condotown Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 i guess in putting Ms. Palin a heart attack away from the oval office, Team McCain don't take their "Mr. Obama Isn't Experienced Enough" argument too seriously. upside is that while she isn't "young and cute" by most standards, by the standards of politicians she's a nubile sex bomb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eagle Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 I think its just to compete with first black man and I hear she is against abortion. Obama made an impressive speech and I wish him our president but I don't believe in fairy tales. I will have to see things happen before I will believe with all my heart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
friendlyCat Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 zero national or foreign experience. If you want to think about something scary, her being called at 3 a.m. to push the button. On the other hand, I think that her choice is absolutely bold and brilliant for McC. Palin is extremely charismatic, a natural beauty, extremely photogenic, and comes across as someone who is of the people, and speaks to the people. I think that many women will want to vote for her. Mostly, it depends on whether she trips up in the campaign. I think that McC and his people knew that they would have to take a big risk to shake up the campaign and have a chance to win against Obama. (Piant, sorry I inadvertently sent this to you as a pm, it should have been posted here.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garlic Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 PiAnt... i always enjoy reading your views of usa politics...it's also great that you love us american people so well also...lol just a little tip to help you out a little...don't go in the southern states in the usa and call them yanks...there are a lot of "good old boys" that won't react very well being called that! lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stramash Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 one big reason why a woman shouldnt have the nuclear button PMT :twisted: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eagle Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 one big reason why a woman shouldnt have the nuclear buttonPMT :twisted: ........but then there was Reagan who was brain dead. At least with a Demo there is a chance of change. I still will have to see it to believe anything with politics . They all seem to turn into song and dance men. :twisted: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce551 Posted August 30, 2008 Report Share Posted August 30, 2008 I'll be interested to hear what Hillary Clinton has say about McCain VP pick. Who ever takes the John McCain & Republicans seriously has to be a complete idiot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
primetime Posted August 30, 2008 Report Share Posted August 30, 2008 Are you kidding me. Some hillbilly as VP. I sure hope there is a 3rd party candidate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PJack Posted August 30, 2008 Report Share Posted August 30, 2008 up until about 2 years ago she was mayor of a town of 7,000 people that is frozen 7 months of the year. before that she was a self professed hockey mom. and the republicans want people to think she is suitable for the VP job and possibly for the Presidency if anything happened to McMean, which is not hard to fathom given he would be the oldest elected President in history. this just might be a dream come true for Obama/Biden ticket Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eagle Posted August 30, 2008 Report Share Posted August 30, 2008 bp2.blogger.com/.../ s400/Sarah-Palin-Vogue.jpg Would look good on Time :shock: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garlic Posted August 30, 2008 Report Share Posted August 30, 2008 PiAnt... i always enjoy reading your views of usa politics...it's also great that you love us american people so well also...lol just a little tip to help you out a little...don't go in the southern states in the usa and call them yanks...there are a lot of "good old boys" that won't react very well being called that! lol Yes, sorry mate if it came across as one of them there sweeping generalisations. Obviously, when I say "yanks", I'm referring to New Yorkers. (I've seen the Dukes of Hazard you know.) the dukes of hazard movie was on last night...i was out so i missed it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted August 31, 2008 Report Share Posted August 31, 2008 Are you kidding me. Some hillbilly as VP. I sure hope there is a 3rd party candidate. there is. libertarian/conservative Bob Barr. of course that dipshit Nader is running again, but at this point he's more of a running joke than running candidate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce551 Posted August 31, 2008 Report Share Posted August 31, 2008 Obama Outwits the Bloviators By FRANK RICH August 31, 2008 Op-Ed Columnist, NY Times STOP the presses! This election isn?t about the Clintons after all. It isn?t about the Acropolis columns erected at Invesco Field. It isn?t about who is Paris Hilton and who is Hanoi Hilton. (Though it may yet be about who is Sarah Palin.) After a weeklong orgy of inane manufactured melodrama labeled ?convention coverage? on television, Barack Obama descended in classic deus ex machina fashion ? yes, that?s Greek too ? to set the record straight. America is in too much trouble, he said, to indulge in ?a big election about small things.? As has been universally noted, Obama did what he had to do in his acceptance speech. He scrapped the messianic ?Change We Can Believe In? for the more concrete policy litany of ?The Change We Need.? He bared his glinting Chicago pol?s teeth to John McCain. Obama?s still a skinny guy, but the gladiatorial arena and his eagerness to stand up to bullies (foreign and Republican) made him a plausible Denver Bronco. All week long a media chorus had fretted whether he could pull off a potentially vainglorious stunt before 80,000 screaming fans. Well, yes he can, and so he did. But was this a surprise? Hardly. No major Obama speech ? each breathlessly hyped in advance as do-or-die and as the ?the most important of his career? ? has been a disaster; most have been triples or home runs, if not grand slams. What is most surprising is how astonished the press still is at each Groundhog Day?s replay of the identical outcome. Indeed, the disconnect between the reality of this campaign and how it is perceived and presented by the mainstream media is now a major part of the year?s story. The press dysfunction is itself a window into the unstable dynamics of Election 2008. At the Democratic convention, as during primary season, almost every oversold plotline was wrong. Those Hillary dead-enders ? played on TV by a fringe posse of women roaming Denver in search of camera time ? would re-enact Chicago 1968. With Hillary?s tacit approval, the roll call would devolve into a classic Democratic civil war. Sulky Bill would wreak havoc once center stage. On TV, each of these hot-air balloons was inflated nonstop right up to the moment they were punctured by reality, at which point the assembled bloviators once more expressed shock, shock at the unexpected denouement. They hadn?t been so surprised since they discovered that Obama was not too black to get white votes, not too white to win black votes, and not too inexperienced to thwart the inevitable triumph of the incomparably well-organized and well-financed Clinton machine. Meanwhile, the candidate known as ?No Drama Obama? because of his personal cool was stealthily hatching a drama of his own. As the various commentators pronounced the convention flat last week ? too few McCain attacks on opening night, too ?minimalist? a Hillary endorsement on Tuesday, and so forth ? Obama held his cards to his chest backstage and built slowly, step by step, to his Thursday night climax. The dramatic arc was as meticulously calibrated as every Obama political strategy. His campaign, unlike TV?s fantasists, knew the simple truth. The New York Times/CBS News poll conducted on the eve of the convention found that the Democrats were no more divided than the G.O.P: In both parties, 79 percent of voters supported their respective nominees. The simultaneous Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll also found that 79 percent of Democrats support Obama ? which, as Amy Walter of National Journal alone noticed, is slightly higher than either John Kerry and Al Gore fared on that same question (77 percent) in that same poll just before their conventions. But empirical evidence can?t compete with a favorite golden oldie like the Clinton soap opera. So when Hillary Clinton said a month ago that her delegates needed a ?catharsis,? surely she had to be laying the groundwork for convention mischief. But it was never in either Clinton?s interest to sabotage Obama. Hillary Clinton?s Tuesday speech, arguably the best of her career, was as much about her own desire to reconcile with the alienated Obama Democrats she might need someday as it was about releasing her supporters to Obama. The Clintons never do stop thinking about tomorrow. The latest good luck for the Democrats is that the McCain campaign was just as bamboozled as the press by the false Hillary narrative. McCain was obviously itching to choose his pal Joe Lieberman as his running mate. A onetime Democrat who breaks with the G.O.P. by supporting abortion rights might have rebooted his lost maverick cred more forcefully than Palin, who is cracking this particular glass ceiling nearly a quarter-century after the Democrats got there first. Lieberman might have even been of some use in roiling the Obama-Hillary-Bill juggernaut that will now storm through South Florida. The main reason McCain knuckled under to the religious right by picking Palin is that he actually believes there?s a large army of embittered Hillary loyalists who will vote for a hard-line conservative simply because she?s a woman. That?s what happens when you listen to the TV news echo chamber. Not only is the whole premise ludicrous, but it is every bit as sexist as the crude joke McCain notoriously told about Janet Reno, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton. Given the press?s track record so far, there?s no reason to believe that the bogus scenarios will stop now. The question of why this keeps happening is not easily answered. Ideological bias, unshakeable Clinton addiction and lingering McCain affection may not account for all or even most of it. Journalists are still Americans ? even if much of our audience doubts that ? and in this time of grave uncertainty about our nation?s future we may simply be as discombobulated as everyone else. We, too, are made anxious and fearful by hard economic times and the prospect of wrenching change. YouTube, the medium that has transformed our culture and politics, didn?t exist four years ago. Four years from now, it?s entirely possible that some, even many, of the newspapers and magazines covering this campaign won?t exist in their current form, if they exist at all. The Big Three network evening newscasts, and network news divisions as we now know them, may also be extinct by then. It is a telling sign that CBS News didn?t invest in the usual sky box for its anchor, Katie Couric, in Denver. It is equally telling that CNN consistently beat ABC and CBS in last week?s Nielsen ratings, and NBC as well by week?s end. But now that media are being transformed at a speed comparable to the ever-doubling power of microchips, cable?s ascendancy could also be as short-lived as, say, the reign of AOL. Andrew Rasiej, the founder of Personal Democracy Forum, which monitors the intersection of politics and technology, points out that when networks judge their success by who got the biggest share of the television audience, ?they are still counting horses while the world has moved on to counting locomotives.? The Web, in its infinite iterations, is eroding all 20th-century media. The Obama campaign has long been on board those digital locomotives. Its ability to tell its story under the radar of the mainstream press in part accounts for why the Obama surge has been so often underestimated. Even now we?re uncertain of its size. The extraordinary TV viewership for Obama on Thursday night, larger than the Olympics opening ceremony, this year?s Oscars or any ?American Idol? finale, may only be a count of the horses. The Obama campaign?s full reach online ? for viewers as well as fund-raising and organizational networking ? remains unknown. None of this, any more than the success of Obama?s acceptance speech, guarantees a Democratic victory. But what it does ensure is that all bets are off when it comes to predicting this race?s outcome. Despite our repeated attempts to see this election through the prism of those of recent and not-so-recent memory, it keeps defying the templates. Last week?s convention couldn?t be turned into a replay of the 1960s no matter how hard the press tried to sell the die-hard Hillary supporters as reincarnations of past rebel factions, from the Dixiecrats to the antiwar left. Far from being a descendant of 1968, the 2008 Democratic gathering was the first in memory that actually kept promptly to its schedule and avoided ludicrous P.C. pandering to every constituency. Nor were we back at Aug. 28, 1963. As a 14-year-old in Washington, I was there on the Mall, taken by my mother, a tireless teacher, with the hope that I might learn something. At a time when the nation?s capital, with its large black population, was still a year away from casting its first votes for president, who would have imagined that a black man might someday have a serious chance of being elected president? Not me. But even as we stop, take a deep breath and savor this remarkable moment in our history, we cannot linger. This is quite another time. After the catastrophic Bush presidency, the troubles that afflict us on nearly every front almost make you nostalgic for the day when America?s gravest problems could still be seen in blacks and whites. As Obama said, this is a big election. We will only begin to confront the magnitude of our choice when and if we stop being distracted by small, let alone utterly fictitious, things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted August 31, 2008 Report Share Posted August 31, 2008 saw a rassumussen poll said that women are more cynical about the Palin pick than men overall. the poll number supports the perception voiced by several pro-hillary women that they're being pandered to. i think the pick isn't so much a serious attempt to win over the so-called PUMAs (an acronym for dipshit IMO) as to win over the social conservative / evangelical side of the republican base. McCain is too rational for them, and they are now quite pleased to have someone on the ticket who thinks creationism should be taught in schools. also the Republicans attract a lot of one-issue voters, and while Bob Barr may siphon off some of the gun lobby, Palin is hardcore anti-abortion and will appeal to the 'pro life' one issue voters. all in all, its' a smart pick in a lot of ways, but also shows that team McCain see themselves as a longshot. if they felt like they were gonna win, they'd have played it safe. (contrast with Obama, who picked the safest possible veep). it's far from a done deal but it does say a lot about how the campaigns perceive the election.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CocoaBrotha Posted September 2, 2008 Report Share Posted September 2, 2008 all in all, its' a smart pick in a lot of ways, but also shows that team McCain see themselves as a longshot. if they felt like they were gonna win, they'd have played it safe. (contrast with Obama, who picked the safest possible veep). it's far from a done deal but it does say a lot about how the campaigns perceive the election.. Ehh.. What is ironic about McCain choosing Palin is that the ® party is constantly talking about how Obama is too young and inexperienced but McCain picks this woman to be his vice president?. WTF? It's like McCain just said screw it and picked her name out of a hat. I guess he's trying to stir up some contreversy to get media attention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biachung Posted September 2, 2008 Report Share Posted September 2, 2008 18 million cracks!! lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eagle Posted September 2, 2008 Report Share Posted September 2, 2008 I was at a friends and I saw a woman republican senator from Minnesota saying over and over again in true CNN or Fox fashion that palin was more experienced then Obama and Biden together. As the republicans struggle to fill a 10,000 seat stadium after the Demos had 80,000 and a parking lot full. Doesn't matter if its true just say it over and over is their strategy. She had this born again Jesus glow in her eyes face all smiling while she said it over and over.......and again sheeez :twisted: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted September 2, 2008 Report Share Posted September 2, 2008 all in all, its' a smart pick in a lot of ways, but also shows that team McCain see themselves as a longshot. if they felt like they were gonna win, they'd have played it safe. (contrast with Obama, who picked the safest possible veep). it's far from a done deal but it does say a lot about how the campaigns perceive the election.. Ehh.. What is ironic about McCain choosing Palin is that the ® party is constantly talking about how Obama is too young and inexperienced but McCain picks this woman to be his vice president?. WTF? It's like McCain just said screw it and picked her name out of a hat. I guess he's trying to stir up some contreversy to get media attention. i don't think republicans nakedly pandering and changing their message on the drop of a hat in order to do so is anything beyond business as usual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted September 2, 2008 Report Share Posted September 2, 2008 I was at a friends and I saw a woman republican senator from Minnesota saying over and over again in true CNN or Fox fashion that palin was more experienced then Obama and Biden together. As the republicans struggle to fill a 10,000 seat stadium after the Demos had 80,000 and a parking lot full. Doesn't matter if its true just say it over and over is their strategy. She had this born again Jesus glow in her eyes face all smiling while she said it over and over.......and again sheeez :twisted: this is what amazes me me... is they can pick a message and just hammer on it, and people lack it up like they were the stupidest dogs on earth. all the antichrist will have to do is declare that he's anti-abortion and he'll win over the far right social conservatives (who i believe are nowhere near as ready for God's judgment as *they* think they are.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Posted September 2, 2008 Report Share Posted September 2, 2008 And her 17 year old daughter is 5 months pregnant...and not married...*gasp* http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080902/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_palin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted September 2, 2008 Report Share Posted September 2, 2008 And her 17 year old daughter is 5 months pregnant...and not married...*gasp*http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080902/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_palin they'll spin this into a positive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beej Posted September 2, 2008 Report Share Posted September 2, 2008 PiAnt... i always enjoy reading your views of usa politics...it's also great that you love us american people so well also...lol just a little tip to help you out a little...don't go in the southern states in the usa and call them yanks...there are a lot of "good old boys" that won't react very well being called that! lol Yes, sorry mate if it came across as one of them there sweeping generalisations. Obviously, when I say "yanks", I'm referring to New Yorkers. (I've seen the Dukes of Hazard you know.) the dukes of hazard movie was on last night...i was out so i missed it... But I bet you can recite it word for word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted September 2, 2008 Report Share Posted September 2, 2008 ...And, isn't Alaska in, like, Canada? nah it's close to russia. that's her foreign policy credentials. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave40 Posted September 2, 2008 Report Share Posted September 2, 2008 She ain't bad looking I like a lady with glasses!!!! :oops: :oops: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.