# Painfully Pointless Palin



## Ravi (Sep 25, 2008)

Tonight's interview highlights:



> COURIC: Well, explain to me why that enhances your foreign policy credentials?  PALIN: Well, it certainly does because our next door neighbors are foreign countries. they're in the state that i am the executive of. And there in Russia --
> COURIC: Have you ever been involved with any negotiations for example, with the Russians?
> PALIN: We have trade missions back and forth. We do -- it's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia -- as Putin rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United States of America, where do they go?
> It's Alaska, It's right over the border. It is from Alaska, that we send those out to make sure an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there, they are right next to our state.


Palin On Foreign Policy Video - CBSNews.com


----------



## notomccain (Sep 25, 2008)

she  sounds  like an idiot


----------



## midcan5 (Sep 25, 2008)

*Dumb and Ms. Dumber for president*

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nokTjEdaUGg[/ame]

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=map+of+alaska&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=


*America for Dummies: A vote for McCain/Palin is a vote to further marginalize science and progress in America by supporting creationism (religion) as science. *
washingtonpost.com


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Tonight's interview highlights:
> 
> Palin On Foreign Policy Video - CBSNews.com



A simple "no" would have made her look a lot less stupid.


----------



## notomccain (Sep 25, 2008)

i honestly  think she  is the dumbest candidate  in our  history. no wonder she  is  ducking the  media.


----------



## Red Dawn (Sep 25, 2008)

She looks like an absolute fool.  

When she's not embarrassing herself, the best she can do is blurt out some simplistic talking points.  

This is as bad as that Admiral Stockdale choice Perot offered up for VP in 1992.   Dan Quayle was light years ahead of this. 


I'm am so glad McCain didn't pick Romney. 


On the other hand, its simply shocking that a 72 year old, three-time cancer survivor would willfully chose to put the nation at risk by nominating an absolute tool to be a heartbeat away from the presidency.


----------



## Ninja (Sep 26, 2008)

"Senator Biden, can you please name some of Barack Obama's legislative accomplishments?"

[youtube]NmRXH7RkCZQ[/youtube]


----------



## pegwinn (Sep 26, 2008)

The best part of threads like this one is that every time you slam on Palin, you highlight the same issues in the opposition.

She has more executive experience than Obama and is more likely an agent of change than Biden. But, do go on ignoring the real issues in favor of the soundbyte of the week.


----------



## Red Dawn (Sep 26, 2008)

pegwinn said:


> The best part of threads like this one is that every time you slam on Palin, you highlight the same issues in the opposition.
> 
> She has more executive experience than Obama and is more likely an agent of change than Biden. But, do go on ignoring the real issues in favor of the soundbyte of the week.



Spin it anyway you like.   Palin looks like a fool. 

Obama has been on Meet the Press, Face the Nation, Fox News Sunday, and other unscripted interviews with journalists about a thousand times.  He's taken part in dozens of live, televised presidential primary debates taking fire from journalists.   

And he is always able to competently natter on about domestic and foreign issues without looking like a complete tool, like Palin.


----------



## pegwinn (Sep 26, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> Spin it anyway you like.   Palin looks like a fool. In your opinion. In my opinion she looks like your typical politician playing to a specific demographic.
> 
> Obama has been on Meet the Press, Face the Nation, Fox News Sunday, and other unscripted interviews with journalists about a thousand times.  He's taken part in dozens of live, televised presidential primary debates taking fire from journalists. He does very well on camera to be sure. But that doesn't add to any foreign policy or executive experience now does it. And a teleprompter at a rodeo?
> 
> And he is always able to competently natter on about domestic and foreign issues without looking like a complete tool, like Palin. Actually, I think he often looks like a fool.



It's all the same. We have four pols that manage to cancel out the perceived weaknesses in their opponents. The truth is that we have four crooks that have already demonstrated in word and deed that they are not to be trusted.


----------



## Stoner (Sep 26, 2008)

> COURIC: Well, explain to me why that enhances your foreign policy credentials? PALIN: Well, it certainly does because our next door neighbors are foreign countries. they're in the state that i am the executive of. And there in Russia --
> COURIC: Have you ever been involved with any negotiations for example, with the Russians?
> PALIN: We have trade missions back and forth. We do -- it's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia -- as Putin rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United States of America, where do they go?
> It's Alaska, It's right over the border. It is from Alaska, that we send those out to make sure an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there, they are right next to our state.



She's 100% right.  Couldn't have said it better.  

She has more executive experience than Obama and Biden combined.


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 26, 2008)

Has anyone actually managed to come up with an example or a link that shows Sarah Palin has personally dealt with the Russians yet?


----------



## Stoner (Sep 26, 2008)

Chris said:


> She will be recommended for indictment in October and replaced by Mitt Romney.



Sorry, kid, won't happen.


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 26, 2008)

Stoner said:


> She's 100% right.  Couldn't have said it better.
> 
> She has more executive experience than Obama and Biden combined.



I'm starting to think you aren't being serious when you post ...


----------



## Stoner (Sep 26, 2008)

Article 15 said:


> I'm starting to think you aren't being serious when you post ...



Why, because I don't recite libbie rhetoric from Moveon, Kos, HuffPo and Air America?  BWAHAHAHAHAHA!  Get real, son.  When you learn to think for yourself and not be a sheeple for the leftwing kooks you'll understand and instantly jump up 50 IQ points.


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 26, 2008)

Stoner said:


> Why, because I don't recite libbie rhetoric from Moveon, Kos, HuffPo and Air America?  BWAHAHAHAHAHA!  Get real, son.  When you learn to think for yourself and not be a sheeple for the leftwing kooks you'll understand and instantly jump up 50 IQ points.



Says the guy reciting right wing rhetoric from Sean, Rush, and the usual talk radio scumbags.  Talk about a sheeple ... how's the dittosphere these days?

I'm very independently minded ... 2000 Bush ... 2004 neither ... 2008 Obama.  My positions on issues are all over the spectrum.

And I'm not your "son." While you were taking bong hits I was off fighting in Iraq.


----------



## Stoner (Sep 26, 2008)

Article 15 said:


> I'm very independently minded



At what point are we going to witness this?



> While you were taking bong hits I was off fighting in Iraq.



I served in the Corps for 10 years so don't start swinging your cock around just yet.  You're not the only one whose fought for this country.


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 26, 2008)

Stoner said:


> At what point are we going to witness this?





What's with the selective cut and paste?  

I just told you my positions are all over the political spectrum ... but you ignored it.




> I served in the Corps for 10 years so don't start swinging your cock around just yet.  You're not the only one whose fought for this country.



Oh ...

I'm still not your son and prefer not to be addressed that way.


----------



## Stoner (Sep 26, 2008)

Article 15 said:


> What's with the selective cut and paste?
> I just told you my positions are all over the political spectrum ... but you ignored it.



I didn't ignore diddly.  I haven't seen any independent thoughts or ideas from you yet.  Was curious when you would grace us with something besides rhetoric out of a Michael Moore movie.


----------



## Luissa (Sep 26, 2008)

Stoner said:


> I didn't ignore diddly.  I haven't seen any independent thoughts or ideas from you yet.  Was curious when you would grace us with something besides rhetoric out of a Michael Moore movie.


You give stoner's a bad name! well I guess Bristol Palin smokes pot too! So what can you say!


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 26, 2008)

Stoner said:


> I didn't ignore diddly.  I haven't seen any independent thoughts or ideas from you yet.  Was curious when you would grace us with something besides rhetoric out of a Michael Moore movie.





lol ... Michael Moore movie rhetoric.

2005 called they want their lame right wing comebacks back.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 26, 2008)

Chris said:


> Stoner, you are an idiot.


says the biggest idiot on the board


----------



## MichaelCollins (Sep 26, 2008)

Stoner said:


> Why, because I don't recite libbie rhetoric from Moveon, Kos, HuffPo and Air America?  BWAHAHAHAHAHA!  Get real, son.  When you learn to think for yourself and not be a sheeple for the leftwing kooks you'll understand and instantly jump up 50 IQ points.



The ultimate irony.. . a jesus freak BUSHTEAM clone ...talking about sheep!

You couldnt make it up could you... and he says he was in the armed forces..and still supports BUSHTEAM.

BUSHTEAM despise little peasants like him.... they lie and they brainwash uneducated peasants like stoner...  they have utter contempt for him ... and yet he still blindly and loyally supports them.

It is tragic but very funny.


----------



## notomccain (Sep 26, 2008)

lets get  back to palin. that witch video is  bizarre and her interview with couric was embarrassing


----------



## greenpartyaz (Sep 26, 2008)

notomccain said:


> i honestly  think she  is the dumbest candidate  in our  history. no wonder she  is  ducking the  media.



Actually Bush is the dumbest candidate in our history. I should rephrase that. Useful idiot!


----------



## greenpartyaz (Sep 26, 2008)

pegwinn said:


> The best part of threads like this one is that every time you slam on Palin, you highlight the same issues in the opposition.
> 
> She has more executive experience than Obama and is more likely an agent of change than Biden. But, do go on ignoring the real issues in favor of the soundbyte of the week.



The issue of executive experience is total bullshit! A mayor of a po-dunk little town in Alaska, or a sitting Senator who has Senate experience? It is a powder cake issue. Palin's lack of experience is downright scary! She is a religious fundamentalist wacko. She tried to inquire three times to ban books in an effort to censor information. She wants creationism taught in schools. She invokes god and military conflict. She is not an agent of change, when she doesn't even know what needs changing. This VP pick is a reckless one!


----------



## Gunny (Sep 26, 2008)

pegwinn said:


> The best part of threads like this one is that every time you slam on Palin, you highlight the same issues in the opposition.
> 
> She has more executive experience than Obama and is more likely an agent of change than Biden. But, do go on ignoring the real issues in favor of the soundbyte of the week.



The really good part is the usual cast of suspects from the peanut gallery that always have something to say, mostly trying to blow smoke up people's asses and it's OBVIOUS. 

Fear has a smell all of its own.


----------



## Diuretic (Sep 26, 2008)

Not only does fear have a certain smell, like soiled underpants, it's also highly contagious.  When it starts it will run like a bushfire (wildfire).  

I can smell toasted soiled underpants from the McCain camp from here


----------



## Gunny (Sep 26, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> Not only does fear have a certain smell, like soiled underpants, it's also highly contagious.  When it starts it will run like a bushfire (wildfire).
> 
> I can smell toasted soiled underpants from the McCain camp from here



Uh.  One of the few missing from the "cast" was you.  You're late to hop on the parrot the bullshit train.

What should be painfully obvious to even your partisan yet analytical mind is the over-the-top smear job against Palin on this board alone, day after day, week after week REEKS of fear. 

 It's as if the leftwingnut mentality is if we stop slinging shit people will stop and think and it won't take them long to figure out we're just full of what we're trying to sling.


----------



## Diuretic (Sep 26, 2008)

Gunny said:


> Uh.  One of the few missing from the "cast" was you.  You're late to hop on the parrot the bullshit train.
> 
> What should be painfully obvious to even your partisan yet analytical mind is the over-the-top smear job against Palin on this board alone, day after day, week after week REEKS of fear.
> 
> It's as if the leftwingnut mentality is if we stop slinging shit people will stop and think and it won't take them long to figure out we're just full of what we're trying to sling.



Oi!  I'll have you know that I'm of the "critical thinking" variety.  I sussed this sheila out weeks ago as soon as I saw that weird look in her eyes. 

I'm not going to go after her.  I don't much like that sort of politics.  But fair dinkum Gunny, this sheila's got a few things going on behind those eyes that you lot should know about.  

She's a nutter.  

Throw her back.


----------



## NOBama (Sep 26, 2008)

Excerpts from Courics interviews with Biden and Palin:

*Couric/Palin:*

*Couric:* You've said, quote, "John McCain will reform the way Wall Street does business." Other than supporting stricter regulations of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago, can you give us any more example of his leading the charge for more oversight? 

*Palin:* I think that the example that you just cited, with his warnings two years ago about Fannie and Freddie - that, that's paramount. That's more than a heck of a lot of other senators and representatives did for us. 

*Couric:* But he's been in Congress for 26 years. He's been chairman of the powerful Commerce Committee. And he has almost always sided with less regulation, not more. 

*Palin:* He's also known as the maverick though, taking shots from his own party, and certainly taking shots from the other party. Trying to get people to understand what he's been talking about - the need to reform government. 

*Couric:* But can you give me any other concrete examples? Because I know you've said Barack Obama is a lot of talk and no action. Can you give me any other examples in his 26 years of John McCain truly taking a stand on this? 

*Palin:* I can give you examples of things that John McCain has done, that has shown his foresight, his pragmatism, and his leadership abilities. And that is what America needs today. 

*Couric:* I'm just going to ask you one more time - not to belabor the point. Specific examples in his 26 years of pushing for more regulation.


*Couric/Biden:*

*Couric:* "You say what's on your mind. Have you found that you have to be uber-careful and disciplined in terms of being out there on the campaign trail?" Couric asked.

*Biden:* "No. I feel passionate about what I'm doing and saying. I know the Republicans are going to take anything I say, no matter what it would be or anybody, and take it out of context," Biden said. "They are going to take any piece and if I have to parse through every single thing I'm going to say, then I'm not me."

*Couric:* On the trail, Biden is unmistakably himself, from occasionally cursing to getting emotional, as he did in Canton, Ohio, at the Pro Football Hall of Fame. We were with him last Thursday during one of the rockiest weeks in history for the U.S. economy, something that wasn't lost on the six-term senator.

*Biden:* "Part of what being a leader does is to instill confidence is to demonstrate what he or she knows what they are talking about and to communicating to people ... this is how we can fix this," Biden said. "When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed. He said, 'look, here's what happened.'"

*Couric:* Relating to the fears of working-class Americans is one of Biden's strong suits, as he did before union members in Akron, Ohio.


*STOP THE PRESS*

Couric simply moved on. She didnt stop to question Bidens lack of knowledge regarding who the president was or the fact that most Americans didnt own a television in 1929. 

What an egregious error on Courics part to have allowed Bidens statement(s) go unchallenged. On the other hand, perhaps Couric herself didnt know that Herbert Hoover was the President in 1929 or that the majority of the American population didn't own a television set.

It seems to me that the Palin interview (once again) was all about getting a GOTCHA moment for Katie.

Well, *GOTCHA Katie!*


----------



## midcan5 (Sep 26, 2008)

Article 15 said:


> Has anyone actually managed to come up with an example or a link that shows Sarah Palin has personally dealt with the Russians yet?



Sarah deals with the Russians through osmosis, some land in the airport there and their vibes travel through space to her empty brain. Seriously, it is a beautiful country but Russia seems no closer than anywhere else, the terrain is something else. Look at the map below and go to the satellite view for a sense of the place. Magnify it, I hiked lots of it around Fairbanks. Just beautiful.

map alaska - Google Maps


*A vote for McCain/Palin is a vote to destroy for future generations the natural beauty of Alaska and our coastlines.*


----------



## pegwinn (Sep 26, 2008)

greenpartyaz said:


> The issue of executive experience is total bullshit! A mayor of a po-dunk little town in Alaska, or a sitting Senator who has Senate experience? It is a powder cake issue. Palin's lack of experience is downright scary! She is a religious fundamentalist wacko. She tried to inquire three times to ban books in an effort to censor information. She wants creationism taught in schools. She invokes god and military conflict. She is not an agent of change, when she doesn't even know what needs changing. This VP pick is a reckless one!



Dude, you really need to share some of the stuff you are smoking. Let me help you out here.

You see, the Senate is a deliberative body. It is literally leadership by committee. The Presidency is executive. Biden and Obama are not accustomed to making an on-the-spot decision using only the info available right now. 

So, executive leadership (such as being a mayor, a governor, or a military commander) is far more important than someone who's specialty is passing the buck in a smoke filled room.

But, continue in this vein. By worrying overmuch about this you are still ignoring the larger issue. 

Are you ready for it? All of the candidates are lying to you. Each is promising things they will not, are not authorized to, deliver. Think about it.

This has been another public service announcement.


----------



## pegwinn (Sep 26, 2008)

pegwinn said:


> The best part of threads like this one is that every time you slam on Palin, you highlight the same issues in the opposition.
> 
> She has more executive experience than Obama and is more likely an agent of change than Biden. But, do go on ignoring the real issues in favor of the soundbyte of the week.



So, MichaelCollins neg repped this post. No worries. If he/she or it had anything constructive to say they might've posted a rebuttal.

Your Kung Fu is weak grasshopper.


----------



## busara (Sep 26, 2008)

pegwinn said:


> Dude, you really need to share some of the stuff you are smoking. Let me help you out here.
> 
> You see, the Senate is a deliberative body. It is literally leadership by committee. The Presidency is executive. Biden and Obama are not accustomed to making an on-the-spot decision using only the info available right now.
> 
> ...



i was a store manager. thats executive experience, right? making on the spot decisions about employment, budget, inventory, etc. ive been to 8 foreign countries and have talked with various diplomats from time to time. i even have experience dealing with al queda (played them in paintball. found out after the fact who they were). guess this all makes me just as qualified if not more so than palin, obama, biden, or mccain, right?


----------



## Silence (Sep 26, 2008)

Stoner said:


> She has more executive experience than Obama and Biden combined.



actually, by that token you could throw McCain in there too since he has ZERO executive experience as well...

Let's elect Palin President since she's the ONLY one with executive experience....


----------



## pegwinn (Sep 26, 2008)

busara said:


> i was a store manager. thats executive experience, right? Yep, it sure is. making on the spot decisions about employment, budget, inventory, etc. ive been to 8 foreign countries and have talked with various diplomats from time to time. i even have experience dealing with al queda (played them in paintball. found out after the fact who they were). guess this all makes me just as qualified if not more so than palin, obama, biden, or mccain, right?



In terms of decision making (executive) experience McCain likely has you beat since he also had a long career as a commissioned officer which included a tour as a CO. For Palin, I dunno, you didn't provide enough information. Obama and Biden have no executive experience at all that I can find. So you got them whupped.

Now that we've established your eligibility per the Constitution, and examined your relevant experience, we need to go into your philosophy and vision.

Conversly if Palin were running for Congress I would ding her for not having much in the way of legislative experience. 

The best part of being independent is that I can slam everyone and not get emotionally charged on personalities.

Good comment though, cool points coming your way.


----------



## MichaelCollins (Sep 26, 2008)

Gunny said:


> The really good part is the usual cast of suspects from the peanut gallery that always have something to say, mostly trying to blow smoke up people's asses and it's OBVIOUS.
> 
> Fear has a smell all of its own.




So you think that Palin is well qualified to be president of the US?

Obviously you do...and we can quote you on this in years to come.

We will not forget.


----------



## Stoner (Sep 26, 2008)

NObama said:


> Couric simply moved on. She didn&#8217;t stop to question Biden&#8217;s lack of knowledge regarding who the president was or the fact that most Americans didn&#8217;t own a television in 1929.
> 
> What an egregious error on Couric&#8217;s part to have allowed Biden&#8217;s statement(s) go unchallenged. On the other hand, perhaps Couric herself didn&#8217;t know that Herbert Hoover was the President in 1929 or that the majority of the American population didn't own a television set.
> 
> ...



Ding ding ding!

Katie is a bias fucktard who makes it obvious she's not a serious journalist.  She's simply a tool for the libbies.  Nothing more, nothing less.  She's in the same pig pen as Maddow, Rhodes, Olbermann, etc...


----------



## Missourian (Sep 26, 2008)

Does anyone have a link to a *reliable* recent Palin vs. Biden poll?


----------



## ABikerSailor (Sep 26, 2008)

You know, for a supposed rough and tough outdoors chick who is able to kill a moose.....

She had a LOT of fear in her eyes during that interview.

Nope.......definitely another empty pants suit.


----------



## doeton (Sep 26, 2008)

pegwinn said:


> So, MichaelCollins neg repped this post. No worries. If he/she or it had anything constructive to say they might've posted a rebuttal.
> 
> Your Kung Fu is weak grasshopper.



yeah, neg reping is weak...sounds like sompin Allie would do...


----------



## Ravi (Sep 26, 2008)

ABikerSailor said:


> You know, for a supposed rough and tough outdoors chick who is able to kill a moose.....
> 
> She had a LOT of fear in her eyes during that interview.
> 
> Nope.......definitely another empty pants suit.


They should have had Mr. Moose interview her.


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 26, 2008)

ABikerSailor said:


> She had a LOT of fear in her eyes during that interview.



Just wait until she's at the VP debate ...

You KNOW that they are scared shitless of it ...


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 26, 2008)

Stoner said:


> Ding ding ding!
> 
> Katie is a bias fucktard who makes it obvious she's not a serious journalist.  She's simply a tool for the libbies.  Nothing more, nothing less.  She's in the same pig pen as Maddow, Rhodes, Olbermann, etc...



Poor whittle Sawrah can't handle a curve ball Katie Couric ...

You guys are fucked.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Sep 26, 2008)

Article 15 said:


> Just wait until she's at the VP debate ...
> 
> You KNOW that they are scared shitless of it ...



Yep.....and Biden is gonna put that pitbull on a leash and beat her with a rolled up newspaper.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Sep 26, 2008)

Maybe then she won't piddle on the cameras anymore.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 26, 2008)

Article 15 said:


> Poor whittle Sawrah can't handle a curve ball Katie Couric ...
> 
> You guys are fucked.


you've got to be kidding

she handled it perfectly, better than biden
Couric was going for the gotcha and failed to get it

and i saw no fear in her eyes at all


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 26, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> you've got to be kidding
> 
> she handled it perfectly, better than biden
> Couric was going for the gotcha and failed to get it
> ...



"I'll try and find some and bring 'em to ya"

Oh yeah ... brilliant handling right there. /sarcasm

And I saw lots of fear in those eyes.  I've picked up a thing or two after thousands of hours at the poker table ...


----------



## ABikerSailor (Sep 26, 2008)

Palin was so scared, she probably had to wear Depends during that interview.  

And.....for a pitbull, she's acting more like a poodle or a chihuahua.


----------



## AllieBaba (Sep 26, 2008)

Lol. You guys wish.

You're all out of ammunition. Now you're just pretending to have neutralized her.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Sep 26, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> Lol. You guys wish.
> 
> You're all out of ammunition. Now you're just pretending to have neutralized her.



Did you actually SEE the interview, or, in your own little deluded meat curtain way, did you choose to ignore it and believe what your party told you to believe?

Always Babbling, you've got to be one of the stupider ***** that I've seen in a LONG time.


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 26, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> Lol. You guys wish.
> 
> You're all out of ammunition. Now you're just pretending to have neutralized her.



All out of ammunition?

lol

Sarah Palin just keeps handing us fresh clips ...

(she's more than nuetralized ... have you checked out RCP lately?)


----------



## Jennifer.Bush (Sep 26, 2008)

Stoner said:


> She's 100% right.  Couldn't have said it better.
> 
> She has more executive experience than Obama and Biden combined.


she may be LITERALLY right but that doesn't add any creds.


----------



## AllieBaba (Sep 26, 2008)

ABikerSailor said:


> Did you actually SEE the interview, or, in your own little deluded meat curtain way, did you choose to ignore it and believe what your party told you to believe?
> 
> Always Babbling, you've got to be one of the stupider ***** that I've seen in a LONG time.



Somehow I doubt that. Your inflated opinion of your intelligence comes from somewhere, so I am going to assume you surround yourself with people who are even less intelligent than yourself. Despite your Village People handle chances are there's at least one bimbo who you employ to build up your self esteem.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Sep 26, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> Somehow I doubt that. Your inflated opinion of your intelligence comes from somewhere, so I am going to assume you surround yourself with people who are even less intelligent than yourself. Despite your Village People handle chances are there's at least one bimbo who you employ to build up your self esteem.



Always a Bimbo, I don't keep bimbos around me.  Most of the ladies that I know, not only can cook and fix motorcycles, but the biggest majority have college degrees.

Of course, a fat-assed bitch like  yourself would often assume things about people they know nothing about.  Just another example of an "open minded Christian".

You're as devout as Ted Haggard.


----------



## Otter_Creek (Sep 26, 2008)

Why do the dems never give us a real contender for the white house?

Last time they gave us Kerrygive me a break.
Sarah Palin does have more experience than that stuffed shirt obama and that's a fact.
Once again the wise voters are forced to choose the less of two evils and they happen to be McCain/Palin.


----------



## ABikerSailor (Sep 26, 2008)

Palin's foreign policy experience......

Traveled to Kuwait, had a stop over in Ireland to refuel.

Yeah.....she's got more experience than Obama.....keep telling yourself that.

Besides that, for a supposed person with foreign experience, you realize that she didn't get a passport until LAST YEAR?


----------



## Jennifer.Bush (Sep 26, 2008)

ABikerSailor said:


> Palin's foreign policy experience......
> 
> Traveled to Kuwait, had a stop over in Ireland to refuel.
> 
> ...


what's the point of having foreign policy experience if YOU don't 
listen to the people who day in and day out put their lives at 
risk to give you the info you need? Generals have been telling 
the dems they need more troops in iraq. what does obama 
do? Vote against the idea. The general, the person with the 
most info..hell the most experienced on this issue tells obama he needs more 
troops, and a non-military cats basically turns his heads and tell the commanders to basically go fuck himself. 

yes iraq was a mistake, but as president you have to deal with 
reality, and reality told obama that Iraq needed more troops 
and obama told reality to go fuck off. Someone who is not willing to deal with reality will not get my vote


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 26, 2008)

ABikerSailor said:


> Palin's foreign policy experience......
> 
> Traveled to Kuwait, had a stop over in Ireland to refuel.
> 
> ...



You forgot the big one ...

She's close to Russia ...


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 26, 2008)

Jennifer.Bush said:


> what's the point of having foreign policy experience if YOU don't
> listen to the people who day in and day out put their lives at
> risk to give you the info you need? Generals have been telling
> the dems they need more troops in iraq. what does obama
> ...



Shinsheki


----------



## Mad Scientist (Sep 26, 2008)

Otter_Creek said:


> Why do the dems never give us a real contender for the white house? Last time they gave us Kerrygive me a break.
> Sarah Palin does have more experience than that stuffed shirt obama and that's a fact. Once again the wise voters are forced to choose the less of two evils and they happen to be McCain/Palin.


In 2000 the Dems said Bush is a dimwit and ran genius Al Gore against him. The Dems lost.
In 2004 the Dems said Bush is a dimwit and ran genius John Kerry against him. The Dems lost.
In 2008 the Dems still say Bush is a dimwit and are running genius Barack Obama against *him and* John McCain.

I *think* I know what's gonna' happen.


----------



## Otter_Creek (Sep 26, 2008)

When was obama a governor? A mayor? Just that short time she's been in is more than obama can boast.
Where did you read obama has some great foreign policy experience?
Maybe he flew to south america and picked up some blow?


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 26, 2008)

Mad Scientist said:


> In 2000 the Dems said Bush is a dimwit and ran genius Al Gore against him. The Dems lost.
> In 2004 the Dems said Bush is a dimwit and ran genius John Kerry against him. The Dems lost.
> In 2008 the Dems still say Bush is a dimwit and are running genius Barack Obama against *him and* John McCain.
> 
> I *think* I know what's gonna' happen.


LOL ya think


----------



## ABikerSailor (Sep 26, 2008)

Mad Scientist said:


> In 2000 the Dems said Bush is a dimwit and ran genius Al Gore against him. The Dems lost.
> In 2004 the Dems said Bush is a dimwit and ran genius John Kerry against him. The Dems lost.
> In 2008 the Dems still say Bush is a dimwit and are running genius Barack Obama against *him and* John McCain.
> 
> I *think* I know what's gonna' happen.



In the summer of 2008, Bush was proven to be a dimwit.


----------



## xsited1 (Sep 26, 2008)

She's as bad as Obama.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 26, 2008)

ABikerSailor said:


> In the summer of 2008, Bush was proven to be a dimwit.


says you
LOL


----------



## Mad Scientist (Sep 26, 2008)

ABikerSailor said:


> Palin's foreign policy experience. Traveled to Kuwait, had a stop over in Ireland to refuel. Yeah.....she's got more experience than Obama, keep telling yourself that. Besides that, for a supposed person with foreign experience, you realize that she didn't get a passport until LAST YEAR?


ABS I just checked my copy of The Constitution and I can't find anything that says the President or Vice-President *must have experience*. What does yours say?

That should be *helping* Obama who runs with the "Change" mantra yet the polls remain close. Hmmm.


----------



## Otter_Creek (Sep 26, 2008)

Mad Scientist said:


> In 2000 the Dems said Bush is a dimwit and ran genius Al Gore against him. The Dems lost.
> In 2004 the Dems said Bush is a dimwit and ran genius John Kerry against him. The Dems lost.
> In 2008 the Dems still say Bush is a dimwit and are running genius Barack Obama against *him and* John McCain.
> 
> I *think* I know what's gonna' happen.



 LOL! Well yes, then there's that.


----------



## Ravi (Sep 26, 2008)

I must say, next to Palin, Bush look intelligent. I don't think it's her fault, she just is very lame.


----------



## Jennifer.Bush (Sep 26, 2008)

Article 15 said:


> Shinsheki


mccan Vs obama


----------



## Mad Scientist (Sep 26, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I must say, next to Palin, Bush look intelligent. I don't think it's her fault, she just is very lame.


Bush *do* look much intelligents do he? All your grammar are belong to us!


----------



## Ravi (Sep 26, 2008)

*GOP concerned about Palin*




> Tony Fabrizio, a GOP strategist, says Palins recent CBS appearance isnt disqualifying but is certainly alarming. You cant continue to have interviews like that and not take on water.


----------



## AllieBaba (Sep 26, 2008)

Mad Scientist said:


> In 2000 the Dems said Bush is a dimwit and ran genius Al Gore against him. The Dems lost.
> In 2004 the Dems said Bush is a dimwit and ran genius John Kerry against him. The Dems lost.
> In 2008 the Dems still say Bush is a dimwit and are running genius Barack Obama against *him and* John McCain.
> 
> I *think* I know what's gonna' happen.



You deserve a rep for that, but I can't yet.
I'm thinking rep-ful thoughts for you, though.


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 26, 2008)

Jennifer.Bush said:


> mccan Vs obama



RCP Obama +4.0


----------



## PeterS (Sep 26, 2008)

pegwinn said:


> She has more executive experience than Obama



She has more executive experience than McCain. Does that make her a better qualified candidate than McCain?


----------



## ABikerSailor (Sep 26, 2008)

Mad Scientist said:


> ABS I just checked my copy of The Constitution and I can't find anything that says the President or Vice-President *must have experience*. What does yours say?
> 
> That should be *helping* Obama who runs with the "Change" mantra yet the polls remain close. Hmmm.



Nothing says they must have experience.  It's the idiot Republicans that are saying that you've got to have experience.


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 26, 2008)

PeterS said:


> She has more executive experience than McCain. Does that make her a better qualified candidate than McCain?



Jimmy Carter had more executive experience than Sarah Palin ...


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 26, 2008)

Article 15 said:


> RCP Obama +4.0


yeah, in polls that are over sampling democrats by 5%
LOL


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 26, 2008)

Article 15 said:


> Jimmy Carter had more executive experience than Sarah Palin ...


LOL but Palin is not the disaster Carter was


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 26, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> LOL but Palin is not the disaster Carter was



I beg to differ ...

Conservatives are starting to call for her to step down ...

She's the gift that keeps on giving ...


----------



## WillowTree (Sep 26, 2008)

Article 15 said:


> Jimmy Carter had more executive experience than Sarah Palin ...






yea, and look how that shithead turned out!


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 26, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> yeah, in polls that are over sampling democrats by 5%
> LOL



More people identify themselves as Democrats ...

blah, blah, blah ...

We've been over this a few times now ...


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 26, 2008)

Article 15 said:


> I beg to differ ...
> 
> Conservatives are starting to call for her to step down ...
> 
> She's the gift that keeps on giving ...


what conservatives?
i know THIS conservative will be PISSED if she does


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 26, 2008)

Article 15 said:


> More people identify themselves as Democrats ...
> 
> blah, blah, blah ...
> 
> We've been over this a few times now ...


but not the number that they are polling


its ok
i just dont want to see you crying the day after the election "but but but the POLLS said"

deal?


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 26, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> what conservatives?



This one ...

Palin Problem by Kathleen Parker on National Review Online



> i know THIS conservative will be PISSED if she does



As you should.

The only thing worse than having Sarah Palin on your ticket is kicking Sarah Palin off your ticket.


----------



## Article 15 (Sep 26, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> but not the number that they are polling
> 
> 
> its ok
> ...



Deal, homey!


----------



## AllieBaba (Sep 26, 2008)

Article 15 said:


> I beg to differ ...
> 
> Conservatives are starting to call for her to step down ...
> 
> She's the gift that keeps on giving ...



Nobody's calling for her to step down, and at any rate, it's not going to happen.


----------



## NOBama (Sep 26, 2008)

I think Palin panicked when it became obvious to her that Couric wasnt going to let up on the personal attack.  Its obvious (to me anyway) that Couric went into that interview with the predetermined intent of walking away with a GOTCHA moment. She simply wouldnt accept Palins answer regarding McCains record of advocating for regulations of Wall St. Yet, during the Biden interview she let his erroneous statement slide like ________ [you fill in the blank] when Biden said during his interview: "When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed. He said, 'look, here's what happened.'". As we all know, when the stock market crashed in '29, Roosevelt wasnt the President and most people didnt have a TV.

IMHO, Couric assumed the Pelosi Position when she did that and she lost any respect I had for her.


----------



## Red Dawn (Sep 26, 2008)

Do you know what kind of pussys you Cons sound like?

If she can't handle a Katie Couric interview, how the fuck is she going to play hardball with world leaders?  

Obama, McCain, and Biden have spent the last four years getting asked hardball questions by journalists, on billions of unscripted interview shows and debates.    And they don't make themselves look like idiots.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 26, 2008)

Article 15 said:


> This one ...
> 
> Palin Problem by Kathleen Parker on National Review Online
> 
> ...


and shes a fucking moron for writing that
and i told her so


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 26, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> Do you know what kind of pussys you Cons sound like?
> 
> If she can't handle a Katie Couric interview, how the fuck is she going to play hardball with world leaders?
> 
> Obama, McCain, and Biden have spent the last four years getting asked hardball questions by journalists, on billions of unscripted interview shows and debates.    And they don't make themselves look like idiots.


thats the fucking point you moron
she DID handle Couric
Couric didnt get her GOTCHA moment like she wanted
my god you obamabots are idiots


----------



## pegwinn (Sep 26, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> Do you know what kind of pussys you Cons sound like?
> 
> If she can't handle a Katie Couric interview, how the fuck is she going to play hardball with world leaders?
> 
> Obama, McCain, and Biden have spent the last four years getting asked hardball questions by journalists, on billions of unscripted interview shows and debates.    And they don't make themselves look like idiots.



Heh. Do you really believe that crap? What a maroon.

I'm not a fan of any of the four crooks. But anyone with the intelligence of a retarded stick of celery knows that the Dems and the media supporting them are still scared stiff.


----------



## NOBama (Sep 26, 2008)

Hey Collins, you Neg Rep'd me just because you didn't like my post in this thread? Did you bother to do any research on what I posted before you did that, and then commented "are u a jesus freak retard?"? If you had, you would have found that those excerpts are striaght off the CBS website. If anybody's a freak or a retard here, it's you bud.

Given that you and I have never shared a single word on this forum or any other, that I'm aware of, I say you're lower than Whale Shit. In fact I believe you need a step ladder just to get to the level of Whale Shit.

I can play that game too, assshole.


----------



## Jennifer.Bush (Sep 27, 2008)

Article 15 said:


> RCP Obama +4.0


ok let's not answer the question


and remeber obama was leading in the polls in nh, and keery was up 5 in the exit polls


----------



## Jennifer.Bush (Sep 27, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> you've got to be kidding
> 
> she handled it perfectly, better than biden
> Couric was going for the gotcha and failed to get it
> ...


ok i just seen the whole interview, and i have to agree


 my  thing is if the ONLY issue you have with her is that she answered one question rather supect then mccain did a good job. she handle that interview with ease.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 27, 2008)

Jennifer.Bush said:


> ok i just seen the whole interview, and i have to agree
> 
> 
> my  thing is if the ONLY issue you have with her is that she answered one question rather supect then mccain did a good job. she handle that interview with ease.


they think if they keep repeating it often enough that the weak minded with follow along


----------



## Jennifer.Bush (Sep 27, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> they think if they keep repeating it often enough that the weak minded with follow along


I know when I was watching it, I was expected major 
blunders and there wasn&#8217;t expect for her answer on Russia 
and after watching it i was like "are these people serious for mocking her?"
I mean the msm never seems to shock me. Even joe on msnbc was talking about her answer and I would really love to know if he saw the entire interview


----------



## newpolitics (Sep 27, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> This is as bad as that Admiral Stockdale choice Perot offered up for VP in 1992.   Dan Quayle was light years ahead of this.



That is very funny , but at the same time, extremely sad, perhaps more so than it is funny  ... wow, I just went in a circle...


----------



## GamTrak (Sep 27, 2008)

Anyone that wants that dingbat as a VP deserves to see her make a total fool out of herself at the debate on Thursday against Biden.  Yes he has made some mis-statements, but atleast he does not come off as an idiot like Palin does. 

That's IF she even shows up. 

Each interview shows just how uninformed she is regarding events and things that the average person knows.


----------



## pegwinn (Sep 27, 2008)

GamTrak said:


> Anyone that wants that dingbat as a VP deserves to see her make a total fool out of herself at the debate on Thursday against Biden.  Yes he has made some mis-statements, but atleast he does not come off as an idiot like Palin does.
> 
> That's IF she even shows up.
> 
> Each interview shows just how uninformed she is regarding events and things that the average person knows.



Since he is such an accomplished pol, the fact that he even makes a mis-statement means he's a bigger idiot. If he can't get it right by now, then his butt kicking in the primary was well earned.


----------



## MichaelCollins (Sep 27, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> they think if they keep repeating it often enough that the weak minded with follow along



IS that a tactic they got from BUSHTEAM?

Terror terror terror terror terror....be very afraid divecon ..be very afraid...scary muslims ..scary muslims...only we (multi billionaire war profiteers) can save you!  Vote for us peasants ...come on peasants..there are so many scary muslims... 

war on terror war on terror... come on peasant..vote for us.

you are unpatriotic if you dont believe us...  

LMAO .. the sheep in chief Divecon ..


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 27, 2008)

MichaelCollins said:


> IS that a tactic they got from BUSHTEAM?
> 
> Terror terror terror terror terror....be very afraid divecon ..be very afraid...scary muslims ..scary muslims...only we (multi billionaire war profiteers) can save you!  Vote for us peasants ...come on peasants..there are so many scary muslims...
> 
> ...


you are such a complete fucking moron


----------



## MichaelCollins (Sep 27, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> you are such a complete fucking moron




scary muslims..war on terror...only we can save you Divecon...commander in chief...scary muslims..wmds... fear..hate...hate...fear Divecon.

well argued son.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 27, 2008)

MichaelCollins said:


> scary muslims..war on terror...only we can save you Divecon...commander in chief...scary muslims..wmds... fear..hate...hate...fear Divecon.
> 
> well argued son.


this only further proves my point
you are a complete fucking moron


----------



## Care4all (Sep 27, 2008)

I think Sarah Palin needs to get some more experience behind her before being vice president, or second in charge....I still think she is alot smarter than people give credit...but she is just a small time, small towner...and has not been exposed to the world or the USA enough....

i think senator mccain made a mistake for our country, though it may have temporarily been good for his campaign....


----------



## HoleInTheVoid (Sep 27, 2008)

Care4all said:


> I think Sarah Palin needs to get some more experience behind her before being vice president, or second in charge....I still think she is alot smarter than people give credit...but she is just a small time, small towner...and has not been exposed to the world or the USA enough....
> 
> i think senator mccain made a mistake for our country, though it may have temporarily been good for his campaign....



McCain's #2 is more experienced than Biden's #1.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 27, 2008)

Care4all said:


> I think Sarah Palin needs to get some more experience behind her before being vice president, or second in charge....I still think she is alot smarter than people give credit...but she is just a small time, small towner...and has not been exposed to the world or the USA enough....
> 
> i think senator mccain made a mistake for our country, though it may have temporarily been good for his campaign....


he made a great choice
i thought you all wanted change?


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 27, 2008)

HoleInTheVoid said:


> McCain's #2 is more experienced than Biden's #1.


an inconvenient truth


----------



## Care4all (Sep 27, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> he made a great choice
> i thought you all wanted change?



i wanted hillary.

i disagree with his choice due to his age and her lack of experience all around, in the tumultuous times that we live in.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 27, 2008)

Care4all said:


> i wanted hillary.
> 
> i disagree with his choice due to his age and her lack of experience all around, in the tumultuous times that we live in.


Hillary wouldnt be change either


----------



## Care4all (Sep 27, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> Hillary wouldnt be change either



the word CHANGE means nothing to me????  I could care less about the word or the slogan....I realize it is some kind of inspirational word for some people but for me...the word 'change' will not factor in to my decision on who i choose for the presidential ticket...it really won't!


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 27, 2008)

Care4all said:


> the word CHANGE means nothing to me????  I could care less about the word or the slogan....I realize it is some kind of inspirational word for some people but for me...the word 'change' will not factor in to my decision on who i choose for the presidential ticket...it really won't!


me neither, change just for change sake is stupidity
if you go from the frying pan into the fire, you have CHANGE 
but its not for the better


----------



## kane3o1 (Sep 29, 2008)

NObama said:


> Excerpts from Courics interviews with Biden and Palin:
> 
> *Couric/Palin:*
> 
> ...




Well, Palin kinda owned herself by answering those questions with those RIDICULOUS answers. I would feel more comfortable with Charles Gibson or Katie Couric as VP and that is scary. At least they have some type of knowledge, well, a lot of knowledge of what they are saying. And when she didn't know what the Bush Doctrine was, that was REALLY BAD. Then she tried to play Charles Gibson for a fool by saying "In what respect Charlie?". She was trying to fish for more information on what the Bush Doctrine was but Charles Gibson didn't fall for it so he put it right back on her "What do you interpret it to be?" SHE DIDN'T FREAKIN' KNOW!!!!

You think reporters are gonna go easy on her???? She can potentially become the President of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Do you think Charles Gibson and Katie Couric would sleep well at night knowing she could potentially become president? Of course they are going to exploit her. Anyone would -_-  She's simply not ready for this position. She is an embarrassment to this country at the moment.


----------



## kane3o1 (Sep 29, 2008)

Silence said:


> actually, by that token you could throw McCain in there too since he has ZERO executive experience as well...
> 
> Let's elect Palin President since she's the ONLY one with executive experience....



lulz


----------



## kane3o1 (Sep 29, 2008)

Otter_Creek said:


> When was obama a governor? A mayor? Just that short time she's been in is more than obama can boast.
> Where did you read obama has some great foreign policy experience?
> Maybe he flew to south america and picked up some blow?



Maybe he went to Russia (you know it's located right by Alaska). You can see some parts of Russian land from certain parts of Alaska. He took a boat ride over there......>_>


----------



## pegwinn (Sep 29, 2008)

> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Silence View Post
> actually, by that token you could throw McCain in there too since he has ZERO executive experience as well...
> 
> Let's elect Palin President since she's the ONLY one with executive experience....



Actually McCains time as a Commissioned Officer and more importantly a Commanding Officer is about as executive as you can get. He out weighs the rest of the pack combined. 



Care4all said:


> I think Sarah Palin needs to get some more experience behind her before being vice president, or second in charge....I still think she is alot smarter than people give credit...but she is just a small time, small towner...and has not been exposed to the world or the USA enough....
> 
> i think senator mccain made a mistake for our country, though it may have temporarily been good for his campaign....



Corrections made as a public service 



I think Barack Obama needs to get some more experience behind him before being president ....I think he is not as smart as some people give credit...and he is just a johnny come lately Chicago pol ...and has not been exposed to the world or the USA enough....

i think the Democrats made a mistake for our country, though it may have temporarily been good for thier image....


----------



## bush lover (Sep 29, 2008)

God forbid, but should anything happen to our next president, John McCain, I would feel very secure under President Palin, because she will keep us safe, just as our President Bush has, among his other accomplishments in office.


----------



## Luissa (Sep 30, 2008)

bush lover said:


> God forbid, but should anything happen to our next president, John McCain, I would feel very secure under President Palin, because she will keep us safe, just as our President Bush has, among his other accomplishments in office.


What accomplishments! Getting us into a war under false pretences! Starting such bad programs as no child left behind!Among other things!


----------



## eots (Sep 30, 2008)

can you imagine if that old bastard died and that crazy check was running the show !
I mean corrupt NWO cabal leaders are one thing but this chick is mental...no if anything happens to him the CIA would be forced to take her out for the sake of the nation


----------



## elvis (Sep 30, 2008)

HoleInTheVoid said:


> McCain's #2 is more experienced than Biden's #1.



Thanks, Rudy.


----------



## eots (Sep 30, 2008)

experience at what being a crazy bitch...come on Alaska ...is that even a state or is it like puerto Rico...


----------



## Elyk88 (Sep 30, 2008)

eots said:


> *experience at what being a crazy bitch*...come on Alaska ...is that even a state or is it like puerto Rico...



I thought you were talking about Biden until you mentioned Alaska..


----------



## DavidS (Sep 30, 2008)

My favorite quote from the entire series of Palin interviews...

"Palin: Well, as Sen. McCain is suggesting here, also, never would our administration get out there and show our cards to terrorists, in this case, to enemies and let them know what the game plan was, not when that could ultimately adversely affect a plan to keep America secure."

Gee, we're not going to tell the terrorists what our gameplan is? Well, vote for this woman right now, right away! We're finally going to have someone in the white house who doesn't tell our enemies our game plan!!!!

Good frickin God, our economy is in the toilet and THIS is what she comes up with??


----------



## NOBama (Sep 30, 2008)

kane3o1 said:


> You think reporters are gonna go easy on her????



Apparently, you missed the entire point of my post. It&#8217;s a critique of Couric, not Palin.

That said, let&#8217;s take a closer look at Couric: Could it be that she didn&#8217;t know who the President was is &#8217;29, when she did the Biden interview? I&#8217;d say there&#8217;s a good chance that she didn&#8217;t. If that&#8217;s the case, and given that we have no proof to the contrary, should Couric even be interviewing any of the candidates in the race to the White House?

Why isn&#8217;t the press going for the &#8220;gotcha&#8221; moment with Biden, or Obama, for that matter? Neither of them has any more experience than Palin. Personally, I think Palin scares the living shit out of the Democratic Party, not because of her credentials, but because if McCain gets elected she has, in my opinion, unequaled potential to become the 45th President following a successful McCain administration. That my friend, instills far more fear in Democrats than Palin assuming office due to McCain&#8217;s death during his administration.

By the way, Pailin did answer Couric&#8217;s question then, Couric did exactly what she said she wasn&#8217;t doing: she &#8220;belabored&#8221; the point.

I don&#8217;t have a problem with the press drilling Palin to get an understanding of her knowledge. My problem is that the perss isn't drilling Biden, or Obama, with the same ferocity, which leads us back to the point of my original post: Couric didn&#8217;t bother to challenge Biden (because she didn't know?) when he didn&#8217;t know what the hell he was talking about, which is irrefutable.


----------



## Diuretic (Sep 30, 2008)

NObama said:


> Apparently, you missed the entire point of my post. It&#8217;s a critique of Couric, not Palin.
> 
> That said, let&#8217;s take a closer look at Couric: Could it be that she didn&#8217;t know who the President was is &#8217;29, when she did the Biden interview? I&#8217;d say there&#8217;s a good chance that she didn&#8217;t. If that&#8217;s the case, and given that we have no proof to the contrary, should Couric even be interviewing any of the candidates in the race to the White House?
> 
> ...



Don't be disingenuous.  Of course you have a problem with Palin being questioned by the media.  Palin has had a bunch of soft interviews.  She blew even those.  Couric is not exactly a tough interviewer but even she managed to expose Palin.  How would Palin go outside the US where real journalists put real questions to people?  She would collapse.

You're pissed because the poster girl fell over.  Bad luck.  McCain tried a Hal Mary and he got a Jesus, Mary and Joseph in return.  McCain has failed, Palin has failed and the GOP has failed.  But they failed because of their total incompetence and not because of Katie Couric.


----------



## newpolitics (Sep 30, 2008)

NObama said:


> Apparently, you missed the entire point of my post. Its a critique of Couric, not Palin.
> 
> That said, lets take a closer look at Couric: Could it be that she didnt know who the President was is 29, when she did the Biden interview? Id say theres a good chance that she didnt. If thats the case, and given that we have no proof to the contrary, should Couric even be interviewing any of the candidates in the race to the White House?
> 
> ...



Obama has been in the spotlight for a while.  The public know him, and are familiar with his name and his presence.  He has talked to the press MANY times, and has been interviewed many times, not to mention, withstood a debate against a man who is supposed to be an expert on foreign policy, and completely stood his ground.  The issue here is competence, and Obama has CLEARLY showed he is intellectually capable enough to handle the information necessary to negotiate his current job as Senator, and prospective job as President (in my opinion).  

Palin is a new face and has never been put under the spotlight the way she has been recently, because of her run for the VP.  She has to be interviewed, probed, and prodded because we need to verify her credibility as a prospect for the WHITE HOUSE.  If she can't stand up to Katie Couric, how the hell is she going to stand-up to Putin, or anyone in the White House? 

C'mon... Don't act like this is a conspiracy.  Who the hell cares if Couric didn't know who the president was in '29?  She is the interviewer, not the interviewee.  She is not the one who is going to be in control, possibly, over the most powerful nation on Earth.  Her job is to ask questions, and let the viewer decide.  This kind of arguement that you are trying to make NoObama, really pisses me off, and conservatives ALWAYS pull this.  I find it much like complaining.  You're VP pick is getting treated "unfairly."  Too bad.  Let's stick to the facts, and clearly Palin doesn't have much command over the facts she needs to know.


----------



## MichaelCollins (Sep 30, 2008)

newpolitics said:


> Obama has been in the spotlight for a while.  The public know him, and are familiar with his name and his presence.  He has talked to the press MANY times, and has been interviewed many times, not to mention, withstood a debate against a man who is supposed to be an expert on foreign policy, and completely stood his ground.  The issue here is competence, and Obama has CLEARLY showed he is intellectually capable enough to handle the information necessary to negotiate his current job as Senator, and prospective job as President (in my opinion).
> 
> Palin is a new face and has never been put under the spotlight the way she has been recently, because of her run for the VP.  She has to be interviewed, probed, and prodded because we need to verify her credibility as a prospect for the WHITE HOUSE.  If she can't stand up to Katie Couric, how the hell is she going to stand-up to Putin, or anyone in the White House?
> 
> C'mon... Don't act like this is a conspiracy.  Who the hell cares if Couric didn't know who the president was in '29?  She is the interviewer, not the interviewee.  She is not the one who is going to be in control, possibly, over the most powerful nation on Earth.  Her job is to ask questions, and let the viewer decide.  This kind of arguement that you are trying to make NoObama, really pisses me off, and conservatives ALWAYS pull this.  I find it much like complaining.  You're VP pick is getting treated "unfairly."  Too bad.  Let's stick to the facts, and clearly Palin doesn't have much command over the facts she needs to know.





McCain ..an expert on Foreign Policy.... LMAO.

Every foreign leader would laugh the elderly terrorist supporting midget out of the room.  The man is as retarded as Bush...  Foreign Policy expert ...


----------



## dilloduck (Sep 30, 2008)

MichaelCollins said:


> McCain ..an expert on Foreign Policy.... LMAO.
> 
> Every foreign leader would laugh the elderly terrorist supporting midget out of the room.  The man is as retarded as Bush...  Foreign Policy expert ...



Hey Limey----look we got pagans !!


----------



## newpolitics (Sep 30, 2008)

MichaelCollins said:


> McCain ..an expert on Foreign Policy.... LMAO.
> 
> Every foreign leader would laugh the elderly terrorist supporting midget out of the room.  The man is as retarded as Bush...  Foreign Policy expert ...


 

I'm confused as to who exactly you are putting down here: McCain for being stupid, Obama for not losing to someone who is stupid, or Me, for... I don't know?

And what the hell does Limey, we got pagans mean?  Jesus...


----------



## kane3o1 (Sep 30, 2008)

eots said:


> can You Imagine If That Old Bastard Died And That Crazy Check Was Running The Show !
> I Mean Corrupt Nwo Cabal Leaders Are One Thing But This Chick Is Mental...no If Anything Happens To Him The Cia Would Be Forced To Take Her Out For The Sake Of The Nation



Lol


----------



## MichaelCollins (Sep 30, 2008)

newpolitics said:


> I'm confused as to who exactly you are putting down here: McCain for being stupid, Obama for not losing to someone who is stupid, or Me, for... I don't know?
> 
> And what the hell does Limey, we got pagans mean?  Jesus...




It was the poster who said that McCain is a foreign policy expert.

His imprisonment in vietnam makes him an expert....???

The man is so undiplomatic... has absolutely zero presence... and is deeply uneducated.  He has ZERO foreign policy experience...because he is retarded..and is controlled by the defence industry.


----------



## WillowTree (Sep 30, 2008)

newpolitics said:


> I'm confused as to who exactly you are putting down here: McCain for being stupid, Obama for not losing to someone who is stupid, or Me, for... I don't know?
> 
> And what the hell does Limey, we got pagans mean?  Jesus...





Michael wears a straight jacket, don't worry about it. he's  and needs his rabies shot. it's overdue.


----------



## WillowTree (Sep 30, 2008)

what's a crazy* check*?


----------



## NOBama (Sep 30, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> Don't be disingenuous.  Of course you have a problem with Palin being questioned by the media.  Palin has had a bunch of soft interviews.  She blew even those.  Couric is not exactly a tough interviewer but even she managed to expose Palin.  How would Palin go outside the US where real journalists put real questions to people?  She would collapse.
> 
> You're pissed because the poster girl fell over.  Bad luck.  McCain tried a Hal Mary and he got a Jesus, Mary and Joseph in return.  McCain has failed, Palin has failed and the GOP has failed.  But they failed because of their total incompetence and not because of Katie Couric.



You have a right to your opinion, but like I said:

"I dont have a problem with the press drilling Palin to get an understanding of her knowledge. My problem is that the press isn't drilling Biden, or Obama, with the same ferocity, which leads us back to the point of my original post: Couric didnt bother to challenge Biden (because she didn't know?) when he didnt know what the hell he was talking about, which is irrefutable."


----------



## kane3o1 (Sep 30, 2008)

NObama said:


> Could it be that she didn&#8217;t know who the President was is &#8217;29, when she did the Biden interview?



McCain doesn't even know how many homes he owns. That's way worse then not knowing who the president was in '29 in my book >_>





NObama said:


> Why isn&#8217;t the press going for the &#8220;gotcha&#8221; moment with Biden, or Obama, for that matter?



Because the press are American citizens 1st, media 2nd. They know Palin doesn't know what the hell she is talking about. Plus the media doesn't want 4 more years of the last 8 years. Remember, McCain agrees with Bush 90% of the time -_-




NObama said:


> Personally, I think Palin scares the living shit out of the Democratic Party,



She scares the crap outta me and a lot of other people because she can potentially become president of the United States of America if McCain wins the job. I'm not saying she isn't a smart woman, but it's evident this job isn't for her. She should go back to Alaska and continue doing what she was doing before McCain asked to be VP.





NObama said:


> I don&#8217;t have a problem with the press drilling Palin to get an understanding of her knowledge. My problem is that the perss isn't drilling Biden, or Obama, with the same ferocity, which leads us back to the point of my original post: Couric didn&#8217;t bother to challenge Biden (because she didn't know?) when he didn&#8217;t know what the hell he was talking about, which is irrefutable.




The reason they don't get drilled the same way she does is because they don't give back BULL$HIT answers. I'm not the most knowledgeable when it comes to politics but when I heard her replies after the questions were asked, I knew she was BS'n around. Especially with that Charles Gibson interview. She clearly tried to fish for an answer when he asked her about the Bush Doctrine. She woulda looked less stupid if she asked him what it was so she could give the best possible answer but she didn't do that. She said "In what respect Charlie?" trying to get Gibson to give her a little bit more information on what tjhe Bush Doctrine was. Plus she was avoiding the media ever sense being selected. That didn't help much either. If your VP, you wanna be on camera as much as possible trying to represent your party. 

I wish Tim Russert we're still alive   He would really expose her and he isn't biased. Not saying that Charles Gibson and Katie Couric are. She's the hockey mom from Alaska and they wanna know what she knows and what she's bout. If you fail with the media, you pretty much fail with the citizens and their votes.


----------



## NOBama (Sep 30, 2008)

Whew, I'm not even going to try sorting all that out but, I hope you feel better having said it.

I'll cut and paste this one more time:

*I don&#8217;t have a problem with the press drilling Palin to get an understanding of her knowledge. My problem is that the perss isn't drilling Biden, or Obama, with the same ferocity, which leads us back to the point of my original post: Couric didn&#8217;t bother to challenge Biden (because she didn't know?) when he didn&#8217;t know what the hell he was talking about, which is irrefutable.*


----------



## pegwinn (Sep 30, 2008)

Luissa27 said:


> What accomplishments! Getting us into a war under false pretences! Hmmmmmm In the reality I live in, we were again attacked by terrorists. This time it was on our soil and catastrophic. Smart move to take out a dictator, draw the targets there, and marginalize OBL all in a few short years. And, as a cap, the Pakistanis now understand that we will not tolerate them not taking care of their own back yard. Starting such bad programs as no child left behind!Among other things! Uh, NCLB is a law enacted by Congress. The President is limited to signing or vetoing it. Please re-read the constitution were the roles and authorities are laid out.



Please read the first blog post referenced in my signature. That way I don't have to retype it and you will get the point.


----------



## Luissa (Oct 1, 2008)

NObama said:


> Whew, I'm not even going to try sorting all that out but, I hope you feel better having said it.
> 
> I'll cut and paste this one more time:
> 
> *I dont have a problem with the press drilling Palin to get an understanding of her knowledge. My problem is that the perss isn't drilling Biden, or Obama, with the same ferocity, which leads us back to the point of my original post: Couric didnt bother to challenge Biden (because she didn't know?) when he didnt know what the hell he was talking about, which is irrefutable.*


Of course they are going to drill Palin about her knowledge she hasn't been around for this whole year or the past 25 years. No one knew about her until a month ago, and don't you think the people need to know about her. And the fact Couric doesn't know shit, BIG SURPRISE! How many times as McCain said something that was wrong an interview! People sometimes make mistakes on their answers.


----------



## N4mddissent (Oct 1, 2008)

First point I would like to make is that the Biden slip is a) not as egregious as it is being made out to be, and b) a minor mistake irrelevant to the point he was making.  Bear with me if you will.  I want to present an analogy.

Our young quarterback today showed great leadership.  When our star running back was injured, he took it upon himself to keep spirits up in the huddle and lead his team to victory.

Now, here is Biden's quote.



> When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on television and didn't just talk about the, you know, princes of greed. He said, look, here's what happened.



If you believe that this can only be interpreted as Biden thinking that Roosevelt was president at the exact moment of the crash, then you must also take the analogy above and admit that if you read it, you could only interpret it to mean that the quarterback huddled his players up at the exact moment the running back was injured.  Obviously that is not the case.  Truthfully, he could have done it the next play, or over the next few plays, or all throughout.  Similarly, the Biden comment can be interpreted differently depending on whether "when the stock market crashed" is interpreted as a specific point in time or is a generalized reference encompassing the resultant economic depression.  

As for the the TV/Radio mix-up, it is a very minor and easily understood mix-up besides being irrelevant to the point he was making.  Roosevelt did give "fireside chats" over the radio explaining to people about the economic crisis.  At the same time, memory often latches more strongly to visual images, and for me- and likely many others- it is common when thinking of Roosevelt to picture him speaking in those grainy black and white videos.  That combined with the prevalence of TV in our culture as a means of communication and the development of TV as a major source of communication, a large part of which took place while Roosevelt was in office, makes such a mistake while speaking off the cuff very understandable.  Roosevelt made his first fireside chat in 1933, and probably the best known video of him- the signing of the social security act- was filmed in 1935.  As early as 1928 live television was being broadcast locally in New York.  And by 1929 there were at least two stations broadcasting tv signals in New York.  And of course, FDR was began his term as governor of New York in 1929.  It is not inconceivable that at some point the governor of New York might have been broadcast over these signals or that he might have commented on the economic which occurred then, but there are no records so it cannot be resolved for now.  It may be the Biden was in fact correct, but since I seriously doubt that this was what he was referring to, I will consider it a mistake.  No free passes for luck.  However it made no difference to his point about leadership. Which brings me to...

My other point is that Palin's remarks are more relevant which is why there is greater scrutiny by Couric, other media, and the general public.  And they are questions suggested by the situation.  The McCain campaign has aligned itself more strongly to its base over the last year- for example on abortion and taxes- where McCain has completely reversed his stance.  I'm not judging his action, nor suggesting he is the only person to ever do that, but it does beg the question about where he stands on regulation.  He says he favors it to clean up Wall Street, but it is counter to his traditional base and all his other moves have been closer to that base.  Despite his epithet, Couric discovered that he overwhelmingly voted against regulation in his 26 years.  Throw in the fact that Palin rarely misses a chance to say that Obama is more talk than action and you're practically asking for this question to be put to you.  And it's relevant since it is part of their campaign platform, unlike whether or not Roosevelt was on TV.   If you want to equate a potential VP stating that her foreign policy experience is based on Alaska being close to Russia, having no idea about the Bush Doctrine, and getting caught being hypocritical about her and her running-mate's criticisms with a potential VP stating that Roosevelt showed leadership by explaining the depression to people over the TV instead of Roosevelt showed leadership by explaining the depression to people over the Radio, then go ahead.  But I think you are being dishonest with yourself.


----------



## Luissa (Oct 1, 2008)

N4mddissent said:


> First point I would like to make is that the Biden slip is a) not as egregious as it is being made out to be, and b) a minor mistake irrelevant to the point he was making.  Bear with me if you will.  I want to present an analogy.
> 
> Our young quarterback today showed great leadership.  When our star running back was injured, he took it upon himself to keep spirits up in the huddle and lead his team to victory.
> 
> ...


And being governor of New York at the time along with being for strong regulations, I am sure he had some input in the stock market! He never said he was President in 29' but he did fix the problem!


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 1, 2008)

Luissa27 said:


> And being governor of New York at the time along with being for strong regulations, I am sure he had some input in the stock market! He never said he was President in 29' but he did fix the problem!


so you will make excuses for Biden, but Palin is an idiot
no partisanship there


----------



## Luissa (Oct 1, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> so you will make excuses for Biden, but Palin is an idiot
> no partisanship there


Biden made a slip up! Palin has no experience especially compared to Biden!
And I don't think is was really a slip up! I bet Biden knows there were shots fired during the Cold War especially since he was in the Senate at the end of the War! Biden is on Foreign Relations while Palin thinks that just because Russia is close by that means she has Foreign Relations experience.


----------



## N4mddissent (Oct 1, 2008)

Who is making excuses?  I said Biden was likely mistaken.  I said it was a question of relevance.  

Consider the effect.  Biden's mistake was one that in no way affected the substance of his point.  His point was leadership and how it requires communication with the public rather than rhetoric.  The medium of that communication- right or wrong does not affect that point.

However, Palin demonstrating a lack of knowledge about the dominant foreign policy established over the last 7 years or her own running mate's record on regulation while making claims about regulation in the platform is not an irrelevant mistake while making a point that is otherwise sound, it becomes a point in and of itself.  

And her comment about Russia was just an obvious attempt to avoid giving an honest answer about her lack of foreign policy experience.  An answer which I think America would have accepted far more readily than her ham-handed attempt to create a smokescreen over the fact.

Do you think Biden was attempting to deceive Americans about the fact that it was really radio Roosevelt used?  Was he trying to cover up the fact that Roosevelt gave fireside chats on the Radio? In the end does it matter if Biden knows whether fireside chats were on the radio instead of TV?  Does it matter if Palin knows about major foreign policy issues?  Does it matter if the record of the McCain-Palin ticket shows discrepancies with their platform?   

There is a fundamental difference and if you can't see it, then you my friend have intentionally blinded yourself.  I hope you will do a little self-reflection based on the series of questions I listed above.  

P.S.  Also wanted to mention that Biden not knowing what the hell he was talking back cannot be properly labeled as irrefutable.  The fact that he said TV when it is almost certain that the speeches given were on radio is irrefutable, but that is far different than not knowing what the hell he is talking about. 

When Bush was speaking to the Japanese Diet a few years back and misspoke saying: Japan and the US have be good friends and close allies for a century and a half,
I thought to myself, except for that whole dropping two nuclear weapons on major cities thing in the middle of a bloody war.  Then I felt a bit embarrassed as an American citizen, laughed it off and moved on, realizing that it was a simple mistake and that he obviously (or perhaps hopefully) meant half a century rather than a century and a half.  Everyone misspeaks occasionally.  I, myself, was talking about this very issue to someone a few days ago and said Charlie Rose rather than Charlie Gibson.  Just a slip while speaking.  Two television personalities who conduct interviews.  Easy to see how my impulses could travel the wrong neural pathway there.  Corrected myself and moved on.  It certainly didn't mean I didn't know what the hell I was talking about.

Palin's difficulties are not of this variety.  There is not a misspoken answer to be concerned about- there is a lack of an answer or an answer that is ridiculous in its totality.  Can anyone here actually, honestly, and factually defend her proximity to Russia = Foreign Policy remark?  Can someone tell me which part of that is the misspoken part and then tell me what she really meant, as I have done with Biden's?


----------



## N4mddissent (Oct 1, 2008)

And by the way, I never said Palin was an idiot.  I made no comment on her competence at all.  I merely presented a case that her responses receive more scrutiny than Biden's because they are more relevant to actual campaign issues.  Please do not put words in my mouth when they are not anywhere implied in what I write.  The fact that I presented the mistakes Palin made while answering and you took that as an implication that she is an idiot is more a commentary on your perception than mine.


----------



## elvis (Oct 1, 2008)

Luissa27 said:


> Biden made a slip up! Palin has no experience especially compared to Biden!
> And I don't think is was really a slip up! I bet Biden knows there were shots fired during the Cold War especially since he was in the Senate at the end of the War! Biden is on Foreign Relations while Palin thinks that just because Russia is close by that means she has Foreign Relations experience.



Obama has no experience compared to McCain.  Biden says something stupid and it's a slip up. Palin says something stupid and she's a moron. Any fifth grader knows they didn't have television in 1929.


----------



## N4mddissent (Oct 1, 2008)

> Obama has no experience compared to McCain. Biden says something stupid and it's a slip up. Palin says something stupid and she's a moron. Any fifth grader knows they didn't have television in 1929.



Actually, television did exist in 1929.  I mentioned the facts in my initial post.  But obviously you're not reading them or at least not comprehending them.  And after all of that information I provided and arguments I made, the person who made the above quote just ignores the arguments and makes his sad little comment which is basically a rip-off of an earlier comment that I addressed.  And did he answer any of the questions I posed.  No.  But he did mention Obama who was not mentioned in any of my posts. 

As a rational, thinking person who usually leans progressive, when I see these kinds of comments from people on who are on MY side of most issues I get just as disgusted as I do when I see it from those on the conservative side.  Right now, I wonder if there are other conservatives here who are disgusted with that pointless response.  I don't mind someone disagreeing with me if they present their case capably and logically where we can have a discussion and perhaps learn something from each other even if we don't convince each other.  But your post just seems like you have minimal literary functionality and severe comprehension deficits.  If you can't make a good argument, there are plenty of other places where you can troll where you may feel more comfortable.  If you can make a good argument but didn't, then I respectfully ask you to not post at all if you're too lazy to post something reasonable.


----------



## mdjgirl7 (Oct 1, 2008)

notomccain said:


> i honestly  think she  is the dumbest candidate  in our  history. no wonder she  is  ducking the  media.



Again really I think that would have been Bill Clinton with I did not have sex with that woman and then he ask them to define sex and that my dear was our President. BTW also a Dem


----------



## mdjgirl7 (Oct 1, 2008)

kane3o1 said:


> McCain doesn't even know how many homes he owns. That's way worse then not knowing who the president was in '29 in my book >_>
> 
> Huh you know what I think? I think I believe it was the men that have done a suck job at running this country. I don't think Sarah could do much worse do you?
> 
> ...



Huh you know what I think? I think I believe it was the men that have done a suck job at running this country. I don't think Sarah could do much worse do you? 

It is not like they just pulled her out of her home while she has been baby sitting and home making. She is the governor of Alaska which is funny since their are more men then women in Alaska. Sooo I don't think Mrs Palin is as dumb as the media would like to paint her. So she may not interview good that does not make her stupid. Sarah does have more executive experience then Obama oh wait she is not running for president now is she. Biden has more experience then Obama oh wait he is not running for president either. 

Soo that means lots of us want to give the job of being our President to the person who has the least amount of experience out of all the candidates that are running for president and vice president. Some how this makes sense to so many go figure. 


Take a peak at this you might be interested to see how our military feels about

 Mr Obama [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4fe9GlWS8]YouTube - Dear Mr. Obama[/ame]


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 1, 2008)

> Huh you know what I think? I think I believe it was the men that have done a suck job at running this country. I don't think Sarah could do much worse do you?



Tell me you're not serious.


----------



## Care4all (Oct 1, 2008)

mdjgirl7 said:


> Huh you know what I think? I think I believe it was the men that have done a suck job at running this country. I don't think Sarah could do much worse do you?
> 
> It is not like they just pulled her out of her home while she has been baby sitting and home making. She is the governor of Alaska which is funny since their are more men then women in Alaska. Sooo I don't think Mrs Palin is as dumb as the media would like to paint her. So she may not interview good that does not make her stupid. Sarah does have more executive experience then Obama oh wait she is not running for president now is she. Biden has more experience then Obama oh wait he is not running for president either.
> 
> ...



YES, she can do much much worse....she is not ready to hold the position of vp....

if you were talking about Hillary, then maybe you would have a point, but Sarah is not even in the ballpark compared to her and she just is not ready, yet, to be vice president....which sarah has made very clear to most all of us....

yes, there was hope when she was first nominated, but her inexperience has been exposed thru time and this is not the day and age where we can take a CHANCE that she is a good study and will learn quickly....

she needs to get some more world experience under her belt and more executive experience with being governor for longer than a year and a half...

Care


----------



## mdjgirl7 (Oct 1, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> Tell me you're not serious.



Considering we are about to be 700 billion dollars in debt what do u think? 

Think it through Palin is the governor of Alaska she was the mayor before that. Considering Alaska is majority men how stupid can she be? The media has jumped up and down on her neck since her named as McCain's VP. Could anyone of us stand up to their scrutiny? I doubt it the media can make anyone look like an idiot. 

Example Bill Clinton I did not have sex with woman. Then he asked them to define sex. How big of a fool was he? And he was our president. 

Everybody is talking about Palin like she is running for president which is not true and yes I am aware of the fact she could be if something were to happen to McCain. We could also end up with Biden and he thinks it would be patriotic to raise our taxes. 

My point is none of these people got to be where they are because they are stupid. My point is pick your poison. 

To make a obvious point the men got us in a war. The men are about to put us 700 billion dollars debt. The men on wall street stole us blind so a woman in office seriously you think she could make a bigger mess?


----------



## mdjgirl7 (Oct 1, 2008)

Care4all said:


> YES, she can do much much worse....she is not ready to hold the position of vp....
> 
> if you were talking about Hillary, then maybe you would have a point, but Sarah is not even in the ballpark compared to her and she just is not ready, yet, to be vice president....which sarah has made very clear to most all of us....
> 
> ...




We could say the very exact same thing about Obama now couldn't we.


----------



## Care4all (Oct 1, 2008)

mdjgirl7 said:


> We could say the very exact same thing about Obama now couldn't we.



no, not really....his 4 years in the usa senate, his world travels and meetings with leaders and his time spent in the illinois senate gives him a SLIGHTLY BETTER mark than her when it comes to experience...he also handles himself MUCH BETTER than she does....she is coming off as an airhead, with her recent interviews...this does not mean she can not overcome this in 4 years, but she is not ready now....

And i am no obamaite and just hate it when i have to defend him, but he is more experienced than she is....no question in my mind.


----------



## mdjgirl7 (Oct 1, 2008)

Care4all said:


> no, not really....his 4 years in the usa senate, his world travels and meetings with leaders and his time spent in the illinois senate gives him a SLIGHTLY BETTER mark than her when it comes to experience...he also handles himself MUCH BETTER than she does....she is coming off as an airhead, with her recent interviews...this does not mean she can not overcome this in 4 years, but she is not ready now....
> 
> And i am no obamaite and just hate it when i have to defend him, but he is more experienced than she is....no question in my mind.



Slightly better is key. Keep in mind Obama is running for PRESIDENT not VP. Want to talk experience then let's compare him to oh I don't know McCain. Senator McCain by far no question about it has more experience then Obama. 

McCain has voted against his own party has Obama that would be a big fat NO. Has McCain applied for any pork again a big fat NO. Has Obama applied for pork hmmm yep but oh wait he suspended it after he wanted to run for president. A little wishy washy if you ask me. 

Obama's experience in foreign policy is a joke compared to McCain. Seeing that the nut who runs Iran has openly threatened us I think I would rather have McCain respond that nut job then Obama inviting him over for tea. 

Then there is Reverend Wright who is quite obviously a racist but Obama just did not know that and he was his minister for 20 years. Thank God Obama threw that nut of a minister under the bus huh. I wonder who else he will throw under the bus. 

McCain's record for integrity is when he refused to be released form a POW camp without his men and was brutally beaten for that. McCain and Palin both have more to lose then most of us in the Iraq war their own flesh and blood. 

You know I think the Dems could have done so much better if they had put Biden in as president and Obama as VP since Biden has way more experience then the Obama. 

In my opinion I would rather have a experienced warrior as president then a cowardly smooth talking inexperienced show pony like Obama as president. 

 In case you missed another post I had take a peek at this and tell me what you think 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4fe9GlWS8]YouTube - Dear Mr. Obama[/ame]


----------



## kane3o1 (Oct 1, 2008)

mdjgirl7 said:


> Considering we are about to be 700 billion dollars in debt what do u think?
> 
> Think it through Palin is the governor of Alaska she was the mayor before that. Considering Alaska is majority men how stupid can she be? The media has jumped up and down on her neck since her named as McCain's VP. Could anyone of us stand up to their scrutiny? I doubt it the media can make anyone look like an idiot.
> 
> ...



How has the media been jumping up and down her neck ever sense she was picked as John McCain's running mate when she was in hiding? Remember, she avoided the media for some time after she was picked. Plus the media didn't jump down her neck when they finally did get the opportunity to do interviews with her. They asked her questions any other VP could answer but she gave BS answers or she didn't know what the hell she was talking about so that exposed her. She self-owned herself -_-


If she can't handle Katie Couric or Charles Gibson asking her questions she should already know, then how can she handle Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-il if something we're to jump off


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 1, 2008)

Care4all said:


> no, not really....his 4 years in the usa senate, his world travels and meetings with leaders and his time spent in the illinois senate gives him a SLIGHTLY BETTER mark than her when it comes to experience...he also handles himself MUCH BETTER than she does....she is coming off as an airhead, with her recent interviews...this does not mean she can not overcome this in 4 years, but she is not ready now....
> 
> And i am no obamaite and just hate it when i have to defend him, but he is more experienced than she is....no question in my mind.


no he isnt
he doesnt even have 4 years in the senate, and for 2 of them he has been campaigning more than legislating
and he has ZERO executive experience and Palin has 2 years as governor and then there is the time she served as a mayor, that counts too
if you claim Palin has no experience it is utterly stupid because Obama has LESS


----------



## Shogun (Oct 1, 2008)

oh I know.. ANY mayor of a town with a monumental population of around 7k is probably well qualified to be a heart attack away from assuming the role of President.


----------



## Coloradomtnman (Oct 1, 2008)

I think the real issue here is judgement and intelligence.  Experience is only as good as the wisdom that comes from it.  Sarah Palin lacks wisdom, intelligence, "GOOD" experience, and many of the other qualities that would make a good VP and potentially a good president.  McCain, from my perspective, has some great qualities (many of which have disappeared since his 2000 campaign), but his judgement is not once of those qualities.  He may have a lot of experience as a polititician but that may or may not be a good thing, and his experience may not have taught him the wisdom to be a great leader.  Obama's judgement may lack in experience, but he has spent his whole life fighting for the working classes, working for community, for equal rights, for fairness and justice, and his policies are directed to benefit the majority of US citizens.  He isn't running a campaign a vanity simply because he desires that title of President of the United States.  He actually believes in what he is doing.  I believe McCain also believes in what he is doing.  McCain, however, has recently undermined his own integrity with the kind of campaign he is running, the spin he's put on Obama's policies, and his own voting record, and he's undermined his judgement by choosing Palin as his candidate.  Not to mention his adherence to Bush's policies, and his belief in the flawed and greedy ideologies of the Republican party.  Obama stands for peace, love for humanity, and community in the true sense of the word.  McCain stands for military might, business over fellowship, and the almighty dollar.  Palin, despite any misplaced belief in a liberal press (which from my liberal point of view is hardly liberal) does not interview or debate well.  The press asks questions, it's up to the candidate to have the knowledge to answer those questions honestly, skillfully, and articulately.  Don't blame the press.  If the Republicans can't stand up to a biased media, then it's no one's fault but their own.


----------



## Care4all (Oct 1, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> no he isnt
> he doesnt even have 4 years in the senate, and for 2 of them he has been campaigning more than legislating
> and he has ZERO executive experience and Palin has 2 years as governor and then there is the time she served as a mayor, that counts too
> if you claim Palin has no experience it is utterly stupid because Obama has LESS



no she isn't
she doesn't even have 2 years as governor. and for the last 2 months she's been campaigning more than governing....

(see, i can say the same as you only with her)

i just disagree with you dive....

i honestly do not believe she is seasoned enough, through her experience...

if this were kate bailey hutchinson....i'd feel differently....she would have more knowledge and experience than obama.

i don't think sarah is dumb though, i do think she would be a fairly quick study...i think she hasn't been exposed enough yet though and shows weakness...

my gut is telling me this, and yours is telling you otherwise i suppose...

and for the sake of being a tad righteous or conceited, i trust my gut instinct, (because it equals my feminine intuition), more than yours....

or any man's... because it has served me quite well, and i have witnessed it serving my mother quite well, as it has served my sister quite well, as it has served my girlfriends quite well etc....

Whereas my husband's read or gut is wrong more often, my father's gut or intuition is wrong more often when it comes to reading people too,  as well as the male friends I have had over the years....ESPECIALLY when it comes down to "reading" a woman....

So, there is not much you can say to change my gut instinct on this....we will have to agree to disagree....  

Care


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 1, 2008)

Shogun said:


> oh I know.. ANY mayor of a town with a monumental population of around 7k is probably well qualified to be a heart attack away from assuming the role of President.


its still more than Obama has
you can down play it all you want
but the top of your ticket is LESS experienced than the VP on ours


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 1, 2008)

Care4all said:


> no she isn't
> she doesn't even have 2 years as governor. and for the last 2 months she's been campaigning more than governing....
> 
> (see, i can say the same as you only with her)
> ...


it will be 2 years dec 5th
i'd say close enough
since she wasnt campaigning for most of it, unlike Obama


----------



## Coloradomtnman (Oct 1, 2008)

Care4all said:


> no she isn't
> she doesn't even have 2 years as governor. and for the last 2 months she's been campaigning more than governing....
> 
> (see, i can say the same as you only with her)
> ...


----------



## Care4all (Oct 1, 2008)

Coloradomtnman said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > no she isn't
> ...


----------



## sealybobo (Oct 1, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Tonight's interview highlights:
> 
> Palin On Foreign Policy Video - CBSNews.com



My co-worker just sent me this:

Couric: And when it comes to establishing your world view, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this to stay informed and to understand the world?

Palin: Ive read most of them, again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media.

Couric: What, specifically?

Palin: Um, all of them, any of them that have been in front of me all these years.

Couric: Can you name a few?

Palin: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news, too. Alaska isnt a foreign country, where its kind of suggested, Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C., may be thinking when you live up there in Alaska? Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America


----------



## sealybobo (Oct 1, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> no he isnt
> he doesnt even have 4 years in the senate, and for 2 of them he has been campaigning more than legislating
> and he has ZERO executive experience and Palin has 2 years as governor and then there is the time she served as a mayor, that counts too
> if you claim Palin has no experience it is utterly stupid because Obama has LESS



Clinton, like Palin, was only a Governor.  He didn't get into Senate politics.  He went straight from Governor to President.

THAT'S BECAUSE HE WAS A FUCKING ROAD SCHOLAR.  DO YOU SEE PALIN IS A JOKE!!!!  I KNOW YOU DO BUT YOU JUST WON'T ADMIT IT UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION.  I CAN'T WAIT TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION WITH YOU SHIT HEAD.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 1, 2008)

sealybobo said:


> Clinton, like Palin, was only a Governor. He didn't get into Senate politics. He went straight from Governor to President.
> 
> THAT'S BECAUSE HE WAS A FUCKING ROAD SCHOLAR. DO YOU SEE PALIN IS A JOKE!!!! I KNOW YOU DO BUT YOU JUST WON'T ADMIT IT UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION. I CAN'T WAIT TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION WITH YOU SHIT HEAD.


no fucktard, she isnt a joke
you are just too much of a fucking moron to understand it
and you will NEVER have that kind of a conversation with me
iu supported her being picked BEFORE she was picked, asshole, i know a bit more about her than you do, it is clear
she will surprise you and i was shocked that McCain actually made such a gre4at choice

and you are the one bringing Clinton into it
i dont give a shit what he was, he was still a lying asshole
and if he didnt have a GOP controled congress all those years you would have seen how bad he could have been


----------



## Coloradomtnman (Oct 1, 2008)

Care4all-

I don't agree with your definition of "gut instinct".  I would define instinct as an unthinking reaction to a situation.  Which is exactly what I don't want people to do when making a decision about who should lead this country.

I want people to think critically, to research the candidates' policies and behaviors, and to choose based on rational thought and carefully considered reasoning.

And please leave your self-proclaimed successes out of the discussion when atttempting to prove how successful your "feminine instinct" has made you.  I don't believe that your "gut instinct" can be the only reason you've had personal success.  I would say your education, research, sound choices based on careful though, and luck when taking risks are all contributing factors for the success you've had.

And to suppose that males' "gut instincts" are somehow less valid than a woman's "feminine instincts" is arrogant.  Not to insult you but that argument is undeniably sexist.  Everyone makes mistakes despite his/her gender.


----------



## Coloradomtnman (Oct 1, 2008)

Clinton lied about having sex with an intern.  He also: balanced the budget, brought our country out of debt, didn't lie about the reasons for going to war (which lead to the unnecessary deaths of thousands of innocent people), didn't give excuses for torturing people, and preserved thousands of square miles of wilderness for generations to come.  Was he really that bad?  Clinton lied but Bush is a lying asshole.


----------



## Ravi (Oct 1, 2008)

Care4all said:


> you are reading what i call intutition or gut instinct wrongly...
> 
> Where do you think gut instinct comes from....i used it all the time, and very successfully at work as well, and not just in judging people or women or men, but judging consumer confidence, judging my departments projections or future sales plans not just on numbers, though an important part, but also on the entire picture....
> 
> ...



gut instinct = subliminal logic


----------



## Care4all (Oct 1, 2008)

Coloradomtnman said:


> Care4all-
> 
> I don't agree with your definition of "gut instinct".  I would define instinct as an unthinking reaction to a situation.  Which is exactly what I don't want people to do when making a decision about who should lead this country.
> 
> ...



oh, i agree, i said in my very post where i mentioned it, that it would be perceived as conceited or self righteous or in your words arrogant....

never denied such!!!!


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 1, 2008)

Coloradomtnman said:


> Clinton lied about having sex with an intern.  He also: balanced the budget, brought our country out of debt, didn't lie about the reasons for going to war (which lead to the unnecessary deaths of thousands of innocent people), didn't give excuses for torturing people, and preserved thousands of square miles of wilderness for generations to come.  Was he really that bad?  Clinton lied but Bush is a lying asshole.


clinton didnt "balance the budget"
congress did
just as they do it when they unbalance it
its in congress constitutional duties not the executives
the executive might ask for either a balanced or unbalanced budget, but it is up to congress to do it


----------



## sealybobo (Oct 1, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> no fucktard, she isnt a joke
> you are just too much of a fucking moron to understand it
> and you will NEVER have that kind of a conversation with me
> iu supported her being picked BEFORE she was picked, asshole, i know a bit more about her than you do, it is clear
> ...



Got any pre pick posts that show you knew who she was?  

She wasn't even mentioned on the short list that I saw.  

You are so funny.


----------



## sealybobo (Oct 1, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> no fucktard, she isnt a joke
> you are just too much of a fucking moron to understand it
> and you will NEVER have that kind of a conversation with me
> iu supported her being picked BEFORE she was picked, asshole, i know a bit more about her than you do, it is clear
> ...



ABC's Jan Crawford Greenburg reports: It wasn't until Sunday night that John McCain, after meeting with his four top advisers, finally decided he could not tap independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut to be his running mate. One adviser, tasked with taking the temperature of the conservative base, had strongly made the case to McCain that it would be a disaster for the party and that the base would revolt. McCain concluded he could not go that route.

The next day, McCain studied the three men at the top of his shortlist: Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge. All had different strengths and negatives, but McCain was not satisfied. None of them had what McCain believed he needed to do -- and would have done -- with Lieberman. 

McCain didn't pick Palin, the religous right did.  

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's name was in the mix as an unconventional choice for months, but she had not been considered a front-runner. So, over the next few days, with McCain continuing to believe he needed someone who had more of a maverick streak than his other choices, lawyers reviewed her vetting information. They kept their activities from even some in McCain's most senior inner circle. 

Pawlenty had been the youthful pick advisers believed would represent a fresh direction -- and one they could use to argue the Republican VP pick was more experienced than the Democratic presidential nominee. But Pawlenty's flaw -- what cost him the VP -- was that he would not have stirred things up. He was safe, and McCain was not inclined to take the safe route.

The campaign secretly flew Palin into Dayton last night. She and McCain met privately for a couple of hours. McCain concluded she would "shake up the system" and was "a maverick," qualities he believed Lieberman would have brought to the ticket. But she also would appeal to conservatives -- which Lieberman most certainly would not have done. 

After their meeting, McCain concluded he was comfortable with his choice. He notified Pawlenty this morning that he was going in a different direction.

Why do you think Palin is a better pick than Pawlenty?


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 1, 2008)

sealybobo said:


> Got any pre pick posts that show you knew who she was?
> 
> She wasn't even mentioned on the short list that I saw.
> 
> You are so funny.


not on this forum, but we cant post to others
its against the rules
and yes, its been over a year that i have known about her
just because you are a political moron, don't assume everyone else is


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 1, 2008)

sealybobo said:


> ABC's Jan Crawford Greenburg reports: It wasn't until Sunday night that John McCain, after meeting with his four top advisers, finally decided he could not tap independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut to be his running mate. One adviser, tasked with taking the temperature of the conservative base, had strongly made the case to McCain that it would be a disaster for the party and that the base would revolt. McCain concluded he could not go that route.
> 
> The next day, McCain studied the three men at the top of his shortlist: Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge. All had different strengths and negatives, but McCain was not satisfied. None of them had what McCain believed he needed to do -- and would have done -- with Lieberman.
> 
> ...


because shes an actual conservative
Pawlenty would have been an ok choice, but i like Palin better


btw, please provide the link you copied that from, its against the fair use policy of this forum to do so without a link


----------



## Care4all (Oct 1, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> clinton didnt "balance the budget"
> congress did
> just as they do it when they unbalance it
> its in congress constitutional duties not the executives
> the executive might ask for either a balanced or unbalanced budget, but it is up to congress to do it


ahhhh, but the president's VETO power used is what is used to keep it in line with what the president wants...

both Reagan and Clinton vetoed spending provisions all the time...

also, clinton introduced a budget/economic plan when he first got in to office, while dems were still in the majority of which not ONE, NOT ONE republican voted for, said it would bankrupt the country and just refused to vote yes on it, but it passed and is one of the major reasons they were able to balance the budget in congress....

Clinton really did have much more of a hand in to it than most presidents, and along with the republican congress, he was able to bring his plan to balance the budget, in to fruition.

I do agree that it probably would have been more difficult for him to institute his plan to ballance the budget if the Dems had stayed in the majority, but not that much more difficult....clinton was use to bashing heads with the democrats in congress to pass things that they differed with....welfare reform for one, the Dems were livid that he compromised and then gave support to the repubs to pass it....  he was more of a Centrist than a liberal, except maybe in his social life!


----------



## sealybobo (Oct 1, 2008)

Care4all said:


> clinton was use to bashing heads with the democrats in congress to pass things that they differed with....welfare reform for one, the Dems were livid that he compromised and then gave support to the repubs to pass it....  he was more of a Centrist than a liberal, except maybe in his social life!



He signed NAFTA, Deregulations Act of the Media and Welfare.  

The one that cracks me up is the deregulating of the media thing.  That allowed republican station owners to put all Republicans on their political talk shows.  Or 3 GOP to every 1 Democrat.  

And that led to them bashing Hillary over and over and over again ever since.  So in a way, he helped to get Hillary NOT elected.  Because the GOP for sure thought they'd be running against her so they kept calling her a LIBERAL!!!  Far LEft Liberal!!!!  When she and her husband are complete moderates.


----------



## elvis (Oct 1, 2008)

N4mddissent said:


> Actually, television did exist in 1929.  I mentioned the facts in my initial post.  But obviously you're not reading them or at least not comprehending them.  And after all of that information I provided and arguments I made, the person who made the above quote just ignores the arguments and makes his sad little comment which is basically a rip-off of an earlier comment that I addressed.  And did he answer any of the questions I posed.  No.  But he did mention Obama who was not mentioned in any of my posts.
> 
> As a rational, thinking person who usually leans progressive, when I see these kinds of comments from people on who are on MY side of most issues I get just as disgusted as I do when I see it from those on the conservative side.  Right now, I wonder if there are other conservatives here who are disgusted with that pointless response.  I don't mind someone disagreeing with me if they present their case capably and logically where we can have a discussion and perhaps learn something from each other even if we don't convince each other.  But your post just seems like you have minimal literary functionality and severe comprehension deficits.  If you can't make a good argument, there are plenty of other places where you can troll where you may feel more comfortable.  If you can make a good argument but didn't, then I respectfully ask you to not post at all if you're too lazy to post something reasonable.



I apologize for not reading every single post in this 12 page thread.  My posting was not in response to yours, but someone else's.  While I appreciate your concern for my level of literacy and reading comprehension, I find your condescending tone less than pleasing.


----------



## elvis (Oct 1, 2008)

N4mddissent said:


> Actually, television did exist in 1929.  I mentioned the facts in my initial post.  But obviously you're not reading them or at least not comprehending them.  And after all of that information I provided and arguments I made, the person who made the above quote just ignores the arguments and makes his sad little comment which is basically a rip-off of an earlier comment that I addressed.  And did he answer any of the questions I posed.  No.  But he did mention Obama who was not mentioned in any of my posts.
> 
> As a rational, thinking person who usually leans progressive, when I see these kinds of comments from people on who are on MY side of most issues I get just as disgusted as I do when I see it from those on the conservative side.  Right now, I wonder if there are other conservatives here who are disgusted with that pointless response.  I don't mind someone disagreeing with me if they present their case capably and logically where we can have a discussion and perhaps learn something from each other even if we don't convince each other.  But your post just seems like you have minimal literary functionality and severe comprehension deficits.  If you can't make a good argument, there are plenty of other places where you can troll where you may feel more comfortable.  If you can make a good argument but didn't, then I respectfully ask you to not post at all if you're too lazy to post something reasonable.


Television - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Although I don't know how reliable a source wikipedia is, it says televisions have been commercially available since the late 1930's.  Because of your haste to dismiss me for not reading every post in this thread, I learned something.  I appreciate that.


----------



## N4mddissent (Oct 1, 2008)

Why is the difference in educational backgrounds not discussed?  You can argue that Palin has more "executive" experience than Obama does.  But I would like a little more specificity.  What sort of actions and duties constitute that experience?  What makes them beneficial to someone seeking the office of President or Vice President?  What actions and duties did Palin have that specifically relate to Pres/VP actions and duties and don't apply to U.S. or state Senators.

And experience, while nice, is usually paired with education while considering a person's qualifications to hold a position.  

Palin - 1 semester at Hawaii Pacific University; 2 Semesters at N. Idaho College; 2 semesters at the University of Idaho; 1- term Matanuska-Susitna College; Returned to University of Idaho for 3 semesters
Graduated B.S. in Communications and Journalism (Irony?)

McCain- U.S. Naval Academy

Barack Obama- 2 years Occidental College; 2 years Columbia University
Graduated B.A. Political Science w/ International Relations specialization;
3 years Harvard Law School (served as editor, then president of _Harvard Law Review_
Graduated Magna Cum Laude Juris Doctorate 

Joe Biden- 4 years University of Delaware
B.A. Double Major- History/Political Science; 
3-years Syracuse University Law School
Graduated with a Juris Doctorate

I think Obama has more educational qualifications than any other candidate.  Columbia and Harvard are both Ivy league.  Of course, the Naval Academy is also very prestigious, but finishing ranked 894 out of 899 tarnishes that accomplishment for McCain, especially when compared to graduating Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law.  I am sure that McCain did learn a lot of leadership there.   It is also obvious that a background in political science specializing in foreign relations (Obama at Columbia) would also be helpful to a future president.  The fact that Obama, after graduating, taught Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School also has clear relevance to someone seeking to be president.  Biden has also studied political science and law.  A degree in communications and journalism could be valuable to a president although seemingly more suited to white-house spokesman.  In addition, Palin did not demonstrate much ability to apply the communication skills she studied.

I think the education gap between Palin and Obama is far greater than the experience gap.


----------



## sealybobo (Oct 1, 2008)

N4mddissent said:


> Why is the difference in educational backgrounds not discussed?  You can argue that Palin has more "executive" experience than Obama does.  But I would like a little more specificity.  What sort of actions and duties constitute that experience?  What makes them beneficial to someone seeking the office of President or Vice President?  What actions and duties did Palin have that specifically relate to Pres/VP actions and duties and don't apply to U.S. or state Senators.
> 
> And experience, while nice, is usually paired with education while considering a person's qualifications to hold a position.
> 
> ...



McCain- U.S. Naval Academy



Ever watch Great Presidential Speeches on David Letterman?  Where he plays a great speech from a past president like Kennedy and then he plays one of Bush's speeches.

The bar for Commander and Chief are way too low.  We vote for who we'd like to drink a beer with and call smart people elitists?  It is clearly time to start voting for exceptional people, not good old boys like Bush.

And while I respect McCain, he is wrong on every issue.  He is also right on every issue too.


----------



## N4mddissent (Oct 1, 2008)

On Television



> In May 1928, General Electric launched the USs first regular television schedule using Alexandersons transmitter, broadcasting one and a half hours a week to an audience consisting of RCA lab technicians and a handful of amateurs who had bought or built their own sets. A few weeks later, Jenkins began broadcasting from Washingtons W3XK, Americas first licensed television station. His programming consisted of animated silhouettesin various scenes. By early 1928, Bairds company, Baird Television, was transmitting a daily experimental signal and was manufacturing receivers.



History Magazine August 2006 p. 27

I apologize if I was a bit harsh in my assessment.  Still, I stand by my view that such responses are pointless.  In addition, I am continually astonished that otherwise intelligent people are willing to engage in self-delusion to try and defend a poor position that Sarah Palin placed herself in.

You cannot honestly believe that Palin's non-answers and drawn out confused statements completely lacking of substance about important matters are in any way comparable to Biden's use of the word TV instead of Radio while making a point about Roosevelt's leadership.  This should be a prima facie conclusion that needs no further discussion.  

Why stretch the bounds of reasonableness and cast a shadow over one's own credibility in an attempt to defend this?  I mentioned Palin's comment about Russia's proximity to Alaska as a clumsy attempt to hide her lack of foreign policy experience.  She could have stated:
"It's true that my foreign policy experience was limited as mayor and then governor.  But many past governors like Roosevelt have gone on to become great presidents.  I am willing to work hard to understand and familiarize myself in foreign policy and fortunately Senator McCain has a deep well of experience that I can draw from."

Sure, such a statement would have had criticisms.  But any statement would.  And this would have been much more honest.  Instead of being up front and honest, she tried obfuscation and deflection and mishandled the situation.  She has no one to blame but herself.  Support her or not, it is questionable whether her response should be defended at all, and to stoop to the point of compromising one's own intellectual rigor by trying to equate it with the Biden comment is really disappointing and far more than she deserves.


----------



## Larkinn (Oct 1, 2008)

N4mddissent said:


> Why is the difference in educational backgrounds not discussed?  You can argue that Palin has more "executive" experience than Obama does.  But I would like a little more specificity.  What sort of actions and duties constitute that experience?  What makes them beneficial to someone seeking the office of President or Vice President?  What actions and duties did Palin have that specifically relate to Pres/VP actions and duties and don't apply to U.S. or state Senators.
> 
> And experience, while nice, is usually paired with education while considering a person's qualifications to hold a position.
> 
> ...



I agree, but the problem is that intellectualism has become a curse, as if knowing more is somehow bad.

Unfortunately they don't subscribe to that idea when seeing a doctor, only when picking a president, otherwise evolution might take care of that problem.


----------



## mdjgirl7 (Oct 1, 2008)

Coloradomtnman said:


> I think the real issue here is judgment and intelligence.  Experience is only as good as the wisdom that comes from it.  Sarah Palin lacks wisdom, intelligence, "GOOD" experience, and many of the other qualities that would make a good VP and potentially a good president.  McCain, from my perspective, has some great qualities (many of which have disappeared since his 2000 campaign), but his judgement is not once of those qualities.  He may have a lot of experience as a polititician but that may or may not be a good thing, and his experience may not have taught him the wisdom to be a great leader.  Obama's judgement may lack in experience, but he has spent his whole life fighting for the working classes, working for community, for equal rights, for fairness and justice, and his policies are directed to benefit the majority of US citizens.  He isn't running a campaign a vanity simply because he desires that title of President of the United States.  He actually believes in what he is doing.  I believe McCain also believes in what he is doing.  McCain, however, has recently undermined his own integrity with the kind of campaign he is running, the spin he's put on Obama's policies, and his own voting record, and he's undermined his judgement by choosing Palin as his candidate.  Not to mention his adherence to Bush's policies, and his belief in the flawed and greedy ideologies of the Republican party.  Obama stands for peace, love for humanity, and community in the true sense of the word.  McCain stands for military might, business over fellowship, and the almighty dollar.  Palin, despite any misplaced belief in a liberal press (which from my liberal point of view is hardly liberal) does not interview or debate well.  The press asks questions, it's up to the candidate to have the knowledge to answer those questions honestly, skillfully, and articulately.  Don't blame the press.  If the Republicans can't stand up to a biased media, then it's no one's fault but their own.




Sarah Palin lacks wisdom and intelligence wow really you can make such a broad judgment about her? Sounds like you know her personally which I doubt you do. I also doubt a woman could be elected mayor then governor of Alaska which is predominately male if she were as stupid as you claim.

John McCain all about the almighty dollar really? Where have you been? McCain has NEVER accepted any pork. How much did Obama ask for? Millions right but he suspended that when he started to run for president. I say he is a wimp man up own it if you asked for those ear marks claim it don't suspend it. Obama also voted to raise taxes on those who make only $42,000 then lied about it.  That is what we need a wishy washy president. One that cannot own up to his responsibilities. 

McCain has not shown he can be a leader? Again where have you been? Who has voted against their own party it sure as heck not Obama he has NEVER voted against his party but McCain has. McCain will not stumble under any party he will stand up for us. McCain will not be passing out ear marks wish I could say the same for Obama. But it might be to late this country has been baptized by the Obama Mania God help us. 

A leader huh let me see and I have said this before on this board. When McCain was offered freedom  in that POW camp he refused to leave his men behind and was brutally tortured. What more can you want out of a leader? John McCain and Sarah Palin have something more precious to lose in Iraq then most of us their own flesh and blood. 

McCain has the foreign policy experience that Obama lacks. That should be a big deal to us. That nut job that runs Iran has threatened us on more then one occasion. I don't think he wants a tea party with Obama like Obama wants either. 

Russia is not acting all warm and fuzzy towards us either. How about North Korea the world is moving on weather we want to realize it or not. This could be our end. And Obama could be the one to lead us into it. 

Obama is inexperienced
A liar
A racist check out his book and see for yourself. 
BTW Biden thinks it is patriotic to raise our taxes.


----------



## kane3o1 (Oct 1, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> no fucktard, she isnt a joke
> you are just too much of a fucking moron to understand it
> and you will NEVER have that kind of a conversation with me
> iu supported her being picked BEFORE she was picked, asshole, i know a bit more about her than you do, it is clear
> ...



You can't be serious..........
He's just playing guys, don't listen to him. And what's a "gre4at choice"?


----------



## elvis (Oct 1, 2008)

N4mddissent said:


> On Television
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Apology accepted. I would probably trust History Magazine over wikipedia,so I would say you were probably correct.

   While I thought McCain's choosing Palin was extremely reckless, I had to laugh at Obama supporters who made fun of her experience, or lack thereof. First of all, they weren't comparing apples to apples.  Palin is vying (sp?) for the Vice Presidency.  Obama is vying for the top job.  They attempt to say they are comparing apples to apples by saying that McCain is old and Palin would be a heartbeat away, but I don't think that works.  I think they should compare Obama to McCain, not Palin.      
   I think that, in your comparing resumes segment, you should include leadership experience, if you haven't already.  When I say leadership, I don't mean it in the sense of "leading by example".  I mean was the candidate actually in charge of something.  
    Being governor of a state or mayor of a city, no matter how small, involves _governing.  When it comes to experience, I think she has the advantage over Obama for sure, and possibly the other two we are discussing as well.  This doesn't mean I think she is more qualified for the job overall, for there are many other factors that go into choosing any candidate for any job or position.  But I feel that, in the generic definition of experience on a resume,  she would be more qualified. 
   As for me not posting intelligent responses, I think you have a point.  It becomes difficult not to play the "cheap-shot" game when everyone seems to be playing it.  It was a frustrating few days.  I had my cousin defending everything Obama has ever said or done, and even defending Jeremiah Wright.    
    I felt McCain won the debate the other night hands-down, and yet the country didn't think so.  When I  say I think he won, I don't mean win in the sense of one candidate being more right that the other, but rather that Obama was defending himself most of the debate.  When Obama would attack McCain, McCain would act as if Obama hadn't even said anything.  How many times did Obama say "That's not true"?  or "John is right".      
      Maybe people think Obama won because they agree with him more.  
All for now,

The King_


----------



## N4mddissent (Oct 1, 2008)

> I also doubt a woman could be elected mayor then governor of Alaska which is predominately male if she were as stupid as you claim.



Well, 43 showed the world that you don't have to be exceptionally bright to get elected to president, much less Governor of Alaska.  



> That is what we need a wishy washy president. One that cannot own up to his responsibilities.



McCain opposed the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 calling them irresponsible, but now supports making them permanent.  

_"But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe vs. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to (undergo) illegal and dangerous operations." -McCain August 1999

"I do not support Roe versus Wade. It should be overturned..." - McCain February 2008

"Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right." - McCain February 2000

May 2006- McCain gives commencement speech at Falwell's Liberty University.  Falwell stated, "He is in the process of healing the breech with evangelical groups," and had committed to support a Federal Marriage Amendment.

When the campaign finance reform bill he originally helped create in 2003 was brought up again in 2006 by the other three original authors, McCain would no longer support it.  It was speculated that he did not want to tie his hands while planning for a election run in 2008.
_

Wishy washy?  Really?  I think if nothing else, this statement by McCain himself should make you question how steadfast he is. 

When McCain faltered back and forth over the confederate flag, first opposing it-then supporting it during the SC primary- then opposing it again he responded when asked about why he changed:
"I feared that if I answered honestly, I could not win the South Carolina primary. So I chose to compromise my principles." 
I applaud him for being honest.  But when you think about this and then consider all of the other issues McCain has had a recent change of heart that happens to pander to the conservative base, it appears to be happening again.



> When McCain was offered freedom in that POW camp he refused to leave his men behind and was brutally tortured. What more can you want out of a leader?



While very brave, it was not just a choice he made.  It was against the code of military conduct for him to be released before the other prisoners. 

McCain has a lot of good qualities and I used to have a great deal of respect for him.  There are countless times when I wished he, rather than Bush had won in 2000.  But, and I am not alone in this (including some friends and family who are veterans who used to sing McCain's praises frequently), McCain seems to have lost his way, perhaps in bitterness over his defeat in 2000.  He not only compromised his principles in S. Carolina, but I think he continues to do so today.  I am disappointed, because I think he could be an inspiration, but has chosen to walk a bitter road, perhaps too long under the long shadow of Rove and the Neocons.


----------



## Luissa (Oct 1, 2008)

N4mddissent said:


> Why is the difference in educational backgrounds not discussed?  You can argue that Palin has more "executive" experience than Obama does.  But I would like a little more specificity.  What sort of actions and duties constitute that experience?  What makes them beneficial to someone seeking the office of President or Vice President?  What actions and duties did Palin have that specifically relate to Pres/VP actions and duties and don't apply to U.S. or state Senators.
> 
> And experience, while nice, is usually paired with education while considering a person's qualifications to hold a position.
> 
> ...


North Idaho is like a community college!Alittle different then Harvard.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 1, 2008)

Luissa27 said:


> North Idaho is like a community college!Alittle different then Harvard.


yeah, kinda like Occidental College


----------



## Luissa (Oct 1, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> yeah, kinda like Occidental College


North Idaho is a junior college(In north Idaho) and Occidental is a four year college, alittle different from communtiy college. Anyone can get into North Idaho! And then she went on to the Unversity Of Idaho know for it's arguilture and natural resourse department giving the fact it is in the middle of no where Idaho among the wheat fields. Have you ever been to northern Idaho? It is probably where Sarah developed her love of guns. Have you heard of randy Weaver or Ruby Ridge?


----------



## elvis (Oct 1, 2008)

Luissa27 said:


> North Idaho is like a community college!Alittle different then Harvard.



Yes, Obama went to Harvard, but Bush went to Yale.  Pedigree doesn't guarantee good performance in the White House.


----------



## Dr Grump (Oct 1, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> Yes, Obama went to Harvard, but Bush went to Yale.  Pedigree doesn't guarantee good performance in the White House.



True re Bush...absolutely..


----------



## newpolitics (Oct 1, 2008)

Coloradomtnman said:


> I think the real issue here is judgement and intelligence.  Experience is only as good as the wisdom that comes from it.  Sarah Palin lacks wisdom, intelligence, "GOOD" experience, and many of the other qualities that would make a good VP and potentially a good president.  .




EXACTLY!  People qualify 'experience' as the end-all qualification for Washington.  It's just something they use to put-down Obama, because they have nothing else.  Too bad though, that that arguement doesn't hold up, for exactly the reason you just outlined.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 1, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> Yes, Obama went to Harvard, but Bush went to Yale.  Pedigree doesn't guarantee good performance in the White House.


Bush went to both, Yale and Harvard
he got his MBA from Harvard


----------



## N4mddissent (Oct 1, 2008)

> First of all, they weren't comparing apples to apples. Palin is vying (sp?) for the Vice Presidency. Obama is vying for the top job. They attempt to say they are comparing apples to apples by saying that McCain is old and Palin would be a heartbeat away, but I don't think that works. I think they should compare Obama to McCain, not Palin.


I understand what you are saying here and I think you can cross compare and directly compare.  No reason not to consider things from all angles.  But notice what you say a short while later...


> When it comes to experience, I think she has the advantage over Obama for sure


 Which is comparing Palin to Obama.  You do go on to say the other two as well.  But that's why I have not actually entered any arguments on the basis of arguing experience.  I think experience is too loose a term.  Experience that Palin has as a Mayor or Governor- as you say, being in charge- is something only she has.  If that is how "experience is defined" then Obama and McCain are about equal in experience since neither have ever been elected to executive office at the city, state, or national level.  But if somehow McCain's senate experience counts for more, then suddenly Palin can't claim an experience advantage over Obama since their time in political office is not that far apart.  And while experience as Mayor or Governor is experience as an executive, no one can argue that there is an enormous difference between being mayor of a very small town and governor of a state with a population smaller than some large American cities is far different than being the POTUS.  Another way the issue could be framed is that the candidates are seeking the highest Federal office in the country and Palin is the only candidate with 0 experience on the Federal level.  How is she going to know what it takes to get a bill through congress?  And she would become de-facto leader of the senate as VP.  You see, it's just too easy for each person to have their own definition of the term "experience" means and adjust it to make their case.  That's why I've focused more on the concerns about Palin's comments and how they reflect on her level of expertise, knowledge, and specific experience (like negotiating and developing foreign policy).  But in my education post, I was intentionally leaving out the experience question, since there are many comments about it already and wanted to make the point that education is important as well.



> It becomes difficult not to play the "cheap-shot" game when everyone seems to be playing it. It was a frustrating few days.



Sorry it has been frustrating.  Believe me, I know.  I live in a region with an 85% + Republican/Conservative evangelical base population.  McCain signs all along the road. Have yet to see an Obama one.  But what I've found is that if you argue clearly and logically and support you statements with facts- facts based on reputable sources- you can tap into that part of the brain found in those on both sides who simply parrot talking points and attacks while never doing any research or serious consideration.  The part where there logical thinking is divided from their preconceived notions.  They won't change their minds usually.  And often they will get very angry with you.  Take satisfaction as they storm off mad, because the source of their anger, is that by exposing the information to the thinking part of their mind that undermines their notions, you have forced them to consciously subvert their own logic to maintain their notions rather than blissfully maintaining them by not thinking.  It is embarrassing to consciously admit that there is no good reason to disregard the information presented and realize you are just going to ignore it.  That embarrassment is where the anger comes from.  But they should be embarrassed.   



> Obama was defending himself most of the debate. When Obama would attack McCain, McCain would act as if Obama hadn't even said anything. How many times did Obama say "That's not true"? or "John is right".



Of course, another way it might have been perceived is that McCain rather than being constructive McCain was attacking Obama, perhaps misleadingly in some cases, and playing politics as usual.  Obama saying John is right, could be seen as a sign of his open-mindedness and willing to stand up and accept a good idea or criticism from any source and not have a knee-jerk dismissal simply because it came from the other side of the isle.  Obama and McCain have worked on legislation together before.  Obviously they agree on some things.  Did Obama not say a single thing McCain agreed with that night?  If so, did McCain just not have the decency to admit that and give credit?  And since McCain is running ads talking about Obama saying he was right (like admitting someone made a valid point is a bad thing) is he now going to consider himself as being less of a leader since he agreed with Obama's FDIC proposal in the last few days, even giving credit to Senator Obama- but carefully avoiding the words "Obama was right".

Obama is not perfect.  But with things sinking on so many fronts, I really feel we have got to get someone in office who does things differently.  If Obama is willing to say someone on the other side is right, rather than throw out a good idea or falsely condemn them- I see that as a positive.  John McCain's service earns him a place in the heart of America.  It alone does not earn him points on governing the nation in my opinion.  Sarah Palin is likable in her own way.  She earned her Miss Congeniality prize.  But being a good old down to earth hockey-mom does not earn her any points toward running the country in my opinion.  Too many people out there believe that is good-enough.  I think it is a great accomplishment that Barak Obama has achieved the first Major party presidential nomination by an African American.  But that gets him no points toward running the country in my opinion.  Joe Biden is a wonderful dad who made a lot of sacrifices to take care of his children in the face of tragedy.  But that earns him no points in my opinion.  All 4 have great stories and I'm sure are great people at heart.  They have all shown tremendous character at times.  It all comes down to competence for me.


----------



## N4mddissent (Oct 1, 2008)

> Bush went to both, Yale and Harvard
> he got his MBA from Harvard



One does not graduate magna cum laude without merit.  One does not get selected editor and then elected by your peers as president of Harvard Law Review without merit.  One does not get sought after by one of the most prestigious law schools in the nation, even offered incentives in the form of fellowship grants, to entice you to teach constitutional law without a hell of a lot of merit.  One does not get into an ivy league school based on Daddy's legacy and influence if your daddy left the country to go back to Kenya when you were 2 years old.  

We all know how Bush got accepted to Harvard and Yale.  I don't think that Obama's family influence had a lot to do with his educational experience.  And the results afterward are clearly different.


----------



## elvis (Oct 1, 2008)

N4mddissent said:


> One does not graduate magna cum laude without merit.  One does not get selected editor and then elected by your peers as president of Harvard Law Review without merit.  One does not get sought after by one of the most prestigious law schools in the nation, even offered incentives in the form of fellowship grants, to entice you to teach constitutional law without a hell of a lot of merit.  One does not get into an ivy league school based on Daddy's legacy and influence if your daddy left the country to go back to Kenya when you were 2 years old.
> 
> We all know how Bush got accepted to Harvard and Yale.  I don't think that Obama's family influence had a lot to do with his educational experience.  And the results afterward are clearly different.



I am not as impressed with his background at harvard.  I can post again later.


----------



## Luissa (Oct 1, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> Yes, Obama went to Harvard, but Bush went to Yale.  Pedigree doesn't guarantee good performance in the White House.


Like Divecon said he has is MBA, he also came from old money and his father is alumni to the college he went to. Obama worked his way up, it is alittle different. McCain went to the Naval Academy and came from a Navy family. Talk about predigree!


----------



## pegwinn (Oct 1, 2008)

Shogun said:


> oh I know.. ANY mayor of a town with a monumental population of around 7k is probably well qualified to be a heart attack away from assuming the role of President.



Any Chicago Pol without credentials can be the President as well. But we really ought to wait until he is dry behind the ears and can show a consistant voting record. Besides, you really don't think Biden is an agent of change do you? Face it. Every Palin weakness so far is reflected in Obama. Don't matter to me any though my vote will be a write in.



Coloradomtnman said:


> Clinton lied about having sex with an intern.  He also: balanced the budget, brought our country out of debt, didn't lie about the reasons for going to war (which lead to the unnecessary deaths of thousands of innocent people), didn't give excuses for torturing people, and preserved thousands of square miles of wilderness for generations to come.  Was he really that bad?  Clinton lied but Bush is a lying asshole.



I'm afraid the Clinton also alienated the military with his obvious character flaws. He balanced the budget on the backs of his service members via the draw down so we all got the opportunity to enjoy even more separation from our families. Clinton was a lying asshole as well.


----------

