McCain picks woman for VP slot

[Topaz]

I was listening to 2 US Cons talk about how Palin has executive experience and that Obama doesn`t and she is more qualify for their job as VP and President than Obama. I guess its true but there`s a difference between working in DC and working in Alaska. The last gov`t that became President is GW and we all know what a great President he is!! McCain will govern some what like Bush but if she had to take over I think I rather have Obama as President or even Hillary first. These are dangerous time for the US and really the west since GW came to power and you cant make any mistakes over people will get killed.

[Guest American Woman]

*WARNING - ANOTHER JOKE*

What qualifies someone to be the US President? US voters.

Evidently being mayor of a really small town qualifies someone to be president. And being governor for two years. Correction: Apparently that's what makes a Republican qualified to be president. A Democrat, not so much.

KARL ROVE at his best:

On Palin: She’s a populist, she’s an economic and a social conservative, she’s a reformer, she took on the incumbent governor of the state Frank Murkowski — Republican — beat him in the primary, won an upset in the general election.She’s a former mayor. She’s the mayor of, I think, the second largest city in Alaska* before she ran for governor.

On Governor Kaine when he was on Obama's short list (emphasis mine): With all due respect again to Governor Kaine, he’s been a governor for three years, he’s been able but undistinguished. I don’t think people could really name a big, important thing that he’s done. He was mayor of the 105th largest city in America. And again, with all due respect to Richmond, Virginia, it’s smaller than Chula Vista, California; Aurora, Colorado; Mesa or Gilbert, Arizona; north Las Vegas or Henderson, Nevada. It’s not a big town. So if he were to pick Governor Kaine, it would be an intensely political choice where he said, `You know what? I’m really not, first and foremost, concerned with, is this person capable of being president of the United States?

*Second largest city in Alaska? He's an idiot too. And I wonder where Wasilla would rank on the list of America's largest cities? Richmond has a population of 200,000. Wasilla has a population of 9,000 tops.

<sarcasm>But of course McCain's choice wasn't "an intensely political choice where he said, `You know what? I’m really not, first and foremost, concerned with, is this person capable of being president of the United States.'" <sarcasm>

Edited September 6, 2008 by American Woman

[Liam]

post deleted

Edited September 6, 2008 by Liam

[CANADIEN]

Evidently being mayor of a really small town qualifies someone to be president. And being governor for two years. Correction: Apparently that's what makes a Republican qualified to be president. A Democrat, not so much.

KARL ROVE at his best:

On Palin: She’s a populist, she’s an economic and a social conservative, she’s a reformer, she took on the incumbent governor of the state Frank Murkowski — Republican — beat him in the primary, won an upset in the general election.She’s a former mayor. She’s the mayor of, I think, the second largest city in Alaska* before she ran for governor.

On Governor Kaine when he was on Obama's short list (emphasis mine): With all due respect again to Governor Kaine, he’s been a governor for three years, he’s been able but undistinguished. I don’t think people could really name a big, important thing that he’s done. He was mayor of the 105th largest city in America. And again, with all due respect to Richmond, Virginia, it’s smaller than Chula Vista, California; Aurora, Colorado; Mesa or Gilbert, Arizona; north Las Vegas or Henderson, Nevada. It’s not a big town. So if he were to pick Governor Kaine, it would be an intensely political choice where he said, `You know what? I’m really not, first and foremost, concerned with, is this person capable of being president of the United States?

*Second largest city in Alaska? He's an idiot too. And I wonder where Wasilla would rank on the list of America's largest cities? Richmond has a population of 200,000. Wasilla has a population of 9,000 tops.

<sarcasm>But of course McCain's choice wasn't "an intensely political choice where he said, `You know what? I’m really not, first and foremost, concerned with, is this person capable of being president of the United States.'" <sarcasm>

Wasilla is not even one of the 5 most populated towns in Alaska. I would not dismiss Governor Palin because she was the mayor of a small town, but those who would dismiss the former mayor of a city of 200000 people should look at whom their party chose.

[Guest American Woman]

Feminists telling women (well one woman in particular) to stay in the kitchen. Leftists all of a sudden talking about Jesus (because they think they can use him to endorse Barry).

I guess some people either can't recognize a joke when they hear/read it, or they're so dishonest they'll go on and on as if it isn't a joke anyway. And for the record, that observation includes everyone it fits in this thread, including the totally clueless "the American left is clueless" Canadian who apparently believes he knows all about the American left; or at least more about America than the AMERICAN Left does.

And for the record, Obama's name is Barack, not Barry. Your disrespect says nothing about him and everything about you.

I think it's safe to say, no matter who wins this election, one week of Sarah Palin brings more change than 4 years of Barack Obama ever could.

No one's denying that Palin wants to bring change, it's just that her change isn't the kind of change we're looking for. In case you're unaware if it, "change" isn't synonymous with "good." To clarify further, Mao brought change to China too, doesn't mean it was good. Bush brought change to America, too, and it wasn't good. So when Obama says he's for "change," it means change from the Bush administration, and I think that's obvious to most people who are discussing things 'honestly.' Palin wouldn't bring that kind of change.

But I'm curious. If Obama wins the election, exactly what kind of "change" will Palin be bringing in "one week?" For that matter, if McCain wins the election, what kind of change will Palin be bringing in one week?

[Guest American Woman]

Wasilla is not even one of the 5 most populated towns in Alaska. I would not dismiss Governor Palin because she was the mayor of a small town, but those who would dismiss the former mayor of a city of 200000 people should look at whom their party chose.

Wasilla isn't even one of the ten most populated towns in Alaska, and it sure would be far down the list of 'most populated cities in America,' which is the criteria Rove was using to dismiss Kaine.

So you're right-- those who dismiss the former mayor of a city of 200,000 most definitely should be at least as critical of a mayor of a town of 9,000-- and of the person who made that VP choice.

The "I don’t think people could really name a big, important thing that he’s done" comment was a classic. Most people didn't even know who Palin was, must less could "name a big, important thing that he’s done."

Edited September 6, 2008 by American Woman

[Liam]

Wasilla isn't even one of the ten most populated towns in Alaska, and it sure would be far down the list of 'most populated cities in America,' which is the criteria Rove was using to dismiss Kaine.

So you're right-- those who dismiss the former mayor of a city of 200,000 most definitely should be at least as critical of a mayor of a town of 9,000-- and of the person who made that VP choice.

The "I don’t think people could really name a big, important thing that he’s done" comment was a classic. Most people didn't even know who Palin was, must less could "name a big, important thing that he’s done."

IOKIYR: It's OK If You're Republican -- the rules we apply to them are suspended when applied back to us

Edited September 6, 2008 by Liam

[Guest American Woman]

IOKIYR: It's OK If You're Republican -- the rules we apply to them are suspended when applied back to us

Exactly. And no intelligent person (who is honest/hasn't had their intelligence completely compromised by blind partisanship) can deny that.

[Pliny]

The "I don’t think people could really name a big, important thing that he’s done" comment was a classic. Most people didn't even know who Palin was, must less could "name a big, important thing that he’s done."

Who's Kaine?

So Kaine won an election....and then it was business as usual.

Sarah Palin in defeating the incumbent accomplished what Barry (he used to call himself that) did when he beat the Clinton Machine for the Democratic nomination - and doing that is his greatest accomplishment.

Sarah Palin won an election....and then, from what I understand, it wasn't business as usual.

It's still early, there is much to learn about Sarah Palin yet. Barry has been on our TV's now for 6 months, I think we know him fairly well and where he stands. Once we have gotten to know a political figure time will stamp them as memorable or forgettable.

[Stephen Best]

I was listening to 2 US Cons talk about how Palin has executive experience and that Obama doesn`t and she is more qualify for their job as VP and President than Obama.

What's the canard I keep hearing about "executive experience" being a perquisite to be President of the United States? First, John McCain has no executive experience, unless you want to count working for his father-in-law at beer distributorship company. Obama, for his part, is currently the "chief executive officer" of, in effect, a 300 million dollar plus, 2,500 plus employee, national enterprise called a presidential campaign. Obama's campaign is arguably one the best political campaigns ever run. That's a testament not only to Obama's skills as an executive, but also as someone who knows how to hire, inspire, and keep competent staff. See "Relentless: How Barack Obama Outsmarted Hillary Clinton".

McCain's campaign on the other hand is bordering on disaster and chaos, thanks to incompetence at most levels: testament to McCain's executive management skills, or lack there of. A google search on McCain's campaign management and woes produces an impressive list of mistakes, messes, and screw ups. We don't know about his experience in the military because won't release his full military records. Gee, I wonder why? Maybe he's hiding something? Ya think?

As for Palin, her executive skills are such that she sparked formal investigations into her management abuses at both the municipal and state levels. In Wasilla, it was an administrator, not Palin, who did most of the management work. The administrator was hired because of questionable firings by Palin.

And lastly does anyone really think that John McCain, whose always lived off the charity, corruption, and avails of others, is going to give Sarah Palin with all her executive experience anything to do in a McCain White House more complex than feeding the Christians?

[Guest American Woman]

Sarah Palin in defeating the incumbent accomplished what Barry (he used to call himself that) .....

The key words there are "used to." As in prior to attending university,when he was a kid, "used to." He now clearly goes by Barack. He no more goes by "Barry" than Harper goes by "Stevie."

Do not use diminutives or character substitutions in proper names that are not recognized by the original person to whom the reference is being made. For example, Prime Minister Stephen Harper does not identify himself as Stevie therefore, it is unacceptable to identify him as Stevie.

[jefferiah]

I guess some people either can't recognize a joke when they hear/read it, or they're so dishonest they'll go on and on as if it isn't a joke anyway.

American Woman, if you will simply read the previous posts, you will see that I already acknowledged the fact that I did not immediately recognize the fact that Canadien was joking. But I also explained that by the time I realized it, Dobbin had jumped on the Obama is Christ train, so the majority of my arguments were aimed at him, along with a great deal of leftists I have been talking to in "American" political chat rooms, who are now telling me Jesus is a leftist and just like Obama.

[jefferiah]

What's the canard I keep hearing about "executive experience" being a perquisite to be President of the United States?

Well, it was your prerequisite. A week ago, your camp was concerned about what experience the lady might have, and now when she has some ........."whats this canard I keep hearing about....."

[jefferiah]

IOKIYR: It's OK If You're Republican -- the rules we apply to them are suspended when applied back to us

Not bad. Let me help you out here. You have it kind of reversed. When Sarah Palin pointed out she had executive experience that was the Republicans pointing out "the rules Democrats apply to us, are suspended when...."

A week ago, you folks were all over Sarah about her experience. So now when, in her own defense, she points out "well hey, just a minute here, I might actually have more than your guy", you are leaping to the defensive and whining about it. She said look, why don't you hold the messiah at the top of your ticket, to the same standard you are holding the VP candidate on ours. Sarah Palin has bigger balls than you.

Edited September 6, 2008 by jefferiah

[jefferiah]

No one's denying that Palin wants to bring change, it's just that her change isn't the kind of change we're looking for. In case you're unaware if it, "change" isn't synonymous with "good." To clarify further, Mao brought change to China too, doesn't mean it was good..

Lol American Woman. Perfect. You have now established why we think "Change", Obama's non-specific campaign promise, is not a necessarily a good policy. You are all of a sudden acting like Sarah Palin invented change. I simply said she brought more change in the last week, in reference to the fact that your guy is the one who keeps harping on about it.

I am terribly sorry for lacking respect of your messiah, and referring to him as Barry. In the future I will refrain from blaspheming Barack.

Edited September 6, 2008 by jefferiah

[Stephen Best]

Well, it was your prerequisite. A week ago, your camp was concerned about what experience the lady might have, and now when she has some ........."whats this canard I keep hearing about....."

Well that's revisionist history. It was "your" camp that was touting her "executive experience" which, upon examination, proved very thin gruel indeed. As I say, executive experience is a canard, but even on that arbitrary test McCain and Palin measure poorly, indeed. Despite the ticket's putative experience, they've learned very little. Whereas, Obama has proven that he excels at management.

FWIW, most of the duties of a President have to do with formulating, reforming, and administering laws. By that measure it would seem that a legal background, particularly a constitutional law one, would be the best experience. On that arbitrary test, the legally and ethically challenged Palin and McCain earn not poor, but failing, grades. Palin is accused of abusing laws, and McCain brags about breaking the rules when he was in the military. Barack Obama would get an A+ if law was the test. Would you not agree?

Or, in your view, is it better to elect law makers who don't know anything about the law? It seems that Republicans and conservatives covet ignorance and stupidity as qualities to be protected at all costs.

[Guest American Woman]

I am terribly sorry for lacking respect of your messiah, and referring to him as Barry. In the future I will refrain from blaspheming Barack.

Just curious. Do you enjoy being an ignoramus?

[Stephen Best]

Just curious. Do you enjoy being an ignoramus?

Probably doesn't notice.

[Stephen Best]

You have now established why we think "Change", Obama's non-specific campaign promise, is not a necessarily a good policy.

Seems to me that the full details of what Obama means by "Change" are available on his campaign website. The question is what does John "I'm for change, too" McCain mean by "Change"? It would appear change to McCain means more Bush. Check out McCain's website.

[bush_cheney2004]

...Or, in your view, is it better to elect law makers who don't know anything about the law? It seems that Republicans and conservatives covet ignorance and stupidity as qualities to be protected at all costs.

Whereas Democrats covet the trial lawyers and their association at all costs? How's that working out?

[Stephen Best]

Whereas Democrats covet the trial lawyers and their association at all costs? How's that working out?

So you don't believe in justice, fair trials, and holding the rich and powerful accountable for their crimes and abuse of power? You don't believe in the rule of law, or equality before and under the law, the Constitution, or a country of laws and not men. You must be a Republican: the party that Lincoln would never recognize.

[bush_cheney2004]

So you don't believe in justice, fair trials, and holding the rich and powerful accountable for their crimes and abuse of power? You don't believe in the rule of law, or equality before and under the law, the Constitution, or a country of laws and not men. You must be a Republican: the party that Lincoln would never recognize.

Nope...America's detractors can't escape the impact of "lawyers" on government and its laws, with very high barriers for anyone who can't afford their "services" to navigate either.

[kimmy]

I should have said "I think there might be something to the National Enquirer story," so I should have proof read that post and made the correction.

Freudian slip? Wishful thinking?

And I said that for two reasons:

1) I think there might be. As I said, they got the Edward's affair story right and it wasn't "unsupported." They kept at it until they had evidence he felt he couldn't deny. So they don't just sit in an office and make stuff up, they take 'investigative' measures too. So I think there might be something to this claim. It's not as if they've accused every politician of having an affair. Not by a long shot.

2) I was curious how many Palin supporters would point out what kind of news outlet the National Enquirer is known to be after the condemnation of Edwards, or the complete silence as others went on about his guilt, based soley on the National Enquirer.

People are skeptical of the National Inquirer because they're the National Inquirer.

When they are the only source for a rumour, their credibility is directly an issue, and their track record speaks for itself. The fact that they got the Edwards story right is balanced by the stratospheric number of retractions they've been forced to make and the number of lawsuit settlements they've had to pay out over their lengthy history of slandering the biggest names of the moment.

The "real" media, having already given John Edwards the benefit of the doubt regarding National Inquirer allegations, would only add further fuel to the charges of bias if they changed their standard for this particular story.

And, it certainly looks like they were right to hold off from jumping on this. Seems like more business as usual for the Inquirer:

Debbie Richter saves Inquiring Minds $1.25

Who, if not the woman supposedly cheated on, would be making the allegations of an affair?

Now here's my question. If there is something to this affair, does that automatically make Trig his baby? Because there's not a lot of defense for Edwards against that claim either.

I've been trying to find people renewing the call for DNA testing to determine Trig's parentage, but so far have come up empty. Valuable Kimmy-Points are available to the first person who can find a link to renewed requests for DNA tests of Trig!

-k

[jefferiah]

Just curious. Do you enjoy being an ignoramus?

An example of the well-thought out arguments one hears from the Left towards anyone who disagrees with them.

[Stephen Best]

Nope...America's detractors can't escape the impact of "lawyers" on government and its laws, with very high barriers for anyone who can't afford their "services" to navigate either.

Which, of course, is the magic of class action and contingency fees, without which the United States would be more unjust than it already is.