back to politics as usual.

-O

[Singularity]

Right now they're playing at damage control. One of the easiest ways to control damage is to go back on the attack.

I watched the last half of her speech, and she is a decent orator, but her politics are a clear throwback to the Bush presidency. Anyone who listens to it will see that, and I think that's why the American public, which has decided that it doesn't like Bush, won't like her.

[Trainz]

Right now they're playing at damage control. One of the easiest ways to control damage is to go back on the attack.

I watched the last half of her speech, and she is a decent orator, but her politics are a clear throwback to the Bush presidency. Anyone who listens to it will see that, and I think that's why the American public, which has decided that it doesn't like Bush, won't like her.

Unless most americans are racists, in which case McCain wins by default.

I don't know if that is the case, but we'll see in November.

[Singularity]

Unless most americans are racists, in which case McCain wins by default.

I don't know if that is the case, but we'll see in November.

The voters you're worried about are racist and sexist, so Palin's nomination is likely to offset that. For them, it will be a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.

In fact, I would actually argue that there's more blatant sexism in American culture than there is blatant racism at this point in time. Some people are criticizing her for taking on too much of a burden and therefore not being there for her kids, which is an entirely sexist point of view. For some reason it's OK for people to make that statement about her but it's not OK to make comments about the color of Obama's skin. This bias might even have something to do with why Obama got the nomination instead of Hillary.

[Name Lips]

We, here on KT, have been mocking her prettieness and calling her a MILF, wondering if her professional ambitions make her an unfit mother, etc. Just sayin', as far as sexism goes, we're not exactly innocent ourselves.

[Ink Bleeder]

The voters you're worried about are racist and sexist, so Palin's nomination is likely to offset that. For them, it will be a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.

In fact, I would actually argue that there's more blatant sexism in American culture than there is blatant racism at this point in time. Some people are criticizing her for taking on too much of a burden and therefore not being there for her kids, which is an entirely sexist point of view. For some reason it's OK for people to make that statement about her but it's not OK to make comments about the color of Obama's skin. This bias might even have something to do with why Obama got the nomination instead of Hillary.

Maybe I'm just trying to justify my own concern about her family obligations (makes me feel like a bad feminist), but I don't think it's necessarily sexist to ask how a woman is going to raise two young children, a teen mother, and a special needs infant when as a conservative Republican, she likely has very traditional sex roles within her family. It's not as if her husband has volunteered to be a househusband.

[Varaj]

Maybe I'm just trying to justify my own concern about her family obligations (makes me feel like a bad feminist), but I don't think it's necessarily sexist to ask how a woman is going to raise two young children, a teen mother, and a special needs infant when as a conservative Republican, she likely has very traditional sex roles within her family. It's not as if her husband has volunteered to be a househusband.

Why don't we ask the men the same question? I don't recall ever seeing the concern about how a man is going to properly raise his kids come up in a political campaign.

[Varaj]

We, here on KT, have been mocking her prettieness and calling her a MILF, wondering if her professional ambitions make her an unfit mother, etc. Just sayin', as far as sexism goes, we're not exactly innocent ourselves.

I'm totally innocent on those charges. :tongue:

[Trainz]

We, here on KT, have been mocking her prettieness and calling her a MILF, wondering if her professional ambitions make her an unfit mother, etc. Just sayin', as far as sexism goes, we're not exactly innocent ourselves.

Oh come on. We do it because she's the adversary (and gives us plenty of ammo too). I call her a cunt like I would call a stupid dude a dick.

I have nothing but pride and admiration for accomplished women. It's the rednecks, nutcases, and "woe is me" feminists* I deride.




* "woe is me" feminists are the ones that keep harping against men without doing anything to improve themselves. This is not a hit against feminists in general.

[obryn]

So while I was playing D&D, my wife was watching the Republican convention.

She was livid at the end of it. From the clips I saw, I can't understand how she made it through the whole thing...

-O

[FeatsofClay]

Oh come on. We do it because she's the adversary (and gives us plenty of ammo too). I call her a cunt like I would call a stupid dude a dick.

I have nothing but pride and admiration for accomplished women. It's the rednecks, nutcases, and "woe is me" feminists* I deride.

.

So, women are off limits but "rednecks" and the mentally ill are good targets?

(Hint: Read "Redneck Manifesto" by Jim Goad and see if it doesn't open your eyes a bit)

[obryn]

We, here on KT, have been mocking her prettieness and calling her a MILF, wondering if her professional ambitions make her an unfit mother, etc. Just sayin', as far as sexism goes, we're not exactly innocent ourselves.
No, I agree. Then again, they were handing out buttons regarding her attractiveness at the friggin' convention.

http://www.lacitybeat.com/cms/story/detail/it_s_so_cold_in_alaska/7468/

“As an actual feminist, I have the great good joy of getting to determine what is and isn’t sexist. Sexist: Asking whether Sarah Palin shouldn’t be staying home with her baby and her other children. Not sexist: Pointing out that Sarah Palin is an utter twit.”

-O

[Radu]

Yeah, I'd have to say you got the better end of that deal, O. I'm not remotely jealous of you. Not even a lot.

[Name Lips]

I'd also like to point out that while liberals and bloggers (which overlap a lot) seem to be all over her faults and disqualifications, Palin seems to be immensely popular with the Republican base - being older, white, middle-to-upper class men. She's not doing a heck of a lot for the independants, but she's exactly what the core Republican base loves.

Which is probably why she seems so fucking scary to us liberals. Business as usual indeed. She's as Classic Republican as you can really get.

[Trainz]

So, women are off limits but "rednecks" and the mentally ill are good targets?

(Hint: Read "Redneck Manifesto" by Jim Goad and see if it doesn't open your eyes a bit)

Yeah, I'm not gonna touch this one. You know what I meant.

Troll. :tongue:

[obryn]

Yeah, I'd have to say you got the better end of that deal, O. I'm not remotely jealous of you. Not even a lot.
Well, seriously, it was like "Here are all of the shallow attacks against Obama you've heard for the past 8 months, repeated by this appealing and photogenic person. Here's an assortment of excuses about how being Governor now somehow qualifies as more experience than Senator. Here's more lies regarding what the Governor does about the National Guard. Here's a heaping helping of bitching about the Media that made John McCain what he is today. Here, let's parade Palin's family around for media attention including that poor guy who really didn't look like he wanted to be here - but they're off limits!! But it will all be delivered very well with lots of flags and cheering."

-O

[Utrecht]

I'd also like to point out that while liberals and bloggers (which overlap a lot) seem to be all over her faults and disqualifications, Palin seems to be immensely popular with the Republican base - being older, white, middle-to-upper class men. She's not doing a heck of a lot for the independants, but she's exactly what the core Republican base loves.


Further, she is EXTREMELY popular to the Republican women - polling showed that McCain picked up 5% of women who identified themselves a conservatives.

As far as indepentents - not yet - many are taking a wait and see attitude - but polling is starting to show that McCain is pickign up some of them (especially after percieved pettyness of extreme left pundits and media.)


Which is probably why she seems so fucking scary to us liberals. Business as usual indeed. She's as Classic Republican as you can really get.

I would go even further in saying that she represents the next generation of Republican and is taking a decidely populist/blue collar bent.

[Utrecht]

Yeah, I'm not gonna touch this one. You know what I meant.

Troll. :tongue:


and you are not????:lol:

[Ink Bleeder]

Why don't we ask the men the same question? I don't recall ever seeing the concern about how a man is going to properly raise his kids come up in a political campaign.

I don't recall a political campaign in which the male candidate had a preggo teen daughter and a newborn with Downs.

[Utrecht]

Well, seriously, it was like "Here are all of the shallow attacks against Obama you've heard for the past 8 months, repeated by this appealing and photogenic person. Here's an assortment of excuses about how being Governor now somehow qualifies as more experience than Senator. Here's more lies regarding what the Governor does about the National Guard. Here's a heaping helping of bitching about the Media that made John McCain what he is today. Here, let's parade Palin's family around for media attention including that poor guy who really didn't look like he wanted to be here - but they're off limits!! But it will all be delivered very well with lots of flags and cheering."

-O

Well the pundits (even the ones who dispise her) felt that she did a damn fine job - and fulfilled the typicall VP attack dog role. So please tell me how Palin's speech was different that Biden's?


As far as shallow attacks - hardly.

Govenor vs. Senetor - tell me how a Senetor has more executive experience than a Govenor. I will say though that campaigning for over a year is a pretty damn good vetting experience - and if I was the Obama campaign, I would highligthing that.

McCain and the media - I agree - hypocrytical


I don't recall a political campaign in which the male candidate had a preggo teen daughter and a newborn with Downs.


Come on - you know what Varaj means - has any male candidate been asked how he can be a good father while campaigning 14 hours a day?

[FeatsofClay]

Yeah, I'm not gonna touch this one. You know what I meant.

Troll. :tongue:

Either way I still recommend the book. Brilliant, satirical, potty mouthed philosophy of the white male. Great stuff. :)

[Radu]

And you forgot to add, Lips: She's Utterly, Totally, And In All Other Ways COMPLETELY Batshit Insane.

She's a creationist. A real, honest-to-my-invisible-nonexistent-friend creationist.

She supports parental control over school curriculum. If you don't like how a teacher runs things you can pull your student out. Given the prior point, what class do you think is most likely to draw her ire? (Anything that encourages rational thinking, I'd imagine.)

She's actively in support of (and SOLELY in support of) abstinence only education. And Bristol Palin is joining a fine peer group of Jamie Lynn Spears, Anna Nicole Smith, Keisha Castle-Hughes, and Fantasia Barrino. All of them were teenage mothers. The high school I went to supplied more than its fair share of teen mothers. The MIDDLE SCHOOL I went to had a baby shower for a student! As you can see, abstinence only education surely works.

She doesn't know what the Vice President's job is. (Hell, I'm not sure I know, but I'M NOT RUNNING FOR OFFICE!)

She dismisses the impact of humans on climate change. I know there are still some who dispute this, but can we agree that regardless of your perceived cause reduction of emissions, increased fuel efficiency, and stricter regulation on industry regarding pollutants and emissions is a good thing? Just because people may not be the sole cause of global warming doesn't mean we aren't a contributor, and in any case we should attempt to be responsible stewards of our environment anyway. It's not like there's anywhere else to go should we fuck this one up.

She has several ongoing investigations against her regarding EXECUTIVE and LEADERSHIP decisions she has made. This calls into question the experience she has which is touted so strongly. If she were such an accomplished leader, why would she feel the need to twist the investigative process in her favor by demanding it be conducted by HER OWN APPOINTEES? Surely this sort of evasion of responsibility and dodge of executive accountability isn't what we want more of. We've had 8 years of that already, thank you!

Batshit. Completely batshit.

[obryn]

As far as shallow attacks - hardly.

Govenor vs. Senetor - tell me how a Senetor has more executive experience than a Govenor.
So executive experience is more important than senate experience? Isn't that McCain's experience, too?

Why isn't she heading the ticket?

Or is there a hidden calculation I'm missing? Some kind of experience algebra? Like x years as Governor = 2y years as senator?

Come on - you know what Varaj means - has any male candidate been asked how he can be a good father while campaigning 14 hours a day?
No, I completely agree with you and Varaj here. Seriously, it's not like her family would be raising themselves. Working people balance family needs and their careers every day. I agree that her kids need a parent - but her husband will just have to take over the lion's share of that duty. While this is unusual for a traditional Republican mindset, it happens increasingly often, and it's good to see the Republican party joining with the Democrats and moving into the 21st century on this issue.

-O

[Name Lips]

So executive experience is more important than senate experience? Isn't that McCain's experience, too?


The standard McCain Campaign response to this is to list his "executive experience" as a military officer 150 years ago, and to say that's much more direct experience "in command" than Obama has ever had.

[Schizm]

Why don't we ask the men the same question? I don't recall ever seeing the concern about how a man is going to properly raise his kids come up in a political campaign.

In biden's case, you actually have a record to look at - given the fact that he's a widower and did raise is children while being a senator. :D

[PWD]

Come on - you know what Varaj means - has any male candidate been asked how he can be a good father while campaigning 14 hours a day?

In her case, we already know the answer: Even without campaigning 14 hours a day she's managed to fail her daughter (staunch abstinence-only + pregnant teen = parental failure) and give birth to a Downs baby. She doesn't need the vice presidency to fail as a parent, though she may appreciate getting a new excuse to explain it away.

[Utrecht]

So executive experience is more important than senate experience? Isn't that McCain's experience, too?

Why isn't she heading the ticket?

Or is there a hidden calculation I'm missing? Some kind of experience algebra? Like x years as Governor = 2y years as senator?

-O

I would say that executive experience is closer than legislative - but no there is no magical conversion ratio. In fact based off of Guliani's speech - Palin has been able to educate McCain on some executive points.

Further, as I mention above - both McCain and Obama have been vetted through the campaign process - which counts for a whole lot - and agree that it trumps 2 years of govenor of Alaska.

[Harry]

I love the fact that McCain is now apparently saying Palin's family is off limits for the media and all criticism. Does that mean we aren't going to hear any more feel good stories about her Down's Syndrome kid, or how "brave" she was for working the day before giving birth, or her daughter's impending marriage, or the fact that she's a "soccer mom"?

And also, does that mean we won't hear any more Republican assaults on Michelle Obama?

Just curious.

Harry

[doc]

Note to American rednecks everywhere: You will either have a black president or a woman VP (And with McCain's advanced years, very likely woman president before 8 years is up).

Suck it Rednecks!

Why the redneck hate ?

[Varaj]

I love the fact that McCain is now apparently saying Palin's family is off limits for the media and all criticism. Does that mean we aren't going to hear any more feel good stories about her Down's Syndrome kid, or how "brave" she was for working the day before giving birth, or her daughter's impending marriage, or the fact that she's a "soccer mom"?

And also, does that mean we won't hear any more Republican assaults on Michelle Obama?

Just curious.

Harry

It's not improper when they do it. :rolleyes:

[Teve]

or the fact that she's a "soccer mom"? Harry

That's Hockey mom :)

[doc]

That's Hockey mom :)

I thought in Alaska it would be "Moose killing Mom"

[Teve]

You know how all this Palin bashing is getting Republicans to kinda get together and defend one of their own?
I feel like I gotta defend her, being that I wanna be an Alaskan.

I CANNOT STAND some of her positions on social issues, like ID, and creationism taught in schools, or pro-life. But I CANNOT STAND some of Obamas issues like GUNS, and money, and do not tout to me the "he's gonna lower taxes" line, because it's bullshit, and I will not sell my soul to vote for either ticket.

But Palin lives in and runs a state where they know how to run things, and take care of their own without INCOME, or SALES taxes. I know we have the oil money going for us, but much of that gets given back in the Permanent Dividend fund. In fact this year an EXTRA $1200, on top of the $2000 PFD, will be given back to EVERY MAN, WOMAN, and CHILD to help offset the rising cost of fuel.
This month Alaskans will be receiving $3200 for everyone in their household, because of the efforts of Palin.
We may have the oil money to help with this, but at least she understands the attitude of people who demand that to government give the people back what is theirs. (their money)

She has been criticized for allowing her family to be pulled through the mud. what political figure does not put their family to that? At least Palin is from a small town that allows her 17yr old girl to go on without facing harassment on the street everyday. They already all know her, they are her friends and they will support her. As for Wasilla being a "village" not even a real town, it's a suburb of Anchorage, it may look removed to you all on the map, but that is the nature of Alaska. People commute less than 60 minutes to get to Anchorage to here. It's not just a little PO DUNK town.... they are overflow.

Every politician loses time from their family, here in Alaska, many fathers, and mothers spend two weeks on and two weeks off working on the North Slope, just to provide. That happens in the lower 48 too. People work to support their family, at the detriment to family relationships. Why is it different for a political figure? (and yes they do it with new born babies) Do you criticize a father who gets deployed over seas, and may not see his new born for a year or more as being a bad father?

As for the separatists... what's wrong with a little separatist attitude? It's not going to happen and Alaska knows it, but it's nice to dream a little. Alaska is a very independent state. The type of people that can survive in Alaska are very self-reliant and independent. There is nothing wrong with that attitude. Perhaps up here they just want to run their own lives, and keep the government out.... which is what I have been preaching since I was old enough to vote.

[Teve]

I thought in Alaska it would be "Moose killing Mom"

well, there is that too :)
But even up here that remains the father/son activity (primarily)

[doc]

Sing it sister ! I wasn't going to vote for O'Bama anyway cause of his stand on issues but wasn't too thilled with McCain either, but now I'm going with the Elephant

[Harry]

As for Wasilla being a "village" not even a real town, it's a suburb of Anchorage, it may look removed to you all on the map, but that is the nature of Alaska. People commute less than 60 minutes to get to Anchorage to here. It's not just a little PO DUNK town.... they are overflow...

Uh-huh. It's a po dunk Alaska version of a suburb. I've never been to Wasilla, but I have a very good, real life friend who's lived there for maybe ten-fifteen years. I've heard all about it, from her Republican perspective, and from her perspective as an ex-Memphian. And seen more pics of Wasilla than most non-Wasillans. Not even fair to call it a suburb, not by the standards here. One of our smallest suburbs has 40,000 people.

It's no great feat being mayor of a town that small.

[Teve]

Uh-huh. It's a po dunk Alaska version of a suburb. I've never been to Wasilla, but I have a very good, real life friend who's lived there for maybe ten-fifteen years. I've heard all about it, from her Republican perspective, and from her perspective as an ex-Memphian. And seen more pics of Wasilla than most non-Wasillans. Not even fair to call it a suburb, not by the standards here. One of our smallest suburbs has 40,000 people.

It's no great feat being mayor of a town that small.

Point being it grew out of a larger city. I am from KS where most of the "towns" are independent. Not grown out of larger citys.
It may be "no great feat" in your eyes. Hell it may simply be "no great feat" but size is not the issue, it is the needs of the community, based on the people. Podunk Alaska version of a village would be a VILLAGE, out in the Bush, Wasilla is no reflection of that. Nor do the people in Wasilla have that mentality.
You may know one person from Wasilla, and seen lots of pictures. But I HAVE BEEN THERE, and know many people from there. Do NOT belittle the status of the do dunk town. You many not see being a mayor of a small town as any feat. But there's only a few towns in this State. Only 2 1/2 real "cities" but I doubt Fairbanks would qualify by your standards (1/2 would be Juno)

If we are connected by roads up here, we are connected to the "Bowl" (that's anchorage, if you are wondering)

I am sorry if I suggested that Mayor of Wasilla qualified Palin for VP. I do not believe that. I am contending the assumption that Wasilla is a Bush Village. Which I believe people see when they hear numbers, or think of Alaska.

[obryn]

So, off-topic and potentially offensively, my wife is wondering if Bristol Palin is just ... umm ... hugely endowed, or if it was stagecraft to make her pregnancy bump look less big.

-O

[PWD]

So, off-topic and potentially offensively, my wife is wondering if Bristol Palin is just ... umm ... hugely endowed, or if it was stagecraft to make her pregnancy bump look less big.

-O

First photo I saw of her, I immediately blurted out "nice rack!", causing my wife to hit me.

So if it was intended as a distraction, it sure was an effective pair.

[PWD]

You know how all this Palin bashing is getting Republicans to kinda get together and defend one of their own?
I feel like I gotta defend her, being that I wanna be an Alaskan. .

You were totally okay with the attacks so long as they were restricted to Clinton and Obama though, right?

Nice.

[Teve]

So, off-topic and potentially offensively, my wife is wondering if Bristol Palin is just ... umm ... hugely endowed, or if it was stagecraft to make her pregnancy bump look less big.

-O

They are natural. :) (or so I'm told, I haven't seen 'em up close. But a couple co-workers are family friends of the Palins.

[obryn]

They are natural. :) (or so I'm told, I haven't seen 'em up close. But a couple co-workers are family friends of the Palins.
OK. I mean, I was gaming instead of watching the convention, but that was one of my wife's main comments.

I thought she was exaggerating until I saw this on a newspaper article.

-O

[Teve]

You were totally okay with the attacks so long as they were restricted to Clinton and Obama though, right?

Nice.

Actually no. If you are referring to this board then note, I am not terribly active on the political side of this board.
Ask my friends who are willing to talk politics, bashing tends NOT to be my style. (except for the few, "he's simply an idiot" comments)

For me attacks made by Palin towards Obama are more damaging to her then they are to Obama. (and vice versa)
But that's me, I *try* to sift through the bullshit, and stick to the facts. With todays media and todays political celebrities, it's a very very hard thing to do.

(Also note, I dislike McCain and Obama both, although not equally)

[PWD]

Actually no. If you are referring to this board then note, I am not terribly active on the political side of this board.
Ask my friends who are willing to talk politics, bashing tends NOT to be my style. (except for the few, "he's simply an idiot" comments)

For me attacks made by Palin towards Obama are more damaging to her then they are to Obama. (and vice versa)
But that's me, I *try* to sift through the bullshit, and stick to the facts. With todays media and todays political celebrities, it's a very very hard thing to do.

(Also note, I dislike McCain and Obama both, although not equally)

Nevertheless, the identical attacks against democrats neither ruffled your feathers, nor caused you to post in outrage about how they had decided your vote against the republicans.

The reciprocation on Palin did exactly that for the democrats. Not the issues, the attacks.

I'm sure there's a distinction you'd like to explain to illuminate the situation. Perhaps your post was unclear somehow.

[Random Encounter]

I CANNOT STAND some of her positions on social issues, like ID, and creationism taught in schools, or pro-life. But I CANNOT STAND some of Obamas issues like GUNS, and money, and do not tout to me the "he's gonna lower taxes" line, because it's bullshit, and I will not sell my soul to vote for either ticket.


Too me Palin's stance on issues such as abortion, Ignorance-Only Sex education, the "defense of marriage" hate disguised as a tradition and a belief in Creationism over science is scary ass shit.
And while I hate how anti-gun the left is and feel that Obama will try to push anti-gun legislation I also feel that any real hard push to take legal guns from people in this country is going to get slapped down by the courts as unconstitutional. I have yet to see any indication that Democrats or Republicans have a better method of handling the economy. Under the "Tax and Spend" Clinton administration we had a balanced national budget and even a surplus as well as a booming economy. Under the "Fiscal conservative" Bush administration we now have "Owned by China" stamped on our collective asses.

But issues aside, the real reason I'm voting for Obama is his apparent popularity outside the United States.
Many Americans would like to think that only America matters and we don't need to care what the rest of the world thinks of us. But one of the President's jobs, probably his most important job, is to act as the face of America to other world leaders and in the age of blogs, TV and newspapers to the peoples of the world as well. I understand some founding fathers were against a position that would raise one man to the status of "King of America" but created the Presidency anyway because you need someone to speak to Kings, Queens and Emperors and to generally be able to speak for the nation.
I don't think the rest of the world will change thier opinion of us under a McCain administration but I feel that with his charisma and previous travels, Obama stands a good chance of turning public opinion around so we aren't disliked/hated all across the world.

[Teve]

Nevertheless, the identical attacks against democrats neither ruffled your feathers, nor caused you to post in outrage about how they had decided your vote against the republicans.

The reciprocation on Palin did exactly that for the democrats. Not the issues, the attacks.

I'm sure there's a distinction you'd like to explain to illuminate the situation. Perhaps your post was unclear somehow.

I never read anything on here about any other attacks. I only read this one, because Palin is of interest for me because of where I live.
No attacks from one side or the other has swayed my vote one way or the other. I have been a decided voter from the beginning. My vote will be for the Libertarian candidate. I comment on Palin simply because she is an Alaskan, and I have a little closer contact than the media on this one. It is not the fact that she is Republican that I defend her. I do NOT defend her politics (that may have been unclear)
I defend her as a person. (and no matter what a intelligent, down to earth person she is... is NOT enough to earn my vote, if it were just her running, I would not vote for her for Pres, hell I wouldn't have voted for her for Gov.)

I suppose if I was a little closer to Obama, and had some better information on him as a person, I may take some interest on him on these threads, but I do not. I don't read most of what is posted in the Xenopolitical Podium, because I do not like political discussions where there is time lapse, and you have no person to person contact to clarify yourself, or what the other person is saying.

Other than the conservative fiscal outlook and the firearms issue, I have little in common with her politically (VERY LITTLE).

[PWD]

I can't imagine how you could possibly be unaware of the mirrored attacks on Obama, Biden, and Clinton that predate the Palin counterstrikes, but I'll take you at face value.

I encourage you to go read some of Palin's own words on Clinton, see what that does to your feelings of how she's being unfairly persecuted and above such things.

[Teve]

I can't imagine how you could possibly be unaware of the mirrored attacks on Obama, Biden, and Clinton that predate the Palin counterstrikes, but I'll take you at face value.

I encourage you to go read some of Palin's own words on Clinton, see what that does to your feelings of how she's being unfairly persecuted and above such things.

Aware of them, just Not commenting here. Her speech last night was full of blows that were not right. I agree. I never said the persecution was unfair, if you are in the political light, you will be on the receiving end of attack, that's fine. I was simply *attempting* to state my side on those limited issues, of the attacks against her.
It's harder for me to make myself clear in limited words. If we were talking face to face, I would probably inform you of all the issues I have with Palin, but I got a little blinded by the "defend the Alaskan" I suppose. It was a directed comment, without addressing the other issues. Talking face to face, you would have said, what about her bad sides. I would have agreed, and we could have talked about those. But not without talking about others bad sides. We would have talked about fiscal plans, perhaps the idiocy of creationism in the science classroom, the importance of defending our firearms rights, and the problems with gun control as it pertains to current politicians running. We could have talked about oil and clean alternatives. But my post was directed at one thing. Bashing Palin, not ALL warranted, though some maybe.
I apologize for the confusion.

and you may note, that most of my defense in my original post was of Alaska, not Palin

This, this is why I generally stay off the political boards.

[Harry]

I guess maybe I should rethink my all-consuming hatred of Fred Thompson. I mean, he IS a Tennessean, and he's got that great voice and everything. His beliefs and the things he stands for are anathema to me, but heck, he's practically a neighbor. And I liked him in Die Hard, too!

[Snatch]

I guess maybe I should rethink my all-consuming hatred of Fred Thompson. I mean, he IS a Tennessean, and he's got that great voice and everything. His beliefs and the things he stands for are anathema to me, but heck, he's practically a neighbor. And I liked him in Die Hard, too!

Don't forget "The Hunt for Red October". Executive command experience in that role for sure!

[Name Lips]

And her much-touted pipeline, helping lead America to energy independence, doesn't actually exist yet. It won't exist for 10 years at the earliest, and maybe never. Also, people have been pushing for this thing since the 70s. She's just one more in a line of politicians pushing for the thing to actually be built.

Link (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26550336/)


Palin’s pipeline exists — but only on paper
Alaska project in speech hasn’t begun construction, could take decade

ANCHORAGE, Alaska - A long-delayed natural gas pipeline championed by Gov. Sarah Palin that would carry supplies from Alaska to Canada and then to the lower 48 states exists in concept only and is years away from fruition.

The vice presidential hopeful, in her speech Wednesday to the Republican National Convention, said she fought to bring about "the largest private-sector infrastructure project in North American history" to bolster America's energy security.

"And when that deal was struck, we began a nearly $40 billion natural gas pipeline to help lead America to energy independence," Palin said.

But plans for the pipeline that would ship gas from Alaska's North Slope — a project envisioned since the 1970s — remain on the drawing board.

"No, it hasn't been started, and that's on the record," said Paul Laird, executive director of the Alaska Support Industry Alliance, an oil field service trade group.

No question, Palin has been a strong pipeline advocate.

Last month, the state legislature endorsed her recommendation to award TransCanada Corp a license to build a 1,715-mile pipeline to Western Canada from Prudhoe Bay. In Alberta, the gas could be diverted to the United States on TransCanada's existing lines.

But there is no commitment to actually build it. The Canadian firm must still convince the state's major gas producers that its project is their best bet.

Alaska officials have worked for decades to encourage construction of a line to tap the North Slope's 35 trillion cubic feet of gas reserves and move it to markets.

Up to now, high costs and poor economics have thwarted that ambition and kept the gas stranded in the region's oil fields. Estimates for the opening of the line are now as far away as the end of the next decade.

Palin's state legislation entitles TransCanada to up to $500 million in subsidies for planning work, and it bars the state from striking a different deal with any other party.

TransCanada has just embarked on field surveys — as has a competing project sponsored by BP Plc and ConocoPhillips — but neither one has secured construction or operating permits, customers or financing.

No construction can start on any pipeline until the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission grants a permit, said former Gov. Tony Knowles, a Democrat who served from 1994 to 2002 and then lost to Palin in 2006. He opposed granting TransCanada a state license.

"Some people think it was the right step. Other people didn't," he said. "But there's nobody who thinks that this has started construction of the pipeline. All it does is it identifies who the state is supporting to get the certificate from FERC."

Palin's speech was the first time a $40 billion price tag had been floated. TransCanada has pegged the cost at $26 billion and state consultants have estimated $31 billion.

However, Laird pointed out inflation has gripped energy projects everywhere.

"Given what has happened with construction costs, with materials cost — particularly steel — it's not outlandish," he said.

[obryn]

John Stewart hit this one out of the park.

Hypocrisy ahoy!

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184086&title=sarah-palin-gender-card

[Dacke]

Or for those who can't see it on the TDS site itself, Youtube comes to the rescue:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1lCMH8rlHE

[Schizm]

words fail to express how much I long for a John Stewart presidency.

[obryn]

words fail to express how much I long for a John Stewart presidency.
I dunno how good he'd be as an administrator, but he'd kill in debates. :)

-O

[Teve]

words fail to express how much I long for a John Stewart presidency.

Ever seen Man of the Year, it could be a hell of a good time for a couple of months :shock:

[Trainz]

I have a pic somewhere to express my feelings about the cons outrage...

Oh right:

[FeatsofClay]

words fail to express how much I long for a John Stewart presidency.

I just wanna see him moderate a debate. :devil: :stirthepot:

[AZRogue]

Well, I can't say I'm digging Cindy McCain's speech so far. Palin was a Hockey Mom, a pit bull with lipstick, but Cindy is just coming off like a Xanax Mom. She looks too doped up to be giving a speech. :indifferent:

[Schizm]

Palin was a Hockey Mom, a pit bull with lipstick,

Whatcha wanna bet stannis votes for her anyway?

[Trainz]

Whatcha wanna bet stannis votes for her anyway?

Stannis has been notably absent from the political threads.

I can't imagine how it is for him. This whole thing.

A very good friend of mine is a hard core Quebec separatist. We are totally opposed in our political views.

Hear that Stannis? It's not because we are diametrically opposed politically that I don't feel for you. For what it's worth, I value your intellect greatly, and your sarcastic wit.

[PWD]

Stannis is a damn fun guy who I'd be happy to buy a beer.

I probably consider him more of a "true believer" than izzy, but even there we've had our periods where we can talk rationally and get past things.

There's just a rather large block between us in that generally he thinks Bush is a smart guy doing good things, and I think the opposite... and I think Bush's remaining true supporters need to be punished for allowing all that's happened due to his presidency. Punished with a very liberal democrat in charge, for no better reason than to make them squirm.

That's softened quite a bit for folks who've seen the errors of their ways and distanced themselves, or who supported the repubs for other reasons and have distaste for the clusterfucks. I'm in no way assuming them all to be cardboard cutouts with the same views and same reasons for voting as they did. I hold no grudge against Scuti for his long and hard pushing of PNAC for instance.

[Hatter]

Stannis is a guy I disagree with on a lot of stuff but that's ok because he's a nice person who wants mostly the same things as the rest of us.

[Ergeheilalt]

I hate that bastard.

Pfft. Taking the name of the biggest douche character from Game of Thrones?

Fuck him. :mad:

[Radu]

Only he didn't take the name of the biggest douche--- he's not calling himself Ned Stark, now is he?

[Trainz]

I hate that bastard.

Pfft. Taking the name of the biggest douche character from Game of Thrones?

Fuck him. :mad:

Yeah, I went down that road once.

Stannis handed me back my ass by spoiling part of the book for me.

I learned my lesson.

[Dacke]

I hate that bastard.

Pfft. Taking the name of the biggest douche character from Game of Thrones?

Fuck him. :mad:
Biggest douche?

I mean, Stannis is a douche, sure, but the biggest? Not even close.

[Singularity]

Stannis is a guy I disagree with on a lot of stuff but that's ok because he's a nice person who wants mostly the same things as the rest of us.

Plus he has a very reasonable position on Star Wars.

I can't stand the "Lucas is raping my childhood" crowd. Sure Han shot first, but so fucking what? And the prequels weren't half as bad as their most vocal critics make them out to be.

[Hatter]

Plus he has a very reasonable position on Star Wars.

I can't stand the "Lucas is raping my childhood" crowd. Sure Han shot first, but so fucking what? And the prequels weren't half as bad as their most vocal critics make them out to be.

<insert statement regarding hamburgers and handjobs>

[Kyle Voltti]

The best I can do is try to judge Mrs. Palin by the standards my mother set.... And I'm prety sure my mom would think that Sarah Palin was a tool.
My mom was a nurse in an ICN (intensive Care Nursary) so the fact that Palin's daughter got knocked up would be strike 1. having a 5th child late in life would be strike 2. and then knowing that your child had medical needs and flying back to Alaska while in labour with him rather than getting the medical care he deserved would be strike 3.

[AZRogue]

having a 5th child late in life would be strike 2.

Really? The other points I can see, but that one, not so much. I can't imagine someone out there would look at someone else and judge them because they had a child in their early 40s. Hell, I don't think I'd want to meet her. I'm not that perfect.

[Name Lips]

Some people we know are shocked Emerald would consider allowing herself to get pregnant after 30. In their mind you should have children young. After 30 they consider the health risks too great. It's true that the risks are higher, but not THAT much higher. I'm never sure how to respond to those people...

[Trainz]

Some people we know are shocked Emerald would consider allowing herself to get pregnant after 30. In their mind you should have children young. After 30 they consider the health risks too great. It's true that the risks are higher, but not THAT much higher. I'm never sure how to respond to those people...

I don't know anyone like that. I have a lot of friends that had/will have their children over 30.

Weird.

[Freedom Canadian]

I don't know anyone like that. I have a lot of friends that had/will have their children over 30.

Weird.

Most women here have their children over 30, even.

[Name Lips]

I know! The pattern these days is for women to start a career and then have children at a measured pace once they're established in it. Whereas these particular friends of Emerald think it's better to have kids during/right after college, and then go for a career once they hit school age.

I know some weird people...

[Kyle Voltti]

yeah it's not the having a child late in life that would have irked my mom the most it was the fact that it was the 5th child when she already had a son and daughters. My mom was very pragmatic when it came to reproduction.

[Lady Fury]

All but one of my kids were born to me over the age of 30.

[Xavier Lang]

My brother and I were both born when my mom was over 30, so in the generation before women were having kids over 30. I'm fairly normal, right? :D