McCain picks woman for VP slot

[WIP]

How am I being a hypocrite because of something Rush Limbaugh said? And where did i caste judgement on the spears family?

Well this certainly is old news! Now, if I recall, you posted one of the comments complaining about people judging other peoples parenting abilities. My point is that judging other peoples' parenting and their children is a regular sport for conservative and fundamentalist commentators, and I never hear them told to back off by their conservative fans.

The hypocrisy of reframing Sarah Palin's daughters teen pregnancy as a pro life story is that when it was Jamie Lynn Spears, conservative talkingheads like Limbaugh and O'Reilly made it a Sodom and Gomorrah story about immorality and poor parenting.

I remember all of these critics complaining about movies like Juno for encouraging teens to have sex, not that they were wonderful pro life messages. It's pro life when it's about conservative fundamentalists; it's sexual immorality when it's everyone else!

[CANADIEN]

It is John McCain, not Sarah Palin, who is running for president.

If the Democrats want to argue the experience of the woman who'd be "one heartbeat away" against the experience of the man who'd be in the big chair on day one, that's their perogative, I suppose, but that comparison is not actually as compelling to most voters as Obama boosters think:

"Forty-four percent (44%) of voters say Palin has the better experience while 48% say Obama has the edge. Among unaffiliated voters, 45% say Obama has better experience while 42% say Palin."

And? Both of them have gone on to other things since.

But again, the Democrats themselves were the ones who begged the comparison between Palin's experience as mayor (by dismissing it) and Obama's experience as a community organizer (by hyping it up for 4 days at their convention.) I am a little weary of the moaning that it was mean of Palin to compare her experience as mayor to Obama's experience as community organizer, when it was Obama's own spokesman who put it forward.

-k

You got something right, for once. The Democratic campaign dismissed Palin's past experience as a mayor because it was irrelevant to the job at hand. The Republican campaign did not just dismiss Obama's experience; they insulted every person who has worked and is working tp help people and communities better their lot in life, by saying they didn't have responsibilities. As for the little "we are so offended" Republican whimpering... seeing the pot call the kettle black is amusing only for a while; it's already getting boring.

[CANADIEN]

The fact that many leftists don't understand all this noise about "community organizers" just shows me how clueless they are about the ordinary people they claim to represent.

And who do you think people who set up retraining and litteracy programs, programs to help youth at risks, tenants associations, voter registration drives, or for that matter people who sit on PTAs (Sarah Palin's first involvement in public life) work with and for? Those people are not ordinary enough for your taste? If that's so, you are the clueless one.

Edited September 9, 2008 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

It is John McCain, not Sarah Palin, who is running for president.

Thank you for reminding me that Sarah Palin is a formidable super-qualified candidate who can do the job... until there is any criticism of her and question as whether or not she is qualified; then it's "but she is not running for President".

If the Democrats want to argue the experience of the woman who'd be "one heartbeat away" against the experience of the man who'd be in the big chair on day one, that's their perogative, I suppose, but that comparison is not actually as compelling to most voters as Obama boosters think:

"Forty-four percent (44%) of voters say Palin has the better experience while 48% say Obama has the edge. Among unaffiliated voters, 45% say Obama has better experience while 42% say Palin."

As I always said, neither one's resume tells me if they are qualified or not.

[CANADIEN]

She did mention that bridge to nowhere in her Vice-Presidential address. It wasn't originally her project though was it? It was a Federal initiative. She may have supported it initially but who started calling it wasteful? Someone not in Alaska, I'm sure. A road got built. Is that the damage? What principle did she sacrifice?

I forgot that has long as a person is a social conservative/christian fundamentalist, he/she shows high principles when jumping on the bandwagon when a project is popular (and funded by the federal government after intense lobbying by the State of Alaska and Alaska's members of Congress), then jump off the bandwagon and denounce the project when it becomes evident. I expect politicians to wear flip flops, but Palin showing pride in it is pushing the enveloppe.

PS: The infamous road built with money Alaska did not return to Congress when the bridge was caancelled leads to only one place... the site of the bridge that now will not be built. Why do I think that's a waste of money?

Karl "Rowe" said that did he? And the republican party picked it up and ran with it. It was all over the media and a hot topic for weeks. Funny, I don't remember it.

Thanks for reminding of what the actual spelling of last name of the man is. And for reminding me that the Republican party and some of its members and supporters seem to be suffering of collective amnesia when it comes to the things they have said and done in the past.

[CANADIEN]

I think Steyn tagged the term "community organizer" best back in May

That's the same Steyn who, on September 12, 2001, cast part of the blame for the events of the previous day (we all remeber what they were, don't way) on SOCCER MOMS and their demands for spending oon education instead of defense. I wonder if she finds anything wrong about soccer or hockey moms now that one of them brings his type of political ideas to the forefront.

I must say though I am not surprised that Mr. Steyn does not want people helping other people in his community.

[Pliny]

Pliny

I beleive that was the case. It was the Repubilcan senator of Alaska Ted Stevens, that had made sure those earmarks went in for that Bridge to Nowhere. It was Congress who killed the bridge, not Palin, but yet she takes credit for it.

She sacraficed integrity and honesty right there and then, just like a true politician.

I don't know about her sacrificing integrity and honesty, Congress complained, I suppose she could have jumped up and down and threw a tantrum. But she decided it would be better to accept what they were giving and fixed up a bunch of other roads, and built a new one to "nowhere?"

What would you have done? Built the Bridge and faced the wrath of Congress (Did I mention it was a democratic congress. Seems the Republican Congress oKed the earmark and the Democratic Congress oked the money but dictated how she should spend it. She killed the project herself after some coercive warnings from congress. Did I mention it was a Democratic Congress?)

The dynamics of what happened there has not been entirely revealed to us, I'm sure. We are not omniscient and can't tell everything about what occurred. You have no idea if she sacrificed integrity and honesty. It is entirely an opinion. I can bet the Ferry workers Union was happy and they probably did the lobbying to congress to cancel it, calling it a waste. All conjecture, I made that up but there is more to the story in all probability.

I find myself in an awkward place. I don't trust politicians at all and it is very difficult for me to defend them. I do so only when they hint at systemic change in the political hierarchy and oppose the promised increases of the welfare state spouted by proponents of such.

Edited September 9, 2008 by Pliny

[Pliny]

I forgot that has long as a person is a social conservative/christian fundamentalist, he/she shows high principles when jumping on the bandwagon when a project is popular (and funded by the federal government after intense lobbying by the State of Alaska and Alaska's members of Congress), then jump off the bandwagon and denounce the project when it becomes evident.

....when it becomes evident.....??? Congress didn't want the Bridge built (Did I mention it was a Democratic Congress). There was outrage and it was called wasteful. She did stop the project. She could have gone ahead with it I suppose and been berated for that by the Democratic Congress. What would you do? Face the ire of the representatives of the Nation or do something else.

I expect politicians to wear flip flops, but Palin showing pride in it is pushing the enveloppe.

What would you do?

PS: The infamous road built with money Alaska did not return to Congress when the bridge was caancelled leads to only one place... the site of the bridge that now will not be built. Why do I think that's a waste of money?

Because you are a Canadian.

Thanks for reminding of what the actual spelling of last name of the man is. And for reminding me that the Republican party and some of its members and supporters seem to be suffering of collective amnesia when it comes to the things they have said and done in the past.

Collective amensia. Hmmm...you think we been hypotized?

[CANADIEN]

....when it becomes evident.....??? Congress didn't want the Bridge built (Did I mention it was a Democratic Congress). There was outrage and it was called wasteful. She did stop the project. She could have gone ahead with it I suppose and been berated for that by the Democratic Congress. What would you do? Face the ire of the representatives of the Nation or do something else.

Saying "you know what, now that Congress won't pay for it, we cannot afford it" would have been one thing. Even saying "shame on those Democrats for opposing a good and useful project" would have been good enough. But she went way further, saying " I said to Congress 'thanks but not thanks' to that bridge to nowhere". In one sentence, she used the same words she had denounced as an insult to Alaska less than 18 months earlier, described as wasteful a project she was praising when she thought that Congress would pay for it. and claimed she stopped Congress from putting money in a project that CONGRESS didn't want to fund.

Collective amensia. Hmmm...you think we been hypotized?

No

Edited September 9, 2008 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

Ah the perils of writing at one in the morning.

I forgot that has long as a person is a social conservative/christian fundamentalist, he/she shows high principles when jumping on the bandwagon when a project is popular (and funded by the federal government after intense lobbying by the State of Alaska and Alaska's members of Congress), then jump off the bandwagon and denounce the project when it becomes evident that Congress now opposes it

[moderateamericain]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080909/ap_on_el_pr/obama_palin

Palin gives GOP a boost. Looks like Mccain made the right choice.

[moderateamericain]

Well this certainly is old news! Now, if I recall, you posted one of the comments complaining about people judging other peoples parenting abilities. My point is that judging other peoples' parenting and their children is a regular sport for conservative and fundamentalist commentators, and I never hear them told to back off by their conservative fans.

The hypocrisy of reframing Sarah Palin's daughters teen pregnancy as a pro life story is that when it was Jamie Lynn Spears, conservative talkingheads like Limbaugh and O'Reilly made it a Sodom and Gomorrah story about immorality and poor parenting.

I remember all of these critics complaining about movies like Juno for encouraging teens to have sex, not that they were wonderful pro life messages. It's pro life when it's about conservative fundamentalists; it's sexual immorality when it's everyone else!

Yeah but what does that have to do with my statement. Absolutely nothing. Your using the words of others to refute my statment. Thats called a falacious argument. Furthermore Bi-partisan politics that go after someone's family is disgusting to me. Talk about low class. I can't make an argument for my belief so ill just attack you or someone close to you. You could drop the Rush Limbaugh's of the world off a cliff and I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. Same for Liberal Radio jockies and Television speaking heads.

[bush_cheney2004]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080909/ap_on_el_pr/obama_palin

Palin gives GOP a boost. Looks like Mccain made the right choice.

Right....for the purposes of this political exercise, that's all that matters, even if she sacrifices goats and lambs on an alter in Alaska.

[moderateamericain]

Right....for the purposes of this political exercise, that's all that matters, even if she sacrifices goats and lambs on an alter in Alaska.

all that matters really is what people do in Nov. If you really wanna get down to it

[stevoh]

The swing in voters apparently comes mainly from white women voters.

Perhaps the suggestion that this election is more about image than policy is correct.

[bush_cheney2004]

The swing in voters apparently comes mainly from white women voters.

Perhaps the suggestion that this election is more about image than policy is correct.

Policy and "issues" have always been overrated....image matters based on American media content and consumer choices for a significant number of voters. Policy wonks and party hacks are predictably boring and biased when it comes to any discerning attributes, but people can judge a candidate's "favourables" all by themselves.

...even Jesus got crucified.

Edited September 9, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

[GostHacked]

Policy and "issues" have always been overrated....image matters based on American media content and consumer choices for a significant number of voters. Policy wonks and party hacks are predictably boring and biased when it comes to any discerning attributes, but people can judge a candidate's "favourables" all by themselves.

...even Jesus got crucified.

The image means nothing if there is no substance. And if you are basing your vote on an image, then you should not be voting at all. Policies matter, plain and simple. If they do not matter, we can get a monkey in office.

People are idiots plain and simple if they vote for an image. But if it is about image, then Palin as a former beauty queen should be Pres and not McCain.

An image will only get you somewhere if you are in Hollywood.

[bush_cheney2004]

The image means nothing if there is no substance. And if you are basing your vote on an image, then you should not be voting at all. Policies matter, plain and simple. If they do not matter, we can get a monkey in office.

Great...then I look forward to your new Prime Minister...Stephane Dion.

People are idiots plain and simple if they vote for an image. But if it is about image, then Palin as a former beauty queen should be Pres and not McCain.

People can vote for whomever they damn well please. President Palin is one step closer to being a reality.

An image will only get you somewhere if you are in Hollywood.

OK...I guess there is no "Hollywood" in Canada.

[Shady]

An image will only get you somewhere if you are in Hollywood.

Exactly. Which is why Obama's campaign is in serious trouble. Quick Barry, go get those styrofoam greek pillars again! Better yet, maybe you can arrange another appearance on Oprah!

[Argus]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080909/ap_on_el_pr/obama_palin

Palin gives GOP a boost. Looks like Mccain made the right choice.

If you mean he made the right choice to boost his electoral hopes then perhaps.

On the other hand, if you mean, he made the right choice in selecting someone who could take over the reigns of power and steer the most powerful nation on earth through troubled times if anything happened to him - not a chance in hell.

[Argus]

Policy and "issues" have always been overrated....image matters based on American media content and consumer choices for a significant number of voters. Policy wonks and party hacks are predictably boring and biased when it comes to any discerning attributes, but people can judge a candidate's "favourables" all by themselves.

Uh huh. Lookit, suppose this woman comes off her little job as mayor asshat Alaska and was to try and run for mayor of a big city like Chicago or Dallas. They'd laugh her out of the room. "What, you think because you were the part-time mayor of some rinky-dink little town in Alaska you can run the multibillion budget and huge staff of a major city!? Are you crazy!"

Now it's eighteen months since then and you think she's ready to run the United States?

[GostHacked]

Great...then I look forward to your new Prime Minister...Stephane Dion.

Don't see the relevance, sorry.

People can vote for whomever they damn well please. President Palin is one step closer to being a reality.

Sure they can vote for whoever they want. But ask those people why .. and you will get a blank look. Image is nothing without substance. If people vote for the image, they themselves have no substance.

OK...I guess there is no "Hollywood" in Canada.

You guess correct.

[Guest American Woman]

If you mean he made the right choice to boost his electoral hopes then perhaps.

Time will tell. Right now she's the 'new kid on the block,' without any baggage that people who have been on the national political scene have had to deal with. The initial 'crush' so many have on her may wear off by election day.

On the other hand, if you mean, he made the right choice in selecting someone who could take over the reigns of power and steer the most powerful nation on earth through troubled times if anything happened to him - not a chance in hell.

You got that right.

[jefferiah]

The image means nothing if there is no substance. And if you are basing your vote on an image, then you should not be voting at all. Policies matter, plain and simple. If they do not matter, we can get a monkey in office.

People are idiots plain and simple if they vote for an image. But if it is about image, then Palin as a former beauty queen should be Pres and not McCain.

An image will only get you somewhere if you are in Hollywood.

McCain/Palin have the monopoly on the issues too. Obama wants to raise taxes on the people who already pay the highest rates. He thinks people who make over 100 grand should pay even more. That is not going to help stimulate a better economy. Raising the minimum wage at this point in time won't either. It will probably result in higher unemployment rates. He wants to drastically increase the capital gains tax, even though history has shown that lower capital gains taxes actually generate more tax revenue because there is a greater incentive to sell.

He wants to further cripple the Patriot Act. I know that is a controversial subject, but I think it would be unwise to do so. Despite the claims that proponents of this are fear-mongering, the reality is that the Patriotic Act has been vital in stopping terrorist attacks since 9/11, though the media largely ignores this. Everyone who drives across the Brooklyn Bridge right now should be grateful for the Patriot Act, imo.

Obama makes entire speeches about how John McCain and Palin are ignoring the issues and then launches into the same old bit about "Er um, JOhn McCain.....is not the, er um, agent of change we need in this country." By talking about change and how John McCain does not talk about the issues, Obama seems to divert people from the fact that he isnt talking about them either. At least no more than McCain/Palin have thus far.

Edited September 9, 2008 by jefferiah

[bush_cheney2004]

Uh huh. Lookit, suppose this woman comes off her little job as mayor asshat Alaska and was to try and run for mayor of a big city like Chicago or Dallas. They'd laugh her out of the room. "What, you think because you were the part-time mayor of some rinky-dink little town in Alaska you can run the multibillion budget and huge staff of a major city!? Are you crazy!"

Uhhh....looky here...I can make a very good case for nearly any part of Canada being just about as challenging as "AssHat Alaska", yet there seems to be no shortage of would be PMs and MPs. You want her to pay some dues in the big city? Well, how has that worked out so far for prior US presidents?

Now it's eighteen months since then and you think she's ready to run the United States?

It's not that difficult to "run the United States". Bill Clinton managed to do it (arguably) even while being impeached. There are several MALE presidents with no more experience than Palin, and at least one other MALE candidate equally "unqualified".

I hope she puts pink ribbons and "Kisses from God" on each laser guided bomb.