View Full Version : So.... what's up with Sarah Palin?
Pages :
1
2
3
4
5
[
6]
7
8
9
10
11
Richard_Head
09-11-2008, 07:28 PM
Yep, now I see why she was being sequestered away from the press. Biden is going to eat her alive in the debate.
Optimist
09-11-2008, 07:29 PM
That said, Obama himself probably doesn't know his position on anything that isn't pre-written for him.
I am not wrong by this, sorry. I've been to his campaign office on several occasions. I can describe to you where their office is within his HQ if you'd like. I have been there several times and am good friends with a campaign mangers who traveled to about 15 states for the primaries. Not only that, I've been given security clearance onto his floor for work, thank you. Which I'm sure is more than you or Optimist can say.
He has a fact-checking department whose sole purpose is cross-checking all of his former statements, interviews, comments, etc. They work in the office NEXT TO his speech writers and they have daily briefing meetings.
I can't spend all week doing research for you. Perhaps you were on a little something when you thought you were with Obama's big team of speechwriters but there are only two.....and you had no clue who Favreau was. So again, I say you don't know what you're talking about. Further, he doesn't take policy orders from them. But I'm oh so sure you, with your make-believe clearance to get close to his team, already know this right? This is just an excercise you're indulging in for shits and giggles.
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20080828/OPINION02/808280331/1039/OPINION
[snip]
My goal was to join Obama's speechwriting team — a lofty goal for a 25-year-old with no political experience. The move was silly in retrospect but idealistic at the time.
The bittersweet part? Two twentysomethings — same age as I — got the jobs. Jon Favreau and Adam Frankel are the little-known scribes for the presidential hopeful. Ted Sorensen, President Kennedy's speechwriter, was the same age as Favreau and Frankel when they began with Obama. [snip]
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1837368,00.html
[snip]
"The hardest part about writing a speech like this is not the mechanics of it but what you want to say and how you're going to say it, the strategy of it," Cherny says. For a speech of this magnitude it's not uncommon for politicians and their staffs to work on language for months, going into double-digit drafts, according to Cherny.
Obama takes an unusually hands-on approach to his speech writing, more so than most politicians. His best writing time comes late at night when he's all alone, scribbling on yellow legal pads. He then logs these thoughts into his laptop, editing as he goes along. This is how he wrote both of his two best selling books—Dreams from My Father and The Audacity of Hope—staying up after Michelle and his two young daughters had long gone to bed, reveling in the late night quiet. For this speech Obama removed himself from the distractions at home and spent many nights in a room in the Park Hyatt Hotel in Chicago. These late-night sessions produced long, meandering texts that were then circulated to a close group of advisers, including Axelrod and Obama's speechwriter Jon Favreau—a 27-year-old wunderkind wordsmith. "When you're working with Senator Obama the main player on a speech is Senator Obama," Axelrod said. "He is the best speechwriter in the group and he knows what he wants to say and he generally says it better than anybody else would."
[snip]
So sorry to say, you didn't meet his speechwriters. If you met anyone then they were just strategists not the editors at the top that help boil it down. They don't create his policies they just help tailor the presentation of his ideas. So yeah, he does know where he stands.
sapphiregirl
09-11-2008, 07:34 PM
Yep, now I see why she was being sequestered away from the press. Biden is going to eat her alive in the debate.
Well....I did learn you could see Russia from Alaska...I did not know that.
She is so not ready for the duties of VP, especially when the whole world thinks we are a flop with Iraq. Her whole "don't blink" attitude is pathetic and it will hurt McCain. She should have "blinked" and realized she was not prepared at all.
Half the time she looked upset and the other half she looked scared...not confident or poised to lead a nation... or god forbid... speak to other nations that may hate us.
And what the heck was John McCain thinking when he picked her????????
Hello_Kitty27
09-11-2008, 07:48 PM
Yes.
By you admitting your ignorance in this department, it proves the point I made earlier. Make sure your statements are based in fact. How can you say what you said without any prior knowledge of the subject besides what you mistakenly think is the truth?
You should read up on his positions, policies, and beliefs on his website (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/) and his books “Change We Can Believe In: Barack Obama's Plan to Renew America's Promise” (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26136726/) and "The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream" (http://www.amazon.com/Audacity-Hope-Thoughts-Reclaiming-American/dp/0307237699)
I'm not attacking you so don't take it that way. I just get upset when people don't know and make assumptions based on that lack of knowledge.
Sorry, I know his voting record, but I haven't read his books. I'll admit to being ignorant on what is written in his books, which last time I checked are not generally used in elections to determine who you are voting for.
Speaking of voting records, you may want to look at it yourself, considering HE NEVER VOTES!
http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=9490
To be fair, I shouldn't say he NEVER votes, but it's not uncommon, I'll put it that way.
Zia_Abq
09-11-2008, 07:49 PM
What? I thought it was all being shown tomorrow?! I heard little clips on the news...I was interested in watching it...
ETA: In response to your A) ....don't you think that that was the best answer she could give?!
Not at all! The SMART answer would have been more along the lines of her giving it the deep thought, consideration and respect that the appointment and position deserve.
She should have said she weighed what she could bring to the White House verses what she can continue to do in Alaska. Where she would best serve her nation and ofcourse how the various choices would affect her family.
Zia_Abq
09-11-2008, 07:53 PM
I am more knowledgeable than her about these issues. Maybe he should have picked me. I have kids and a vagina too. Plus I was a teenage mom so that trumps her just being the parent of a teenage mom. LUSCIOUS FOR VP!!!
Love it!!!!
This is my favorite post on this site today :great:
Hello_Kitty27
09-11-2008, 07:54 PM
Not at all! The SMART answer would have been more along the lines of her giving it the deep thought, consideration and respect that the appointment and position deserve.
She should have said she weighed what she could bring to the White House verses what she can continue to do in Alaska. Where she would best serve her nation and ofcourse how the various choices would affect her family.
I agree with where you are coming from on this, but I still think she would have been even more attacked as weak and unprepared.
Which she very well may be....like I've said, I don't really intend to vote for for McCain/Palin.
sapphiregirl
09-11-2008, 07:58 PM
I watched the interview again. She does not look like she even wants to be sitting in that room with Gibson.
McCain's judgement is pathetic to put her on the VP spot...not just for the country but for HER. I don't think this woman has a CLUE about what she signed up for with the Big Boys in Washington and world.
Hello_Kitty27
09-11-2008, 08:11 PM
I can't spend all week doing research for you. Perhaps you were on a little something when you thought you were with Obama's big team of speechwriters but there are only two.....and you had no clue who Favreau was. So again, I say you don't know what you're talking about. Further, he doesn't take policy orders from them. But I'm oh so sure you, with your make-believe clearance to get close to his team, already know this right? This is just an excercise you're indulging in for shits and giggles.
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20080828/OPINION02/808280331/1039/OPINION
[snip]
My goal was to join Obama's speechwriting team — a lofty goal for a 25-year-old with no political experience. The move was silly in retrospect but idealistic at the time.
The bittersweet part? Two twentysomethings — same age as I — got the jobs. Jon Favreau and Adam Frankel are the little-known scribes for the presidential hopeful. Ted Sorensen, President Kennedy's speechwriter, was the same age as Favreau and Frankel when they began with Obama. [snip]
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1837368,00.html
[snip]
"The hardest part about writing a speech like this is not the mechanics of it but what you want to say and how you're going to say it, the strategy of it," Cherny says. For a speech of this magnitude it's not uncommon for politicians and their staffs to work on language for months, going into double-digit drafts, according to Cherny.
Obama takes an unusually hands-on approach to his speech writing, more so than most politicians. His best writing time comes late at night when he's all alone, scribbling on yellow legal pads. He then logs these thoughts into his laptop, editing as he goes along. This is how he wrote both of his two best selling books—Dreams from My Father and The Audacity of Hope—staying up after Michelle and his two young daughters had long gone to bed, reveling in the late night quiet. For this speech Obama removed himself from the distractions at home and spent many nights in a room in the Park Hyatt Hotel in Chicago. These late-night sessions produced long, meandering texts that were then circulated to a close group of advisers, including Axelrod and Obama's speechwriter Jon Favreau—a 27-year-old wunderkind wordsmith. "When you're working with Senator Obama the main player on a speech is Senator Obama," Axelrod said. "He is the best speechwriter in the group and he knows what he wants to say and he generally says it better than anybody else would."
[snip]
So sorry to say, you didn't meet his speechwriters. If you met anyone then they were just strategists not the editors at the top that help boil it down. They don't create his policies they just help tailor the presentation of his ideas. So yeah, he does know where he stands.
I don't read your link earlier to know Favreau. But I knew one of his writers was younger than me....most of his entire staff is in their mid-20's. I don't go around shaking people's hands and introducing myself unless I have something to gain from it. I am in sales, my time is important to me. I've been there several times, I have security clearance into his building and I've seen their offices while their all around the table doing their briefings. I really don't plan on defending what I've seen there or who I've met any further. Believe what you'd like, I personally don't care. You're nothing more than some random nobody bitching at me from a computer far, far away.
Maybe next time, I'll take pictures for you and get some autographs or something. ;)
Now if you'd like to discuss something of value, please let me know.
I still can't really figure out what you're arguing with me about. i simply stated something about various departments of people that he employs. I didn't realize it would offend you so greatly for me to say that he is nothing more than a good speach reader, essentially.
Zia_Abq
09-11-2008, 08:15 PM
like I've said, I don't really intend to vote for for McCain/Palin.
Thank God :angel:
Should I take it that you are voting for Barr? If you prefer to keep that private, that's cool too. Just curious. Anything that could sway you to vote Obama by chance?
Miss_Luscious
09-11-2008, 08:36 PM
Sorry, I know his voting record, but I haven't read his books. I'll admit to being ignorant on what is written in his books, which last time I checked are not generally used in elections to determine who you are voting for.
Speaking of voting records, you may want to look at it yourself, considering HE NEVER VOTES!
http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=9490
To be fair, I shouldn't say he NEVER votes, but it's not uncommon, I'll put it that way.
So you are sayng that what he puts IN WRITING about his stances, beliefs and plans are not important when deciding who to vote for? How? He lays it all out there so people can be informed and make informed decisions.
And you being in his offices has nothing to do with you knowing the in inner workings of his campaign. I've been inside the Pitney Bowes headquarters numerous times, I have security clearance to walk around the building and I know the vice president of the company personally. I still don't pretend to know how the CEO makes his decisions or anything like that.
I (and Optimist too I believe) am arguing with you because you stated something that was untrue and when you were confronted with facts, you said that you were in a postion to know more than us when in fact you knew less than we did both about the way his campaign works and about his positions which you said he didn't know unless he was told. You are now acting like you never said that Obama doesn't know his positions and only stated that you have seen his offices and know of his office employees.
sapphiregirl
09-11-2008, 09:25 PM
Well this wasn't too bright....especially on 9-11
Palin Links Iraq to Sept. 11 In Talk to Troops in Alaska
By Anne E. Kornblut
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, September 12, 2008; A01
FORT WAINWRIGHT, Alaska, Sept. 11 -- Gov. Sarah Palin (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Sarah+Palin?tid=informline) linked the war in Iraq with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, telling an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would "defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans."
The idea that the Iraqi government under Saddam Hussein (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Saddam+Hussein?tid=informline) helped al-Qaeda (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Al+Qaeda?tid=informline) plan the attacks on the World Trade Center (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/World+Trade+Center?tid=informline) and the Pentagon (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/The+Pentagon?tid=informline), a view once promoted by Bush administration officials, has since been rejected even by the president himself. But it is widely agreed that militants allied with al-Qaeda have taken root in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion.
"America can never go back to that false sense of security that came before September 11, 2001," she said at the deployment ceremony, which drew hundreds of military families who walked from their homes on the sprawling post to the airstrip where the service was held.
Palin's return to Alaska coincided with her first extensive interview since she became the Republican vice presidential nominee. In the interview, with ABC News (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/ABC+Inc.?tid=informline) correspondent Charles Gibson (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Charles+Gibson?tid=informline), she was confronted with questions about the U.S. relationship with Russia and her fitness for office, and she appeared to struggle when asked to define the "Bush doctrine" on foreign policy. Palin drew repeated follow-up questions from Gibson about whether she believed in the right to "anticipatory self-defense" and crossing other nations' borders to take action against threats.
"I believe that America has to exercise all options in order to stop the terrorists who are hellbent on destroying America and our allies," she said after several questions on the topic. "We have got to have all options out there on the table."
That response put her in line with a view expressed by Sen. Barack Obama (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/), now the Democratic presidential nominee, in August 2007, when he stirred controversy by saying that if he were elected president, he would be willing to attack inside Pakistan with or without approval from the Pakistani government. "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Pervez+Musharraf?tid=informline) won't act, we will," Obama said. At the time, McCain (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/John+McCain?tid=informline) called Obama's comments "naive."
Palin continued to take a hard line on national security issues when asked whether war with Russia could be necessary if Georgia were to join NATO (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/NATO?tid=informline) and Russia crossed its borders again. Palin replied, "Perhaps so."
"I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help," she said.
In the interview, Palin said "I'm ready" when asked whether she had sufficient experience to serve as vice president. She added that she did not hesitate when McCain offered her the No. 2 spot on the ticket.
"I answered yes because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can't blink, you have to be wired in a way of being so committed to the mission, the mission that we're on, reform of this country and victory in the war, you can't blink," she told Gibson.
The event Thursday, held on a barren Army post on the seventh anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, provided a powerful visual backdrop for Palin's first solo appearance after weeks of traveling alongside McCain and reading from a carefully prepared script.
McCain aides were adamant that the ceremony had not been coordinated with the campaign, and officers at the installation said the Alaska governor had agreed to attend months before she was chosen for the GOP (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/U.S.+Republican+Party?tid=informline) ticket. Palin's son Track, 19, will deploy to Iraq with his unit later this month. McCain's son Jimmy is with his Marine Corps (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/U.S.+Marine+Corps?tid=informline) unit in Iraq, but the senator from Arizona has taken pains to keep him out of the campaign spotlight.
As she has been since McCain plucked her from relative obscurity two weeks ago, Palin continues to be surrounded by senior McCain advisers even here; the senator's top strategist, Steve Schmidt (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Steve+Schmidt?tid=informline), and several others accompanied her to Alaska. The group is guiding Palin through a crash course on policy issues and is revising the campaign's original plan to send her on fundraising missions separately from McCain.
Instead, seeking to seize on the outpouring of enthusiasm for Palin, McCain advisers are "seriously considering" having McCain and Palin campaign together on the road. It would be an unusual arrangement -- running mates traditionally split up to cover as much ground as possible -- but aides believe it would help brand McCain and Palin as a single unit. It would also prevent Palin from having to contend with her own dedicated press contingent as she works to become more comfortable with an array of national and international issues. The campaign is also cognizant of the fact that McCain has consistently drawn bigger crowds since adding Palin to the ticket.
"It is under serious consideration that they will spend more time together than not, and more time together than is traditional," said a senior McCain adviser, speaking on the condition of anonymity. "They are a great duo together, from the perspective of delivering a message." The adviser added: "Sometimes these vice presidential selections, the pairings work in a magical way; they click."
Other campaign formalities have also been taken care of in recent days. Aides confirmed that Palin and her husband, Todd, have been assigned Secret Service (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/U.S.+Secret+Service?tid=informline) names: hers is Denali, after the Alaska national park and wildlife preserve that includes Mount McKinley; his is Driller, a nod to his work as an oilman on the state's North Slope.
On the Army post outside Fairbanks early Thursday afternoon, thousands of soldiers stood in formation as a low sun beamed on the chilly tarmac. One officer who said he had come to know Track Palin (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Track+Palin?tid=informline) said that the ceremony would have taken place in the same way had the governor not been tapped to run for higher office, and that her son was determined to remain as anonymous as possible.
Pvt. 1st Class Palin is being sent to Iraq with the Stryker Brigade Combat Team (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Stryker+Brigade+Combat+Team?tid=informline) of the 25th Infantry Division (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/25th+Infantry+Division?tid=informline). Palin, 19, will be deployed to northern Iraq and will be primarily tasked with protecting and helping transport the deputy commander of his unit, Lt. Col. Michael W. Smith. His position is one of dismounted infantryman.
"He wants to pave his own route in life. He wants to do his own thing," Maj. Chris Hyde said. "He doesn't want to just be known as Governor Palin's son."
Hyde said Col. Burt Thompson had arranged the deployment ceremony to coincide with the Sept. 11 anniversary as a symbol of the importance of the military. "That was intentional," Hyde said, describing the effort as a "theatrical" one but adding quickly that it had nothing to do with the Palins. "I talked to Track Palin last week, and he's still just an all-American kid," Hyde said.
The governor did not address her son by name in her remarks but spoke broadly on behalf of the troops' families. "Don't mind us -- your parents, your friends, your family -- if we allow for a few tears or if we hold you just a little closer once more before you're gone," she said. "We're going to miss you. We can't help it, we're going to miss you."
She continued: "You may not need our protection anymore. In fact, you're the ones who will now be protecting us, protecting America."
sapphiregirl
09-11-2008, 09:58 PM
.....and the reviews from her interview Part one...I have not seen a good one...This man is spot on. We need WISDOM not anger.
-----------------------
Sarah Palin’s tough-girl image a tad unsettling
By Peter Gelzinis | Friday, September 12, 2008 | http://www.bostonherald.com (http://news.bostonherald.com/) | Columnists (http://news.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/columnists/)
http://multimedia.heraldinteractive.com/images/0e1a18c0b8_palin2_09122008.jpg
Photo by AP
Sarah Strangelove.
She may not be too clear on the Bush doctrine, but the gal who can gut a moose and shoot wolves from a chopper knows that “Ya just can’t blink, Charlie,” not when you’re looking out across the Bering Strait with your finger on the nuclear trigger.
About five minutes into her maiden seance with ABC’s Charlie Gibson last night, I found myself growing nervously nostalgic for Sarah Barracuda. A week ago, she was “just your average hockey mom” from a one-horse town in the Klondike.
Now she’s making these threatening chirping noises about field-dressing Vladimir Putin if he doesn’t shape up. “We gotta keep an eye on Russia, Charlie.” You betcha, sweetheart.
Even those folks who’ve been smitten with John McCain’s girl from the north country appeared a bit freaked out by her Strangelovian views on bringing the cold war back, one more time with feeling.
This post from one jittery blogger: “The interviewer led you down that path, Palin . . . let’s avoid these answers. No leader should get onto national TV and speak about a war with Russia. Russia has the nuclear button just like we do. They are no Iraq or Iran (http://news.bostonherald.com/search/?keyword=Iran&searchSite=pubdate) or some weak country.
“By the time your nuclear (war)heads hit their mainland, their nuclear missiles will be 15 minutes away from our country. May God give wisdom to whoever the next president is, and preserve us from self-inflicted harm.”
I always had the feeling that the kind of change John McCain’s May/December arrangement was veering toward was a trip back to the future. But I didn’t think it would really go all the way back to those dark days of mutually assured destruction and diving under the school desks. What’s next . . . real-estate sharks pushing bomb-shelter condos?
And all of this gloom and doom delivered with a wink, smile and voice straight out of “Fargo,” on the one day that people paused to recall a nightmare and dare to imagine a better world.
For a moment yesterday, we caught a glimpse of what happens when life trumps politics. Gone was the partisan bile. Suddenly, it wasn’t about a Democrat and a Republican shouting from opposite ends of the red-blue divide.
There was just Barack Obama and John McCain, standing side by side in silence at the hallowed spot in lower Manhattan where nearly 3,000 of their fellow Americans perished at the start of a workday seven years ago.
Unfortunately, such moments don’t last long. Less than 90 minutes after Barack Obama, John McCain, his wife, Cindy and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg made the quarter-mile trek up the ramp from wound in the heart of New York City, ABC News issued the following blurb across the Internet ether.
“EXCLUSIVE: GOV. SARAH PALIN WARNS WAR MAY BE NECESSARY IF RUSSIA INVADES ANOTHER COUNTRY.”
It’s strange that Sarah seemed ambushed by the Bush doctrine question, considering she’s been in a kind of nonstop, lockdown tutorial with a team of George Bush’s recycled policy wonks.
Maybe they just tried to cram too much history, too many facts and figures and funny-sounding names into this hockey mom’s pretty noggin.
The other day I listened as an irate reader gave me his quick-and-dirty analysis of the world. “The world is an evil, dangerous place,” he said. “And nobody gives a (expletive, expletive) about hope. What the (expletive) is hope gonna do? Lemme tell ya something, this is a red country. And hope just doesn’t cut it here.”
Apparently, in a world like this, we don’t need wisdom. We need anger. Most of all, we need an angry frontier woman who rides onto the international stage with a shotgun slung over her shoulder, eyes that won’t blink and a finger poised on the trigger of annihilation. I feel safer already . . .
francescadubois
09-11-2008, 10:24 PM
Here is a link for the first part of her interview. Even Youtube has it named as a crash and burn......ouch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LiH_GDg-6w
Wow. That's just bad. I actually feel bad for her on a personal level, but I'm scared shitless for us...:'(
G-Real
09-12-2008, 02:24 AM
Wow. That's just bad. I actually feel bad for her on a personal level, but I'm scared shitless for us...:'(
Mebbe its just me, but, when Gibson had to explain the questions to her, it made me want to squirm.
Was she set-up, hell yes; but, this is what any news reporter worth anything does....ask the hard questions...see if the interviewee is smart enought to know they are being set-up, answer the question and spin the question back.
bem401
09-12-2008, 05:44 AM
Funny, I haven't heard the interview yet but those comments I've heard have largely been positive.
Her interview needs only to convince the conservatives that she will adhere to their ideals. People far to the left, which describes many on this board, weren't going to vote for her or find anything positive about her performance no matter what she said. Much like I can't find anything positive to say about anything related to Obama.
Richard_Head
09-12-2008, 07:17 AM
Funny, I haven't heard the interview yet but those comments I've heard have largely been positive.Let me guess, you've only listened to the Fox News or right wing radio review of the interview?
Her interview needs only to convince the conservatives that she will adhere to their ideals. People far to the left, which describes many on this board, weren't going to vote for her or find anything positive about her performance no matter what she said. Much like I can't find anything positive to say about anything related to Obama.That's really not true. She also needs to convince independents and moderates that she's ready to lead and I really don't think she did that.
Zia_Abq
09-12-2008, 08:03 AM
She also needs to convince independents and moderates that she's ready to lead and I really don't think she did that.
Exactly. I can’t imagine that anyone found it very comforting that she had to have the 'Bush Doctrine' explained to her like she was a child. It is after all one of the most controversial things that happened in his time in office and is the very basis that was used for starting the war in Iraq.
While some of our less informed voters out there may not have known it by name the people wanting to lead this nation SHOULD know such things. She had not the first fucking clue.
Miss_Luscious
09-12-2008, 09:03 AM
That's really not true. She also needs to convince independents and moderates that she's ready to lead and I really don't think she did that.
Exactly. The right-wingers are already firmly behind her and the left-wingers won't vote for her anyway. It's those moderates and independents that need the reassurance and she did not give that. I frequent another board that has liberals, conservatives and independents and no one was impressed with her answers or her knowledge.
threlayer
09-12-2008, 12:19 PM
I've watched her speeches and the latest interview. Overall I have been largely very much UNimpressed. Yeah, I know this is abnormal. But I believe I can see into her a bit beyond what she chooses to show us as her 'personality and qualifications.' Her performance at the Charlie Gibson interview I saw last night was I thought very guarded and nervous as well as non-helpful. Plus I thought her responses were about on the same order as Bush, though she can certainly express herself much better.
I think people are looking at her attractiveness and her talking ability and not seeing very much beyond that. I'm still waiting for her to hit her stride so I can try to accept her as a valid VP candidate.
bem401
09-12-2008, 01:13 PM
Maybe she wasn't sure on what the Bush Doctrine was because that was the Democrats' name for it and it h as referred to different things at different times over the years.
from the Washington Post's Dan Froomkin:
(snip)
And to be completely accurate, there have been several Bush Doctrines over the years. Another dramatic announcement, you may recall, was his declaration on Sept. 20, 2001: "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime." (Or, as he put it on Feb. 11, 2002: "You're either with us or against us; you're either evil or you're good." (snip)
sapphiregirl
09-12-2008, 01:53 PM
Maybe she wasn't sure on what the Bush Doctrine was because that was the Democrats' name for it and it h as referred to different things at different times over the years.
from the Washington Post's Dan Froomkin:
(snip)
And to be completely accurate, there have been several Bush Doctrines over the years. Another dramatic announcement, you may recall, was his declaration on Sept. 20, 2001: "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime." (Or, as he put it on Feb. 11, 2002: "You're either with us or against us; you're either evil or you're good." (snip)
Then why wasn't her response...WHICH VERSION OF THE BUSH DOCTRINE should I comment on and stated a few....we get a blank stare.
At the beginning of the interview she stated....she was ready....clearly, she has no clue.
sapphiregirl
09-12-2008, 02:46 PM
Exactly. I can’t imagine that anyone found it very comforting that she had to have the 'Bush Doctrine' explained to her like she was a child. It is after all one of the most controversial things that happened in his time in office and is the very basis that was used for starting the war in Iraq.
While some of our less informed voters out there may not have known it by name the people wanting to lead this nation SHOULD know such things. She had not the first fucking clue.
I was hoping Gibson would hold up a map and ask her to point to Iraq and Iran...tee hee.
Why was she calling him "Charlie" like they were old friends...lol
Sometimes, I think we have entered the twilight zone with this election.
bem401
09-13-2008, 10:11 AM
Then why wasn't her response...WHICH VERSION OF THE BUSH DOCTRINE should I comment on and stated a few....we get a blank stare.
At the beginning of the interview she stated....she was ready....clearly, she has no clue.
She did ask him to clarify what he meant by the Bush Doctrine, so your main problem is with the way she worded the question?
G-Real
09-13-2008, 10:18 AM
She did ask him to clarify what he meant by the Bush Doctrine, so your main problem is with the way she worded the question?
I think it is clear to see that with foreign policy she has room for improvement, but, she seems to have national policy down pretty well...though amazingly some of her stances have changes a little to fall in line with McCain.
Zia_Abq
09-13-2008, 10:24 AM
Why was she calling him "Charlie" like they were old friends...lol
If you listen a bit closer she isn’t doing it as if they were old friends. The tone is very passive aggressive. Almost like an adult trying to get dominance over a problem child. It was on more the demeaning side than that actually.
Optimist
09-13-2008, 12:06 PM
^^^^Yeah, I have to agree. It seemed odd.
sapphiregirl
09-13-2008, 12:09 PM
If you listen a bit closer she isn’t doing it as if they were old friends. The tone is very passive aggressive. Almost like an adult trying to get dominance over a problem child. It was on more the demeaning side than that actually.
I can see that.
She sure was trying to make ANOTHER cheap shot at Obama by commenting how he probably regrets not picking Hillary now. She's freakng nasty and quite frankly boring.
threlayer
09-13-2008, 12:47 PM
... The tone is very passive aggressive. Almost like an adult trying to get dominance over a problem child. It was on more the demeaning side than that actually.
That's the way she usually talks, come to think of it. And it's one of the subtle, but big, things that bother me about her.
This campaign has all four candidates with big black marks against them. I'm fairly sure we could have had a better selection (or at least a very different approach to getting votes) but I'm not sure all of whom to blame that on yet.
Color me 'unsatisfied'.
bem401
09-13-2008, 01:54 PM
I can see that.
She sure was trying to make ANOTHER cheap shot at Obama by commenting how he probably regrets not picking Hillary now. She's freakng nasty and quite frankly boring.
I wouldn't call it a cheap shot but more likely a play for those female voters who are less-than-enthusiastic supporters of Obama. Some former Hillary supporters are firmly behind Obama. Some have "jumped ship" to McCain already. And some are still on the fence.
If she's so boring, why is such a lightning-rod for the libs? And why has her ticket gotten the bump it has? To me, and to the press apparently, boring = Biden.
G-Real
09-13-2008, 02:17 PM
saw this and thought it was appropriate ;D
http://www.caglecartoons.com/images/preview/%7BF9DB86B3-8272-45EC-9FC4-52B5D67BC600%7D.gif
I've been following the election coverage through television, newspaper, radio and internet sources. I have only this to say: I'm scared. I sincerely hope the poll bump seen since the inroduction of Palin dies down. She's not ready to be a heartbeat away from the presidency. While she certainly doesn't blink, foreign policy often requires more subtlety than I believe she possesses.
G-Real
09-13-2008, 02:22 PM
I've been following the election coverage through television, newspaper, radio and internet sources. I have only this to say: I'm scared. I sincerely hope the poll bump seen since the inroduction of Palin dies down. She's not ready to be a heartbeat away from the presidency. While she certainly doesn't blink, foreign policy often requires more subtlety than I believe she possesses.
Am I the only one frightened that Palin one day may sneak-up on McCain, yell "BOOO!!", has a heart-attack, and Palin becomes the Nominee/President??
sapphiregirl
09-13-2008, 02:29 PM
I wouldn't call it a cheap shot but more likely a play for those female voters who are less-than-enthusiastic supporters of Obama. Some former Hillary supporters are firmly behind Obama. Some have "jumped ship" to McCain already. And some are still one fence.
If she's so boring, why is such a lightning-rod for the libs? And why has her ticket gotten the bump it has? To me, and to the press apparently, boring = Biden.
She is only all over the news because she is NEW....It's been an election that has gone on forever and she is the new one.
I think libs are more concerned with Mccain resorting to lies in his ads....he sure is depserate...low ball adds, thinking he needs Sarah Palin...talk about insecurity about standing on his own merit.
No one will give a flip about Sarah Plain in a month and it will get back to normal.
bem401
09-13-2008, 02:35 PM
What makes everyone think the Democrats are going to be good for foreign policy?
Obama is certainly a newbie in that regard and has already shown he doesn't quite "get it". Biden opposed the "80's build-up that won us the Cold War, he opposed supporting South Vietnam while McCain was in the prison camp, he opposed Gulf War I, and he opposed the surge which gave us whatever success we are currently seeing in Gulf War II. That's hardly a distinguished record.
If Palin were to have to replace McCain prematurely, she'd still undoubtedly be able to count on the support of all the same advisors who will be advising McCain. I'm more considered that the naive Obama will be counting on Biden, who's exhibited poor judgment time and again in the past.
sapphiregirl
09-13-2008, 02:35 PM
Am I the only one frightened that Palin one day may sneak-up on McCain, yell "BOOO!!", has a heart-attack, and Palin becomes the Nominee/President??
With the way she acts towards people....I would not be surprised if she hoped something happens to him. She sure seems big on power and being in control.
Zia_Abq
09-13-2008, 02:51 PM
I think libs are more concerned with Mccain resorting to lies in his ads....he sure is depserate...low ball adds, thinking he needs Sarah Palin...talk about insecurity about standing on his own merit.
I am most concerned about the Palin choice because it shows total lack of an intelligent decision. She is not only unprepared, lacking in necessary knowledge but she wasn't even properly vetted as far as personal and public scandals.
McCain actually thinks out of ALL the possible choices, both men and women, that SHE is the best qualified and capable of running the free world should he be unable to complete the task. That was the best he thought he could do???? That is fucking scary all right!
It shows me how well he would make decisions for other major issues and situations should he win the election. That doesn’t bode well for the wellbeing of ANYONE. Not Democrats not republicans. Not US children, not the military, not business and not any of the other people around the world affected or dependant on the US.
Having a leader that makes such rash and poor decisions is a bad thing for everyone and everything on the entire planet.
sapphiregirl
09-13-2008, 02:57 PM
I am most concerned about the Palin choice because it shows total lack of an intelligent decision. She is not only unprepared, lacking in necessary knowledge but she wasn't even properly vetted as far as personal and public scandals.
McCain actually thinks out of ALL the possible choices, both men and women, that SHE is the best qualified and capable of running the free world should he be unable to complete the task. That was the best he thought he could do???? That is fucking scary all right!
It shows me how well he would make decisions for other major issues and situations should he win the election. That doesn’t bode well for the wellbeing of ANYONE. Not Democrats not republicans. Not US children, not the military, not business and not any of the other people around the world affected or dependant on the US.
Having a leader that makes such rash and poor decisions is a bad thing for everyone and everything on the entire planet.
Very true....but it would be 2 leaders like that. She doesn't "blink" or think things through either....and she brags about it.
bem401
09-13-2008, 02:59 PM
Having a leader that makes such rash and poor decisions is a bad thing for everyone and everything on the entire planet.
I guess that's why McCain has gone from trailing to a somewhat sizeable lead - because she was a poor choice.
I took a political science course in college where i was taught : the #1 job of any candidate is to get elected and the #1 job of any incumbent is to get reelected.
McCain the candidate has apparently made better decisions than Obama the candidate thus far.
sapphiregirl
09-13-2008, 03:00 PM
Beautiful.... :propeller I knew it was only a matter of time.
Enviro Group Launches Attack Ad Against Palin
Michael M. Phillips reports on the presidential race.
An environmental group launched a graphic television ad Friday condemning Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s support for aerial wolf hunting. The ad also seeks to take the Great White North mystique out of the vice presidential candidate for voters in the Lower 48.
The ad shows unflattering photos of the Republican governor juxtaposed with footage of a hunter in a small, low-flying plane shooting a wolf, which stumbles in the snow, gnawing at the wound on his hindquarters. The camera cuts to a view of the wolf’s bloody body strapped under the plane’s wing.
“Do we really want a vice president who champions such savagery?” asks the female narrator.
Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund, a nonprofit advocacy group funded mostly by small donors, said it will run the ads for the next two weeks in Ohio’s Toledo and Dayton media markets. The group plans to run the ads in other key political markets, starting next week, according to William Lutz, the fund’s senior director.
The McCain campaign has promoted Palin’s outdoorsy image as a small-town hunting enthusiast. Her father is a locally famous hunter, with a stack of moose antlers in his yard in Wasilla, the family’s hometown. Her husband, Todd, won a grueling snowmobile race called the Iron Dog.
Palin ran for office in 2006 as an advocate of aerial bear and wolf hunting, saying it helps protect moose and caribou that locals hunt for food. “If we’re not allowed to have a scientifically based, very sensible predator control program, especially in rural Alaska, we will see a diminished population of moose and caribou – those types of game that fill Alaska’s freezers,” Palin told a local television station last September.
Soon after she took office, Palin proposed that the state provide a $150 “incentive” for aerial wolf hunters; to collect it the hunters would have to turn in the animal’s severed left forepaw. Several environmental groups immediately attacked the proposal as an illegal “bounty” and sued the state. The court agreed, shutting the program down before it started.
Later, Palin backed a bill that would have made it easier for the state Board of Game to expand aerial hunting. The legislation passed the House, but failed to clear the Senate.
“This policy is in place as a form of game management to ensure that Alaskans are able to feed their families,” said McCain-Palin spokeswoman Maria Comella.
The practice has long been controversial in Alaska. In a 1996 ballot initiative, Alaskans voted to ban predator hunting from aircraft. State law, however, allows the legislature to overturn a referendum after three years. Lawmakers did so, and voters again voted for a ban in 2000. The legislature reversed the ban again in 2003. Last month, Alaskans defeated another initiative to ban aerial hunts.
Lutz said that subsistence moose and caribou hunters aren’t the real beneficiaries of the state’s practice of killing natural predators. Most of the moose and caribou, he said, are taken by urban or out-of-state hunters who don’t need the game for survival.
In most other states, game wardens use aircraft when going after sick or rogue animals, such as those who have attacked people. Such game management is “perfectly legitimate,” Lutz said.
Alaska’s aerial kills, he said, are really sport hunting in the guise of game management. “What Alaska is doing is licensing private citizens, private hunters, flying private planes flown by private pilots to go out in the bush and do this,” he said. “And then they get to sell the skins of the animals they kill, which is sport hunting by almost any definition.”
Aerial hunters killed approximately 124 wolves last winter, and a total of almost 800 over the last five winters. The hunts usually take place when there’s snow on the ground, rendering the wolves more visible from the air. There are anywhere from 7,000 to 12,000 gray wolves in Alaska, according to Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund. The animals are not considered threatened, although they are in the northern Rockies in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming.
bem401
09-13-2008, 03:01 PM
Very true....but it would be 2 leaders like that. She doesn't "blink" or think things through either....and she brags about it.
She said she didn't "blink" when she was asked to serve her country and wouldn't "blink" in executing her duties as VP..
sapphiregirl
09-13-2008, 03:03 PM
She said she didn't "blink" when she was asked to serve her country and wouldn't "blink" in executing her duties as VP..
Yep...she sure did....Absolutely no thought into decisions whatsoever!
sapphiregirl
09-13-2008, 03:09 PM
It's about time the American public sees ads like these :drum:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQobIUE1zTU
Eric Stoner
09-13-2008, 03:14 PM
Beautiful.... :propeller I knew it was only a matter of time.
Enviro Group Launches Attack Ad Against Palin
Michael M. Phillips reports on the presidential race.
An environmental group launched a graphic television ad Friday condemning Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s support for aerial wolf hunting. The ad also seeks to take the Great White North mystique out of the vice presidential candidate for voters in the Lower 48.
The ad shows unflattering photos of the Republican governor juxtaposed with footage of a hunter in a small, low-flying plane shooting a wolf, which stumbles in the snow, gnawing at the wound on his hindquarters. The camera cuts to a view of the wolf’s bloody body strapped under the plane’s wing.
“Do we really want a vice president who champions such savagery?” asks the female narrator.
Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund, a nonprofit advocacy group funded mostly by small donors, said it will run the ads for the next two weeks in Ohio’s Toledo and Dayton media markets. The group plans to run the ads in other key political markets, starting next week, according to William Lutz, the fund’s senior director.
The McCain campaign has promoted Palin’s outdoorsy image as a small-town hunting enthusiast. Her father is a locally famous hunter, with a stack of moose antlers in his yard in Wasilla, the family’s hometown. Her husband, Todd, won a grueling snowmobile race called the Iron Dog.
Palin ran for office in 2006 as an advocate of aerial bear and wolf hunting, saying it helps protect moose and caribou that locals hunt for food. “If we’re not allowed to have a scientifically based, very sensible predator control program, especially in rural Alaska, we will see a diminished population of moose and caribou – those types of game that fill Alaska’s freezers,” Palin told a local television station last September.
Soon after she took office, Palin proposed that the state provide a $150 “incentive” for aerial wolf hunters; to collect it the hunters would have to turn in the animal’s severed left forepaw. Several environmental groups immediately attacked the proposal as an illegal “bounty” and sued the state. The court agreed, shutting the program down before it started.
Later, Palin backed a bill that would have made it easier for the state Board of Game to expand aerial hunting. The legislation passed the House, but failed to clear the Senate.
“This policy is in place as a form of game management to ensure that Alaskans are able to feed their families,” said McCain-Palin spokeswoman Maria Comella.
The practice has long been controversial in Alaska. In a 1996 ballot initiative, Alaskans voted to ban predator hunting from aircraft. State law, however, allows the legislature to overturn a referendum after three years. Lawmakers did so, and voters again voted for a ban in 2000. The legislature reversed the ban again in 2003. Last month, Alaskans defeated another initiative to ban aerial hunts.
Lutz said that subsistence moose and caribou hunters aren’t the real beneficiaries of the state’s practice of killing natural predators. Most of the moose and caribou, he said, are taken by urban or out-of-state hunters who don’t need the game for survival.
In most other states, game wardens use aircraft when going after sick or rogue animals, such as those who have attacked people. Such game management is “perfectly legitimate,” Lutz said.
Alaska’s aerial kills, he said, are really sport hunting in the guise of game management. “What Alaska is doing is licensing private citizens, private hunters, flying private planes flown by private pilots to go out in the bush and do this,” he said. “And then they get to sell the skins of the animals they kill, which is sport hunting by almost any definition.”
Aerial hunters killed approximately 124 wolves last winter, and a total of almost 800 over the last five winters. The hunts usually take place when there’s snow on the ground, rendering the wolves more visible from the air. There are anywhere from 7,000 to 12,000 gray wolves in Alaska, according to Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund. The animals are not considered threatened, although they are in the northern Rockies in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming.
While I've defended her against some unfair and inaccurate attacks, her support for aerial wolf hunting is too tough for me to swallow. I don't hunt because I love animals but some hunting of some animals is necessary because we ( us, "Man" ,humans) have killled off the natural predators of game animals like deer. Wolves are an essential part of many ecosystems and their re-introduction into places like Yellowstone has been an unqualified success.
Hunting is called a "sport". Would someone explain to me what is "sporting" about using a helicopter to run a wolf into exhaustion and then shoot a terrified, exhausted animal ? An animal that is never going to be eaten like a deer or a moose ? An animal that keeps the elk, deer, caribou and moose herds healthy by killing off the weak and lame ?
I can give Palin a pass here and there on a few issues where she and I don't see eye to eye but support of this barbaric and despicable type of hunting is just plain SICK !
Melonie
09-13-2008, 03:22 PM
the counter-arguments to the aerial wolf hunting are threefold
#1 - aggressive control of Alaskan wolf populations is necessary to prevent resulting damage to populations of other animals, primarily Caribou and Moose
#2 - native Alaskans depend on the hunting of Caribou and Moose for their subsistence / culture, thus allowing these animal populations to be decimated by wolves would pose a direct threat to their native way of life
#3 - the issue was put to Alaskan voters on a recent election ballot, and it was the Alaskan voters themselves who voted in favor of continued aerial wolf hunting.
In other words, the issue of aerial wolf hunting in Alaska really doesn't involve any major component of 'sport'. Regardless of how aerial wolf hunting may appear to residents of California or New York or Illinois, in a context of Alaskan real world issues it appears to make sense for Alaska.
sapphiregirl
09-13-2008, 03:30 PM
the counter-arguments to the aerial wolf hunting are threefold
#1 - aggressive control of Alaskan wolf populations is necessary to prevent resulting damage to populations of other animals, primarily Caribou and Deer
#2 - native Alaskans depend on the hunting of Caribou and Deer for their subsistence, thus allowing these animal populations to be decimated by wolves would pose a direct threat to their native way of life
#3 - the issue was put to Alaskan voters on a recent election ballot, and it was the Alaskan voters themselves who voted in favor of continued aerial wolf hunting.
In other words, the issue of aerial wolf hunting in Alaska really doesn't involve any major component of 'sport'. Regardless of how aerial wolf hunting may appear to residents of California or New York or Illinois, in a context of Alaskan real world issues it appears to make sense for Alaska.
We are truly a pathetic species if we cannot stand up for more humane ways to magage the planet and its wildlife.
......but then humans are the ONLY species who have had a negative impact on every single species living on the planet. We really know what we are doing.
Melonie
09-13-2008, 03:35 PM
actually, Alaskan fish and game seems to know what they are doing pretty well ...
(snip)"The exact number of moose or caribou saved by thinning wolf populations is hard to determine. Fish and Game's ungulate survival calculations are based on an average consumption of approximately 12 moose or 24 caribou per wolf per year.
A kill of 124 wolves would thus translate to 1,488 moose or 2,976 caribou or some combination thereof."(snip)
from
just out of curiosity, what's less humane about 124 wolves being cleanly shot via aerial hunting versus 1488 moose or 2976 caribou or some combination thereof being run down and ripped to shreds by wolf packs ?
G-Real
09-13-2008, 03:38 PM
the counter-arguments to the aerial wolf hunting are threefold
#1 - aggressive control of Alaskan wolf populations is necessary to prevent resulting damage to populations of other animals, primarily Caribou and Moose
#2 - native Alaskans depend on the hunting of Caribou and Moose for their subsistence / culture, thus allowing these animal populations to be decimated by wolves would pose a direct threat to their native way of life
#3 - the issue was put to Alaskan voters on a recent election ballot, and it was the Alaskan voters themselves who voted in favor of continued aerial wolf hunting.
In other words, the issue of aerial wolf hunting in Alaska really doesn't involve any major component of 'sport'. Regardless of how aerial wolf hunting may appear to residents of California or New York or Illinois, in a context of Alaskan real world issues it appears to make sense for Alaska.
To counter your counter, doesn't this go against capitalism?.....survival of the fittest.
If there is a better predator out there than man at hunting caribou. surely alaskans could herd caribou, they do with deer and other grazing animals all over the world......
G-Real
09-13-2008, 03:39 PM
just out of curiosity, what's less humane about 124 wolves being cleanly shot via aerial hunting versus 1488 moose or 2976 caribou or some combination thereof being run down and ripped to shreds by wolf packs ?
Do you think its human to chase an animal to exhaustion then land and kill it,....or shoot at it from the air and continually graze and miss the kill-shot?
Melonie
09-13-2008, 03:40 PM
^^^ to counter your counter of my counter, what gives residents of the lower 48 states the right to dictate how Alaskans must manage their own affairs ... particularly so when such dictates would have a direct impact on the traditional way of life of native American peoples ? Of course, this sort of question circles right back to a fundamental difference between liberal and conservative policies.