View Full Version : McCain's choice - interesting turnabout
Pages :
1
2
3
4
5
[
6]
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
sapphiregirl
09-01-2008, 03:13 PM
I will say one thing, I respect Obama for jumping right in and saying family is off limits. I think he meant it too. Guess this also puts to rest the "it's her kids daughter argument".
I agree with you on that. Although, I sure do remember McCain making fun of Chelsea Clinton for her looks so it guess he doesn't have the same maturity as Obama.
sapphiregirl
09-01-2008, 03:15 PM
I want to comment about these two thoughts.
First, no parent can stop a teenager from doing anything they choose to if their mind is on it. Her 17yr being pregnant isn't an indication of her parental skills.
Secondly, the amount of oil under and off the shores of the US is unknown. It can be speculated, but until that well is drilled and drained dry and counted, no one really knows.
There could be 1.7 million barrels and there could be 112.7 trillion barrels and no one will know till it is all said and done. Some of those pockets that look huge can be tiny, and some of the small ones can produce for decades and produce MUCH more than ever expected.
When it comes to oil and to drill or not to drill, you will have a 1,000 different opinions and it's anyone's guess who's correct.
Maybe the Christian Conservative Republican Party should not object to teaching BIRTH CONTROL to teenagers. That whole Republican Party family values idea
Zia_Abq
09-01-2008, 03:21 PM
I think the family is off limits too. It's a private matter and I wish the press would leave it alone. But I live in the real world and know they won't. It's too juicy due to the connection to the republican party position on abstinence only sex ed in schools .
Also it's a shame people like McCain and Palin et all only think reproductive choices are a private matter when it comes to them yet they want to take away the right to make private decisions for the rest of us out here. More evidence of them personally being hypocrites. That is a strong argument on why it could be viewed as fair game.
sapphiregirl
09-01-2008, 03:26 PM
I think the family is off limits too. It's a private matter and I wish the press would leave it alone. But I live in the real world and know they won't. It's too juicy due to the connection to the republican party position on abstinence only sex ed in schools .
Also it's a shame people like McCain and Palin et all only think reproductive choices are a private matter when it comes to them yet they want to take away the right to make private decisions for the rest of us out here. More evidence of them personally being hypocrites. That is a strong argument on why it could be viewed as fair game.
I never thought of it like that....good point.
The media goes after politicians kids equally though...right or wrong. I remember when they went after the Bush girls in Texas for their partying. They were always hard on Chelsea Clinton for her looks and I think she is a class act. They also went after Al Gore's son for speeding under the influence. Doesn't seem to last long but the press does feed on it.
The_Oceans
09-01-2008, 03:37 PM
I don't think that the media is going to be playing by Obama's rules though, do you?
So I'm flipping between FOX News and CNN, and each of them have played the soundbite from Obama saying that family should be off limits...immediately thereafter they're both interviewing delegates about the "Palin's daughter is pregnant" situation and spending five minutes analyzing it from a political standpoint. :banghead:
My point is, if we can't use the candidates' family issues as a reflection of their shortcomings, we shouldn't turn around and use them to extol their virtues either.
Hmmph, I think I'll pay more attention to the soccer transfer window (equivalent of the "trade deadline") instead.
kitana
09-01-2008, 03:41 PM
Maybe the Christian Conservative Republican Party should not object to teaching BIRTH CONTROL to teenagers. That whole Republican Party family values idea
Why are you bitching to me about Christians?!
They ain't my peeps, rofl!
Christian does not equal republican and republican does not equal Christian.
G-Real
09-01-2008, 03:42 PM
threadjacK:
Hmmph, I think I'll pay more attention to the soccer transfer window (equivalent of the "trade deadline") instead.
any good transfers take place recently?
/threadjack
G-Real
09-01-2008, 03:43 PM
Christian does not equal republican and republican does not equal Christian.
true enought, but, the Republicans have been courting the christian vote for sometime now....
but when you think about it, besides abortion, wouldn't most of the christian be voting democrat, as that is a basis of christianity (helping others)?...
sapphiregirl
09-01-2008, 03:51 PM
true enought, but, the Republicans have been courting the christian vote for sometime now....
but when you think about it, besides abortion, wouldn't most of the christian be voting democrat, as that is a basis of christianity (helping others)?...
Right Wing Christian Conservatives are against gay marriage, gay adoptions- all things Democrats support.
Heck, the Right Wing Christian Conservatives could not even support a Hate Crimes Bill sponsored by Matthew Shephard's parents because it involved gays.
sapphiregirl
09-01-2008, 03:53 PM
Why are you bitching to me about Christians?!
They ain't my peeps, rofl!
Christian does not equal republican and republican does not equal Christian.
No offense...but you make no sense.
But hey....I'm glad they "ain't your peeps" rofl!
kitana
09-01-2008, 03:57 PM
No offense...but you make no sense.
But hey....I'm glad they "ain't your peeps" rofl!
Neither do you babe.
You keep quoting me and saying "Christian this and Christian that", and yet Christian does not apply to me in any shape form or fashion, so what gives?
kitana
09-01-2008, 04:00 PM
true enought, but, the Republicans have been courting the christian vote for sometime now....
but when you think about it, besides abortion, wouldn't most of the christian be voting democrat, as that is a basis of christianity (helping others)?...
Well, remember I am extremely biased, but *I* feel the "Christian" thing to do would be for one party to take the other party's ideas, scramble em up a bit then pass em off as their own then deny it, and dismiss the original party as false or misinformed when they protest or show a different version.
But again I am biased.
So what party is that exactly?
Anyway, neither party has it right, and they never will as long as extremism is running rampant on both sides.
Zia_Abq
09-01-2008, 04:01 PM
Christian does not equal republican and republican does not equal Christian.
I agree and all but it might be time to remind the GOP of that fact.
sapphiregirl
09-01-2008, 04:04 PM
Yep Sarah Palin is a class act when it comes to other politicians families.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_23HhsKOQQ
kitana
09-01-2008, 04:06 PM
I agree and all but it might be time to remind the GOP of that fact.
Eh, they won't listen to me; I'm just a lonely little Heebie girl.;D
Richard_Head
09-01-2008, 04:40 PM
Seems that the media is going over the Palin's with a fine tooth comb.
Here's the latest: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/01/palins-husband-has-dwi-arrest/
kitana
09-01-2008, 04:50 PM
Seems that the media is going over the Palin's with a fine tooth comb.
Here's the latest: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/01/palins-husband-has-dwi-arrest/
And Ted Kennedy did enough drugs to kill 14 horses and yet no one gave him that much grief; hell if anything it was a joke, not a hanging offense; especially from 24 yrs ago.
jester214
09-01-2008, 04:56 PM
I don't think that the media is going to be playing by Obama's rules though, do you?
Of course not, but that doesn't make it any different.
jester214
09-01-2008, 04:58 PM
I agree with you on that. Although, I sure do remember McCain making fun of Chelsea Clinton for her looks so it guess he doesn't have the same maturity as Obama.
Little bit different, since Chelsea was marching around on the campaign trail touting the qualities of her mother. She exposed herself to the media, something I'm not sure she wanted to do, but she still did it.
jester214
09-01-2008, 05:00 PM
Also it's a shame people like McCain and Palin et all only think reproductive choices are a private matter when it comes to them yet they want to take away the right to make private decisions for the rest of us out here. More evidence of them personally being hypocrites. That is a strong argument on why it could be viewed as fair game.
That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard (yet) in this thread.
sapphiregirl
09-01-2008, 05:01 PM
And Ted Kennedy did enough drugs to kill 14 horses and yet no one gave him that much grief; hell if anything it was a joke, not a hanging offense; especially from 24 yrs ago.
The media should be going over her with a fine tooth comb. She is running for Vice President of the United States. She came out of nowhere for most people and the election is in November- 2 months. It's not giving her grief.
Even if you do not like Obama - he has worked his tail off for 19+ months to make his position and taken a lot of "grief" in the process.
Lets see how she handles it
Richard_Head
09-01-2008, 05:11 PM
Of course not, but that doesn't make it any different.I'm not sure where you're going here?
kitana
09-01-2008, 05:11 PM
The media should go going over her with a fine tooth comb. She is running for Vice President of the United States. She came out of nowhere for most people and the election is in November- 2 months. It's not giving her grief.
Even if you do not like Obama - he has worked his tail off for 19+ months to make his position and taken a lot of "grief" in the process.
Lets see how she handles it
Her yes; her husband's DUI from damn near a quarter of a century ago; that's a little more than a stretch.
I wonder if they will bring up her dead great grandmother's jaywalking tickets too?::)
sapphiregirl
09-01-2008, 05:12 PM
That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard (yet) in this thread.
Actually, I think she has a great point.
Richard_Head
09-01-2008, 05:13 PM
I wonder if they will bring up her dead great grandmother's jaywalking tickets too?::)Probably.
sapphiregirl
09-01-2008, 05:13 PM
Her yes; her husband's DUI from damn near a quarter of a century ago; that's a little more than a stretch.
I wonder if they will bring up her dead great grandmother's jaywalking tickets too?::)
Nah...she's probably too sensitive and can't handle it. ::)
sapphiregirl
09-01-2008, 05:17 PM
Probably.
Well, you know you can blame McCain for a lot of it...Maybe he should not have sprung an out of nowhere candidate for Vice President 2 months before the election on the American people.
Maybe he should have had the "balls" to do it before Obama named his VP.
Of course the American public is going to want to find out everything.
sapphiregirl
09-01-2008, 05:19 PM
Little bit different, since Chelsea was marching around on the campaign trail touting the qualities of her mother. She exposed herself to the media, something I'm not sure she wanted to do, but she still did it.
Chelsea was made fun of the entire time her parents were in office
sapphiregirl
09-01-2008, 05:21 PM
And Ted Kennedy did enough drugs to kill 14 horses and yet no one gave him that much grief; hell if anything it was a joke, not a hanging offense; especially from 24 yrs ago.
I would not be too worried about. It's common knowledge Bush was a coke whore in college around Texas.
sapphiregirl
09-01-2008, 05:40 PM
For all you people defending Sarah Palin and her being under the press. This woman is in an election for the Vice President of the United States at a time when the rest of the WORLD has us under a microscope because of Iraq. We are still a country at war.
Her JOB is to be able to take over the Presidents office in a second if something happens to him.
She should be under a microscope. How responsible was McCain to spring a candidate most people have never heard of on the American people so close to the election - a candidate he has never even worked with.
Call me a "Leftie"...but some of you have left the planet
jester214
09-01-2008, 06:03 PM
Chelsea was made fun of the entire time her parents were in office
And when did McCain do this?
jester214
09-01-2008, 06:05 PM
I'm not sure where you're going here?
Nowhere. I said I respect Obama for it. You said the media wouldn't leave it alone. I said yes, but it didn't change that I respected Obama.
jester214
09-01-2008, 06:06 PM
Actually, I think she has a great point.
Big shocker there.
Roxelle
09-01-2008, 06:11 PM
Oh, don't tell me that republicans, who tried to impeach Bill Clinton over Monicagate are now crying that personal lives are off limits.
Anyway, I can only imagine a world of Sarah Palin's making. Teenage mothers everywhere and lots of drilling (and not just by her future son-in-law).
Jay Zeno
09-01-2008, 06:24 PM
Can I be so bold as to suggest that a candidate's position on abortion is more of a litmus test than any actual concern? The Supreme Court has ruled on abortion, and that has been the baseline standard since. There may be skirmishes and tests, but barring a Constitutional amendment, which ain't gonna happen, or a remade Supreme Court, which is a whole different concern, then how a candidate feels about abortion is largely irrelevant to what he or she will actually do in office.
Can I suggest the same thing about gun control? Again, the Supreme Court rules on it recently, and baseline rights of ownership apply. Like it or not.
In either case, if a candidate were to promise to make a Supreme Court Justice selection solely on abortion or solely on gun control, either way, I wouldn't vote for that candidate. Out of the thousands of possible important issues that a Justice would decide upon, the qualifications for that position should not devolve to a single issue.
I don't really care if someone's kid is knocked up. I might be disappointed in the unseemliness but want to go on to more important matters than someone getting a blowjob in the White House.
It does bother me that a (past) candidate got drunk and got someone killed, especially if he was allowed to walk off scott free (I don't think I'd be extended the same courtesy), because that's not the kind of guy I want running the country. It bothers me that a candidate wants quasi-religion on an equal footing with science in schools, because that candidate may be decide on the funding for that very thing.
I guess it's just me, but that's the kind of political and personal issues that concern me.
doc-catfish
09-01-2008, 06:42 PM
With all the childish commentary in this thread (and all over cable news), I think its time we just abandon this whole melting pot thing, erase the state lines, make new ones based on ideological preferences instead of geography, keep separate tax pools, put a heavy emphasis on local control, and start over.
Yeah, it would be an extra-constitutional thing to do, and quite possibly the end of the USA as we know it, but at least then everyone would have a homeland that caters to their political tastes and would be fully responsible for what becomes of it.
Miss_Luscious
09-01-2008, 06:44 PM
Apparently (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/members-of-frin.html), she was a member of a secessionist party. Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwvPNXYrIyI) is her addressing the party.
jester214
09-01-2008, 07:04 PM
Oh, don't tell me that republicans, who tried to impeach Bill Clinton over Monicagate are now crying that personal lives are off limits.
Anyway, I can only imagine a world of Sarah Palin's making. Teenage mothers everywhere and lots of drilling (and not just by her future son-in-law).
Actually it was BARACK OBAMA a DEMOCRAT who said family was off limit. And as to Clinton. When you become president, you really don't get a personal life.
Zia_Abq
09-01-2008, 07:26 PM
That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard (yet) in this thread.
It’s not ridiculous at all. It’s the truth. They want to outlaw Roe v Wade which ofcourse secures the right to make private reproductive choices. No Roe v Wade equals no privacy regarding reproductive choices. They are hypocrites because they want privacy for themselves yet want to take it away from the rest of the female population in this country.
Btw, are you pro choice or anti choice?
Dirty Ernie
09-01-2008, 07:59 PM
A really liberal fill=in host on the local talk radio program is conjecturing that both babies are Bristol's, and this baby will be weeks late to give additional cover for the timeframe.
Here are pics alleging to be both taken at Gov Palin's 7th month of different pregnancies. I cannot speak to the accuracy of this claim.
http://www.giftsandfreeadvice.com/free_advice/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/pp44-120x300.jpg (http://www.giftsandfreeadvice.com/free_advice/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/pp44.jpg) http://www.giftsandfreeadvice.com/free_advice/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/sp7-155x300.jpg (http://www.giftsandfreeadvice.com/free_advice/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/sp7.jpg)
sapphiregirl
09-01-2008, 08:10 PM
Oh, don't tell me that republicans, who tried to impeach Bill Clinton over Monicagate are now crying that personal lives are off limits.
Anyway, I can only imagine a world of Sarah Palin's making. Teenage mothers everywhere and lots of drilling (and not just by her future son-in-law).
You have that right.
One thing is for sure...Sarah Palin has a selfish streak...She made the choice to be a mother and I was actually turned off at the media talking about her baby with downs syndrome. But now that I know she made the choice to throw her family under the international spotlight when her daughter is dealing with a teenage pregnancy...seems pretty selfish.
I will say Republicans must love their supporters. Their supporters don't don't even give them hard questions or want Sarah Palin under a microscope. McCain could have named Kermit the Frog as his VP and they would have loved his choice.....such good Republicans....or should I say sheep.
and they complain about "lefties"
nicole84
09-01-2008, 08:12 PM
I just have to say I am really surprised no one here has mentioned the fact that the next president will almost certainly be nominating at least one supreme court justice, possibly two.
Sort of an important consideration in my mind.
I won't get into where I stand on a lot of stuff because I don't feel like arguing it on here, but I will say that most of america, including some of the folks on here, are sorely misinformed, uninformed, and just plain don't seem to get it.
Wherever you stand, please, please, please be able to support your views with real facts and thought out arguments. Don't be a sheep.
Zia_Abq
09-01-2008, 08:18 PM
Can I be so bold as to suggest that a candidate's position on abortion is more of a litmus test than any actual concern? The Supreme Court has ruled on abortion, and that has been the baseline standard since. There may be skirmishes and tests, but barring a Constitutional amendment, which ain't gonna happen, or a remade Supreme Court, which is a whole different concern, then how a candidate feels about abortion is largely irrelevant to what he or she will actually do in office I tend to think you may be correct. However for me the risk is too great to take it for granted that Roe is forever secure. And so why it may be a litmus test, I find it an important one.
Jay Zeno
09-01-2008, 08:23 PM
I understand. Let me put my thoughts in narrower perspective.
If I think a candidate is pro- or anti-abortion, that might factor into my decision, but not much, because I 99% doubt that he could do anything.
If I think a candidate is capable of starting an unnecessary war, that concerns me greatly, because he certainly could. That would have much more weight in my decision, and the problematic abortion issue is just so much noise in comparison.
sapphiregirl
09-01-2008, 08:27 PM
I just have to say I am really surprised no one here has mentioned the fact that the next president will almost certainly be nominating at least one supreme court justice, possibly two.
Sort of an important consideration in my mind.
I won't get into where I stand on a lot of stuff because I don't feel like arguing it on here, but I will say that most of america, including some of the folks on here, are sorely misinformed, uninformed, and just plain don't seem to get it.
Wherever you stand, please, please, please be able to support your views with real facts and thought out arguments. Don't be a sheep.
You have an excellent point with the Supreme Court Justices. Bravo to you.
I don't think this thread has gotten out of hand with fighting...It's a big election and there is a lot going on in the world and people are fired up.
I will say I've been impressed with some of the posts on this thread by younger people. I'm in my thirties. It's cool to see people interested in politics and standing up for it.
No matter what your view...don't be a sheep and register to vote.
sapphiregirl
09-01-2008, 08:42 PM
Now this video is cool....because I seriously think you are looking at the next President of the United States. He deserves it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kv8eiDvrHJ4
jester214
09-01-2008, 09:15 PM
It’s not ridiculous at all. It’s the truth. They want to outlaw Roe v Wade which ofcourse secures the right to make private reproductive choices. No Roe v Wade equals no privacy regarding reproductive choices. They are hypocrites because they want privacy for themselves yet want to take it away from the rest of the female population in this country.
Btw, are you pro choice or anti choice?
Yes it's ridiculous. What do you mean they want privacy for themselves? They've opened themselves up to more scrutiny than you will ever know.
This isn't the time or the place, but to be honest, I don't know. I have a lot of opinions about it, for one I think the future life of the child and the parents is something that should be considered, but is something that no one ever really does.
Also, if a fetus isn't life, then what is it? I don't know, but I don't think it's as cut and dry as either side wants to make it.
I also feel strongly that the idea of the father just being able to be cut out of the decision is wrong. I know that it would be an imperfect situation, but isn't it as much his as hers?
And not that it matters as much, but I do think that some time the option of abortion is "abused".
So, I think it's a really complex situation. I wish I had a better answer for it, but I really don't. Mainly I think Pro-Life people think to much about the rights of the fetus, and to many Pro-Choice people think too much about the right of the woman.
Jay Zeno
09-01-2008, 09:34 PM
A forlorn request that we PLEASE not turn a debate on the candidates into a debate on abortion.
sapphiregirl
09-01-2008, 11:36 PM
Well, she will be under a major microscope from now until the election.
Palin "bridge to nowhere" line angers many Alaskans
Mon Sep 1, 2008 3:44pm EDT
by Yereth Rosen
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (Reuters) - It garnered big applause in her first speech as Republican John McCain (http://www.reuters.com/news/globalcoverage/johnmccain)'s vice presidential pick, but Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's assertion that she rejected Congressional funds for the so-called "bridge to nowhere" has upset many Alaskans.
During her first speech after being named as McCain's surprise pick as a running mate, Palin said she had told Congress "'thanks but no thanks' on that bridge to nowhere."
In the city Ketchikan, the planned site of the so-called "Bridge to Nowhere," political leaders of both parties said the claim was false and a betrayal of their community, because she had supported the bridge and the earmark for it secured by Alaska's Congressional delegation during her run for governor.
The bridge, a span from the city to Gravina Island, home to only a few dozen people, secured a $223 million earmark in 2005. The pricey designation raised a furor and critics, including McCain, used the bridge as an example of wasteful federal spending on politicians' pet projects.
When she was running for governor in 2006, Palin said she was insulted by the term "bridge to nowhere," according to Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein, a Democrat, and Mike Elerding, a Republican who was Palin's campaign coordinator in the southeast Alaska city.
"People are learning that she pandered to us by saying, I'm for this' ... and then when she found it was politically advantageous for her nationally, abruptly she starts using the very term that she said was insulting," Weinstein said.
Palin's spokeswoman in Alaska was not immediately available to comment.
National fury over the bridge caused Congress to remove the earmark designation, but Alaska was still granted an equivalent amount of transportation money to be used at its own discretion.
Last year, Palin announced she was stopping state work on the controversial project, earning her admirers from earmark critics and budget hawks from around the nation. The move also thrust her into the spotlight as a reform-minded newcomer.
The state, however, never gave back any of the money that was originally earmarked for the Gravina Island bridge, said Weinstein and Elerding.
In fact, the Palin administration has spent "tens of millions of dollars" in federal funds to start building a road on Gravina Island that is supposed to link up to the yet-to-be-built bridge, Weinstein said.
"She said 'thanks but no thanks,' but they kept the money," said Elerding about her applause line.
Former state House Speaker Gail Phillips, a Republican who represented the Kenai Peninsula city of Homer, is also critical about Palin's reversal on the bridge issue.
"You don't tell a group of Alaskans you support something and then go to someplace else and say you oppose it," said Phillips, who supported Palin's opponent, Democrat Tony Knowles, in the 2006 gubernatorial race.
A press release issued by the governor on September 21, 2007 said she decided to cancel state work on the project because of rising cost estimates.
"It's clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island," Palin said in the news release. "Much of the public's attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here."
(Editing by Daisuke Wakabayashi and Sandra Maler)
minnow
09-02-2008, 12:11 AM
A few dozen threads back, I raised question on how much experience is enough, but didn't provide any answers, or opinions. Listed below is a quick summary of significant elected, or appointed posts held by 9 elected VP's of the United States since 1953.
Richard Nixon- 4yrs US Representative, 2 yrs US Senator
Lyndon Johnson- 12 yrs US Representative, 12 yrs. US Senator, including 2 yrs as Minority Leader, 6 yrs. as Majority Leader
Hubert Humphrey- 3.5 yrs Minneapolis Mayor, 15 yrs US Senator ( he served some additional yrs as US Senator after his VP term)
Spiro Agnew- 3 yrs as a County Executive, 2 yrs. as Maryland Governor
Walter Mondale- 4 yrs. MN Attorney General, 12 yrs. US Senator
George Bush (41st US President)- 4 yrs US Representative, various appointed posts including US Ambassador to UN(2 yrs), and CIA Director (1 yr). Private industry includes 10 yrs as President plus 2 yrs. as Chairman of an oil exploration company prior to running for Congress in 1966.
Dan Quayle- 4 yrs. US Representative, 8 yrs. US Senator
Al Gore- 8 yrs. US Representative, 8 yrs. US Senator
Dick Cheney- 14 mos. White House Chief of Staff, 10 yrs. US Representative, 4 yrs. Sec. of Defense. (Plus executive experience in private sector).
The 2 appointed US VP's (Gerald Ford & Nelson Rockefeller) didn't bother looking up, both had well over a decade of experience in significant elected offices.
Some US Presidents ( and Candidates for US President) have /had thinner resumes than the above named Vice Presidents. Hoping you all look over the candidates resumes between now & Nov.