[Captain Obvious]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

So who was concerned with cheap politics

Clearly the DNC base was since the top of their ticket:

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

And represented a 95% black district as a state senator. Only managed to win his first seat in government by a procedural technicality that kept the returning incumbent off the ballot. Lost his one and only competitive open race to Bobby Rush. Managed to get to the US Senate after his rivals in both parties were done in by spousal scandals and then ran against a carpetbagger with no support named Alan Keyes. He was only then thrust on o the national stage at the mercy of a faction of the DNC leadership who allowed him to give a keynote at the 04 convention. And if you really want to find the point where he beat Clinton in the primary, it was when his camp started calling the Clintons racists.

Gerater political experience? lol
Obama's career on paper is the epitome of mediocre

Everyone else in your primary could actually make a sound argument as to how they were qualified. Yet here you are using Biden as the filling for your Oreo cookie.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

That wins some points from me, even though it shouldn't. But unfortunately there are plenty of politicians who would have no problem violating the constitution and the law if it fit their ideology to do so.

Maybe I should say it doesn't give me any confidence that she'll treat gays fairly. If given half a chance, it sounds like she'll strip them of every right she possibly can. Yeah, the fact that she's honest enough to admit that she has no legal recourse rather than forcing the court to strike it down is better than some politicians — though that's pretty sad in itself.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

She went and met some soldiers from Alaska. That's not diplomacy, it's hanging out with boys from your hometown. I've shaken hands with soldiers who went overseas. Does that make me a foreign policy ace too?

How do we know she wasn't there planning another "October Surprise"?

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

Clearly the DNC base was since the top of their ticket:

Everyone else in your primary could actually make a sound argument as to how they were qualified. Yet here you are using Biden as the filling for your Oreo cookie.

So I want to get this straight. Rather than address my point that Palin was a highly political choice and Biden was not, you go back to criticizing Obama. And in order to do so, you cite your own post - filled with typos and lols - as evidence. Oooookkkk.

[Captain Obvious]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

So I want to get this straight. Rather than address my point that Palin was a highly political choice and Biden was not, you go back to criticizing Obama. And in order to do so, you cite your own post - filled with typos and lols - as evidence. Oooookkkk.

Did you not read the previous posts on the last page Sparky?

[Paco500]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

Did you not read the previous posts on the last page Sparky?

You know- the quotes that put forth the argument that Biden was picked to lock up the PA vote. You know, in the same way W. locked up the Connecticut vote.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

Did you not read the previous posts on the last page Sparky?

I've read them all, and none of yours made any coherent point, including the one I'm quoting now.

[besson3c]

Does anybody here think that anything good will come of this conversation? The Republicans in here are heavily invested in McCain/Palin, and the Democrats are heavily invested in Obama/Biden. The intensity of this debate illustrates how deeply personal this is to people, and simultaneously why there is simply no way that anybody will give up any ground, because nobody is interested in doing so.

As a pissing match and a game of partisan football, I guess this can be fun for a certain amount of time, but I'm finding my interest rapidly waning... Am I the black sheep of this forum, or does anybody else feel like me?

[Gee-Man]

From http://ontheissues.org/Sarah_Palin.htm

Sarah Palin on Abortion
• Pro-life. (Nov 2006)

Sarah Palin on Budget & Economy
• Aim to reduce general fund spending by $150 million. (Jan 2007)

Sarah Palin on Civil Rights
• Marriage only be between and man and a woman. (Nov 2006)

Sarah Palin on Corporations
No issue stance yet recorded by OnTheIssues.org.

Sarah Palin on Crime
• If legislature passed death penalty law, I would sign it. (Nov 2006)

Sarah Palin on Drugs
No issue stance yet recorded by OnTheIssues.org.

Sarah Palin on Education
• Fully fund K-12 and support early funding of education. (Jan 2007)

Sarah Palin on Energy & Oil
• Fund cellulosic biofuel research in Farm Bill. (Oct 2007)
• Stranded Gas Development Act no longer applies. (Nov 2006)
• Get ANWR open. (Nov 2006)

Sarah Palin on Environment
• Provide stability in regulations for developers. (Jan 2007)
• Convince the rest of the nation to open ANWR. (Jan 2007)

Sarah Palin on Families & Children
No issue stance yet recorded by OnTheIssues.org.

Sarah Palin on Foreign Policy
No issue stance yet recorded by OnTheIssues.org.

Sarah Palin on Free Trade
No issue stance yet recorded by OnTheIssues.org.

Sarah Palin on Government Reform
No issue stance yet recorded by OnTheIssues.org.

Sarah Palin on Gun Control
• Supports Constitutional right to bear arms. (Nov 2006)

Sarah Palin on Health Care
• Flexibility in government regulations to allow competition. (Nov 2006)

Sarah Palin on Homeland Security
• Promote from within, in Alaska's National Guard. (Nov 2006)

Sarah Palin on Immigration
No issue stance yet recorded by OnTheIssues.org.

Sarah Palin on Jobs
No issue stance yet recorded by OnTheIssues.org.

Sarah Palin on Principles & Values
No issue stance yet recorded by OnTheIssues.org.

Sarah Palin on Social Security
• Fund the Seniors Longevity Bonus Program. (Nov 2006)

Sarah Palin on Tax Reform
• Repeal "nuisance taxes" including the tire tax. (Jan 2007)

Sarah Palin on Technology
No issue stance yet recorded by OnTheIssues.org.

[Captain Obvious]

You two should get together so you can perform actual fellatio on each other rather than doing it over the internet.

Anyway:

Joe Biden has deep roots in Pennsylvania. Often referred to as "Pennsylvania's Third Senator," Senator Biden was born in and lived in Scranton until he was 10, and spent nearly every summer of his childhood at his grandfather's house there after his family moved to Delaware. His great-grandfather was a local state senator, and his great-great-grandfather was an engineer who planned many of Scranton's early roadways.

The values Senator Biden learned during his childhood in Pennsylvania play a large role in his politics. In his 2007 book "Promises to Keep: On Life and Politics", Senator Biden opened by recalling that he learned his first lessons about politics "in the 1950's in my grandpop's kitchen," in Scranton.

-Sean Smith
Obama Pennsylvania Communications Director

I'm sure its a coincidence the Obama camp plays that up in the PA region.
Knock yourselves out though. Keep on clinging to one line of every post I make rather than trying to wrap your head around the whole thing.

[TheMosco]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

The same can be said for Biden. The same can actually be said for Obama and McCain. Please, stop being naive.

Thanks for defending McCain on his own merits.

oops...

[BRussell]

Ladies and gentleman, John McCain presents your future commander-in-chief, the 45th president of the United States:

[besson3c]

I think the take home message is this: Palin is exactly what the right wing base wants. The jury is out about how well she will court moderates and independents (I'm guessing that she wasn't designed to do so, save PUMA), and Palin definitely has little to no appeal to the left wing base.

[Paco500]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

You two should get together so you can perform actual fellatio on each other rather than doing it over the internet.

Ahh, the biting wit. Shame about the whole microphallis thing or I image you could be sucking your self off. But then again, that will occupy your mouth, leaving you unable to hear the sound of your own voice.

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

I'm sure its a coincidence the Obama camp plays that up in the PA region.

Of course they are. I assume they will be playing up the fact that Obama is from Illinois and spent time in Hawaii as a kid. And I'm assuming the people of Alaska and Arizona will be altered to the home states of the Republican nominee as well.

Obama wants, some may say needs, to win PA. He'll play it up however he can. But if he cynically wanted to pick someone just to wrap up PA, he didn't make a very clever choice.

But then again, you have the whole arrogant asshat thing going on.

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

"We believe we have no more judicial options to pursue. So we may disagree with the foundation there, the rationale behind the ruling, but our responsibility is to proceed forward with the law and abide by the constitution," Palin said.

I don't think you win any points for being legally forced to treat gays fairly.

I agree. I don't think you can win points for that.

Still, it's both promising and depressing that I find some hope in her specific reference to the constitution, and abiding by it.
It is promising that we have someone here who actually will follow the consitution, and depressing that so many other politicians (including McCain) will pass legislation in violation of the clear language of the constitution and actually explicitly express disdain for the amendments of the Bill of Rights.

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

Ladies and gentleman, John McCain presents your future commander-in-chief, the 45th president of the United States:

How is this not you, and the person who put that picture together, being sexist?

Disagree with her policies. Disagree with her experience. But disagreeing because she's a woman who isn't in your political party?

That's unfortunate.

[besson3c]

vmarks: I see your point, but what about all of those people that were calling John Edwards nothing more than a pretty face with a nice hair style? It does work both ways. I do agree that what is being done is sexist, but I think the larger attempt is to make a politician look bad regardless of their gender rather than to set out to share sexist viewpoints.

[vmarks]

MODERATOR HAT ON

The tenor of the discussion needs to be brought back down a notch.

Quotes like the following are inflammatory, and I prefer that they be avoided.

Originally Posted by Paco500 

And I see you are an arrogant asshat incapable of discussion that does not fit your dogma.

Originally Posted by BRussell 

(There's also a video, because I know it's hard for you to follow the written word.)

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

God you people are stupid

Please don't do that.

Reeeee...... lax.........

That is all.

[Paco500]

Originally Posted by vmarks 

MODERATOR HAT ON

The tenor of the discussion needs to be brought back down a notch.

Quotes like the following are inflammatory, and I prefer that they be avoided.








Please don't do that.

Reeeee...... lax.........

That is all.

Apologies. I'm done.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by vmarks 

How is this not you, and the person who put that picture together, being sexist?

Disagree with her policies. Disagree with her experience. But disagreeing because she's a woman who isn't in your political party?

That's unfortunate.

I'd like you to explain how it's sexist of me to publicize Palin's own publicity. Did she not voluntarily decide to get attention in that manner?

[edit] Ha, I just found out that's not the real Vogue cover. She was really in Vogue, but not on the cover. Sorry.

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

vmarks: I see your point, but what about all of those people that were calling John Edwards nothing more than a pretty face with a nice hair style? It does work both ways. I do agree that what is being done is sexist, but I think the larger attempt is to make a politician look bad regardless of their gender rather than to set out to share sexist viewpoints.

John Edwards fostered that opinion by his $500 dollar haircuts, and through videos like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AE847UXu3Q

Of course, it's silly to reduce him to that when he had such atrocious political positions, and had an easy background to discuss (ambulance chasing attorney) or his use of his wife's cancer for political advantage while he was stepping out on their marriage - but he did all these things to himself. It's different in character than a gender based attack on Palin.

It's much more comparable to a gender based attack on Mrs. Clinton - also wrong, but interestingly, the progressives seem to have let her beat her head against a glass ceiling, and then practice sexism in images like the one BRussell used, or Salon.com's headline for the nomination news, "It's a Girl!" - really? That's what Salon, a progressive news outlet uses for a woman who has chosen to accept the candidacy for Vice-President?

I use the word 'chosen' because I want to bring attention to the fact - she wasn't just picked by McCain, she's an individual with free will, and she chose to accept.

What I've learned from this thread and from reading reactions at sites like atrios, democraticunderground, huffpo, salon and dailykos is that sexism is far more prevalent in the left than racism.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by vmarks 

What I've learned from this thread and from reading reactions at sites like atrios, democraticunderground, huffpo, salon and dailykos is that sexism is far more prevalent in the left than racism.

Sadly, I'm inclined to have to agree with you. There are many on the left who are sounding a lot like those on the right who attacked Hillary Clinton through her gender.

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

I'd like you to explain how it's sexist of me to publicize Palin's own publicity. Did she not voluntarily decide to get attention in that manner?

[edit] Ha, I just found out that's not the real Vogue cover. She was really in Vogue, but not on the cover. Sorry.

Thank you for posting the edit.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

I'd like you to explain how it's sexist of me to publicize Palin's own publicity. Did she not voluntarily decide to get attention in that manner?

[edit] Ha, I just found out that's not the real Vogue cover. She was really in Vogue, but not on the cover. Sorry.

Her actual Vogue pics had standing in a field of snow in furs.

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I think the take home message is this: Palin is exactly what the right wing base wants. The jury is out about how well she will court moderates and independents (I'm guessing that she wasn't designed to do so, save PUMA), and Palin definitely has little to no appeal to the left wing base.

That's probably about right. Core left-wingers won't accept anyone with conservative views. The key is peeling off the superficial layers and leaving behind those core left-wingers.

How can that be done? Easy. The Obama camp is all hard-left. They practically require all their supporters to believe the exact same way about every issue. Disagree with a single issue, and you'll get the Joe Lieberman treatment - cast aside with packs of rabid liberals trashing you at every turn.

So in looking at Obama and the DNC, most rational thinking people will have at least one disagreement with liberal doctrine. So all that's needed is to place the spotlight momentarily on each issue. As the Obama camp and their supporters tear into those who may disagree, the peeling-off effect will ultimately result in leaving behind only the core left-wingers.

[Mithras]

My brother-in-law emailed me what I think is a very cogent analysis of the situation:

A big gamble which he needed to take. If I had to bet, I would say that it will work in his favor for the following reasons:

1) Stops Obama's amazing convention momentum
2) Helps unite and motiviate Republican base
3) Will bring back some disenchanted right leaning soccor moms.

A big unknown is how she acts under the scrutiny over the next few weeks and does not pull a Dan Quayle. Based on her history of overachievement in many fields, I think that she may surprise positively. However, if she begins to look not fit for prime time, it could finish him.

It's a risky gamble, which may pay off, and may be disastrous. Time will tell.

[Paco500]

Originally Posted by spacefreak 

The Obama camp is all hard-left. They practically require all their supporters to believe the exact same way about every issue. Disagree with a single issue, and you'll get the Joe Lieberman treatment - cast aside with packs of rabid liberals trashing you at every turn.

You know this is just as true of the right. Look what happened to McCain in 2000. He was only able to secure his party's nomination by dropping his "maverick" positions and getting in lock-step with the hard-right.

[glyph]

The bulk of media coverage in Alaska on Palin's politics since becoming governor, has been her stance against the big oil companies and how to go about getting Alaska's fair share in revenues from them. She scrapped a plan by the previous governor that he enacted in his last days of office that was a disgrace and blatantly pro-oil industry. What brought Palin to power was her promise to get Alaska's fair share of oil revenues and to make a stand against politics-as-usual (and of course - the vagina factor) - she has been a fighter ever since. I have not read too many articles since hearing the news of her VP nomination, but what I've read seem to be lacking in the experience she's had in dealing with the oil giants.

It's just odd to me that for all she's done to expose and shame the republican party in Alaska, and the stance she maintains with the oil industry, she'd be the VP nominee with McCain. I suppose the vagina factor would help McCain, and having Palin too preoccupied with campaining to do any real fighting for Alaska against the oil giants might be of some benefit.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

Ladies and gentleman, John McCain presents your future commander-in-chief, the 45th president of the United States:

photochopped

She definitely lost the the PETA vote

[BRussell]

What Republicans always need to do is rev up their base without turning off everyone else too much. I think this is basically the hope with Palin. My neighbor is a highly politically active evangelical-creationist-Republican-type family, and they are really into Sarah Palin. They know Palin is one of them. But I think the hope is that non-political women don't find out much about her actual views and instead just go for the image of the attractive young woman and assume she is moderate.

I personally don't think people vote on the veep choice. To the extent it has any effect at all, it's about the overall impression the team makes, and how the choice reflects on the presidential nominee's judgment.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

They know Palin is one of them. But I think the hope is that non-political women don't find out much about her actual views and instead just go for the image of the attractive young woman and assume she is moderate.

She's more moderate than you might think. It's necessary to compartmentalize people because the job of critiquing someone is easier this way. We're hearing "vagina factor", baby parades, "I'd hit it", bogus pictures of her featured scantily clad on the cover of Vogue Magazine, etc... I'm just wondering how long this goes on before women can't be both good looking and feminine and run for office. Shame really and from many who claim to favor affirmative action.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

She's more moderate than you might think. It's necessary to compartmentalize people because the job of critiquing someone is easier this way. We're hearing "vagina factor", baby parades, "I'd hit it", bogus pictures of her featured scantily clad on the cover of Vogue Magazine, etc... I'm just wondering how long this goes on before women can't be both good looking and feminine and run for office. Shame really and from many who claim to favor affirmative action.

I don't know about that, but I do know that the social conservatives who see creationism and similar beliefs as litmus tests of true-believerdom think she's great. I sincerely doubt they'd feel that way unless she had views that would turn off mainstream Americans in large numbers.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

She went and met some soldiers from Alaska. That's not diplomacy, it's hanging out with boys from your hometown. I've shaken hands with soldiers who went overseas. Does that make me a foreign policy ace too?

Obama goes on a meet and greet tour and Viola! foreign affairs expert. McCain should send Gov. Palin where Obama went on his tour, have her give a speech after an Oktoberfest concert, and all fears will be swept away.

[Dork.]

I've done a bit of reading up on Gov. Palin, and I've come to the conclusion she's just Mike Huckabee with a dress. Does that seem correct to you all?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

I've done a bit of reading up on Gov. Palin, and I've come to the conclusion she's just Mike Huckabee with a dress. Does that seem correct to you all?

Damn right, that's why I think she makes a great VP for McCain.

-t

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by Paco500 

You know this is just as true of the right. Look what happened to McCain in 2000. He was only able to secure his party's nomination by dropping his "maverick" positions and getting in lock-step with the hard-right.

Nope. You are either mistaken, poorly informed, or lying. The "hard-right" - I am assuming that you are referring to Reagan conservatives - they only just came around with the Palin selection. During the primary, these conservatives were behind either Romney or McCain.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

I've done a bit of reading up on Gov. Palin, and I've come to the conclusion she's just Mike Huckabee with a dress. Does that seem correct to you all?

That's probably true, with one caveat: How do we know Huckabee himself doesn't wear a dress?

[Paco500]

Originally Posted by spacefreak 

Nope. You are either mistaken, poorly informed, or lying. The "hard-right" - I am assuming that you are referring to Reagan conservatives - they only just came around with the Palin selection. During the primary, these conservatives were behind either Romney or McCain.

So you are saying McCain has not swung way to the right this time around? The time he won? Do you even remember the 2000 primary?

I used the term "hard-right" in response to your use of the term "hard-left". Call them the religious right, Regan conservatives, whatever you like. The fact of the matter is politics has become hyper partisan and this is true for both sides. If you insist on denying this, I would say you either mistaken, poorly informed, or lying.

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

That's probably true, with one caveat: How do we know Huckabee himself doesn't wear a dress?

If he does, I'm sure it's intelligently designed....

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by spacefreak 

That's probably about right. Core left-wingers won't accept anyone with conservative views. The key is peeling off the superficial layers and leaving behind those core left-wingers.

How can that be done? Easy. The Obama camp is all hard-left. They practically require all their supporters to believe the exact same way about every issue. Disagree with a single issue, and you'll get the Joe Lieberman treatment - cast aside with packs of rabid liberals trashing you at every turn.

So in looking at Obama and the DNC, most rational thinking people will have at least one disagreement with liberal doctrine. So all that's needed is to place the spotlight momentarily on each issue. As the Obama camp and their supporters tear into those who may disagree, the peeling-off effect will ultimately result in leaving behind only the core left-wingers.

The thing is, your perspective is tainted by your own political ideology, and so is mine. Honestly, to me I feel that Obama is pretty moderate. My perceptions are shaped by 20 years living in Canada, but still, I feel strongly that there is definitely a distinction between the Daily Kos and Obama, for instance. I also feel that many people in here are pretty far right wing. There seem to be few moderate Republicans in here.

[besson3c]

How is that sweater you are working on knitting, Dork.? Dork. told me the other day that he is busy knitting sweaters for families of this free market socialist program that he has been involved in.

[lpkmckenna]

I wanted to see her beauty pageant bikini pictures, and you have all let me down.

BTW, the blog buzz is: Trig isn't her son, but her daughter's son.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

It's about pwning the lefties. Who gives a f*ck about America. As long as lefties get pwned, it's all good.

No, pwning the lefties is just a great additional benefit. It's hilarious to watch as those who said experience didn't matter when it came to their presidential candidate now attacking the the Republican V.P. candidate over the same issue. And only because the left is frightened does it act out like this.

[placebo1969]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

BTW, the blog buzz is: Trig isn't her son, but her daughter's son.

Is that the "repeat a lie enough and it becomes the truth" play?

Gee, the blog buzz is that Sen. Obama is a Muslim.

[Shaddim]

After much thought and study, I find that I'm for Laura Roslin.

Oops, sorry there, I meant Sarah Palin...


Let's just elect Palin directly and kick McCain out of the race, k?

[OldManMac]

The real reason he selected her.

http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showDi...3?diaryId=6737

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

The real reason he selected her.

http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showDi...3?diaryId=6737

That blog post is really unfortunate. It's shamefully sexist/misogynistic.

"First Trollop" ??? Really?

So much for equality.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by placebo1969 

Is that the "repeat a lie enough and it becomes the truth" play?

I don't know. Has it been mentioned before today?

Gee, the blog buzz is that Sen. Obama is a Muslim.

No, that's the email campaign.

[zerostar]

Did you just get on the internets? or have you never been to freerepublic either? hahaha

2 small breasts 2 large thighs left wing.... your a damn liar if you want us to believe its just dems and not us.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

No, pwning the lefties is just a great additional benefit. It's hilarious to watch as those who said experience didn't matter when it came to their presidential candidate now attacking the the Republican V.P. candidate over the same issue. And only because the left is frightened does it act out like this.

Is being this partisan something you enjoy or feel is necessary or something? You seem to get really wound up over the left. Did Howard Dean kill your dog or something?