View Full Version : Sarah Palin scares the hell out of me.
TheKilo
09-29-2008, 11:15 AM
Nothing substantive. But she's a goddamned moron and shouldn't be put in any position of power.
a700hitter
09-29-2008, 11:54 AM
She will be Vice President. As former VP John Nance Garner has said, the Vice Presidency is not worth a bucket of warm spit. There is no power vested in the vice president. She'll do a great job at funerals of foreign dignitaries.
HeadOfSoxNation
09-29-2008, 12:08 PM
She will be Vice President. As former VP John Nance Garner has said, the Vice Presidency is not worth a bucket of warm spit. There is no power vested in the vice president. She'll do a great job at funerals of foreign dignitaries.
Wager? Manny Ramirez has as good of a chance at becoming Vice President of the United States as Sarah Palin does. That charade of a campaign will not succeed. McCain's choosing of Palin is an out and out admission that he doesn't stand a chance in this election and had to do something drastic. Unfortunately, to McCain, "drastic" and "outright stupid" seem to be somewhat synonymous.
TheKilo
09-29-2008, 01:15 PM
She will be Vice President. As former VP John Nance Garner has said, the Vice Presidency is not worth a bucket of warm spit. There is no power vested in the vice president. She'll do a great job at funerals of foreign dignitaries.
Do you dispute she's a moron, though?
a700hitter
09-29-2008, 02:16 PM
Do you dispute she's a moron, though?I think Biden is a moron so it would be a pointless argument. I think they are both fully capable of handling the ceremonial duties of the VP.
TheKilo
09-29-2008, 02:28 PM
That's not really what I asked.
Do you dispute she's a moron, though?
She is a moron. She's also hot. I want to bang her.
Biden is also a moron. He's not hot. I do not want to bang him.
Palin>>>Biden
a700hitter
09-29-2008, 02:35 PM
That's not really what I asked.I have followed Biden for years, and I am quite certain that he is a moron. I really know very little about Palin, and I have seen very very little of her debating or discussing issues in public. It certainly is too small of a sample size for me to conclude that she is a moron. That being said, I haven't seen her look this stupid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxBX8sz3tO8
or this stupid
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbpWonUzlrc
Nothing even close.
TheKilo
09-29-2008, 03:15 PM
I have followed Biden for years, and I am quite certain that he is a moron. I really know very little about Palin, and I have seen very very little of her debating or discussing issues in public. It certainly is too small of a sample size for me to conclude that she is a moron. That being said, I haven't seen her look this stupid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxBX8sz3tO8
or this stupid
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbpWonUzlrc
Nothing even close.
I will say this - when Katie Couric makes you look bad in an interview you know you're not doing something right.
CrespoBlows
09-29-2008, 03:20 PM
The argument that Palin is less stupid, because Biden is more stupid is nonsense.
If Palin is stupid, and you know she is stupid, call her stupid. That's like accusing other kids of being rotten, when yours are just as bad. This argument is nothing more than blind party loyalty.
Can some of you guys please look at Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin, Ralph Nader, or even Cynthia McKinney? Despite our laws that discourage third parties from running, these people are still running for President. If you truly do not want to vote for McCain or Obama, but are only doing so, because they are the lesser of two evils, then "Change" will never happen.
a700hitter
09-29-2008, 03:42 PM
I will say this - when Katie Couric makes you look bad in an interview you know you're not doing something right.She didn't look anywhere as stupid as Obama looked in those Youtube clips, and he was not responding to an interviewers question, nor were those clips edited by a network.
CrespoBlows
09-29-2008, 03:43 PM
Wager? Manny Ramirez has as good of a chance at becoming Vice President of the United States as Sarah Palin does. That charade of a campaign will not succeed. McCain's choosing of Palin is an out and out admission that he doesn't stand a chance in this election and had to do something drastic. Unfortunately, to McCain, "drastic" and "outright stupid" seem to be somewhat synonymous.
It worked. Why are you surprised by this?
Palin has energized the conservative base, making them the party of working class patriotism, reform, youth, and resourcefulness to their voters. Obama has energized the liberal base, but he's still pushing the same failed socialist policies that John Kerry talked about in 2004. He's simply a better salesman.
McCain revamped his marketing strategy, and people fell in love with it. He's still the same neo-conservative that wants to drop more bombs in the Middle East.
I don't really care that Palin is a pitbull with lipstick, or that Obama is a champion of the working class. If they are wrong on the issues, I won't vote for them. The most mundane candidate, who is right on the issues will get my vote. (See Paul, Ron)
NateGrey
09-29-2008, 07:15 PM
. Q: you know what's the difference between bush and palin . ? .
*drumroll*
. A: lipstick .
.
HeadOfSoxNation
09-29-2008, 10:32 PM
It worked. Why are you surprised by this?
Palin has energized the conservative base, making them the party of working class patriotism, reform, youth, and resourcefulness to their voters. Obama has energized the liberal base, but he's still pushing the same failed socialist policies that John Kerry talked about in 2004. He's simply a better salesman.
McCain revamped his marketing strategy, and people fell in love with it. He's still the same neo-conservative that wants to drop more bombs in the Middle East.
I don't really care that Palin is a pitbull with lipstick, or that Obama is a champion of the working class. If they are wrong on the issues, I won't vote for them. The most mundane candidate, who is right on the issues will get my vote. (See Paul, Ron)
It didn't work. McCain is still going to lose, only now he's going to look ridiculous doing it. This is such a failed marketing plan because it goes after such a small group. Or at least, it will only potentially work on a small few. Think about it...
This plan was obviously set forth to capture the female voter. That's fine. There are Republican females who will vote Republican regardless of who the candidate or their running mate is. You have the Democratic females who will vote for the Democratic candidate regardless of who he is or who his running mate is. You then have the swing voters who can be swayed either way. Now, you're going to take a ridiculous small portion of this group to find those that this strategy will work on; those who want to vote for a female. The amount of individuals in this group who will vote for a female just for the sake of voting for a female is tiny...far too small to make any kind of difference in the overall scheme of the election.
McCain/Palin has no chance. Does ANYONE want to wager this against me? Please?
TheKilo
09-29-2008, 10:46 PM
Could the same thing not have been said after Bush's first term?
CrespoBlows
09-29-2008, 10:55 PM
It didn't work. McCain is still going to lose, only now he's going to look ridiculous doing it. This is such a failed marketing plan because it goes after such a small group. Or at least, it will only potentially work on a small few. Think about it...
It worked, because it energized the conservative base that was reluctant to accept him. A major bloc of the Republicans, are conservative Christians. When you have an attractive, bubbly persona endorsing your pro-life views, more people are more apt to cast their ballots for you party. Do you notice that some of the most critical conservative radio show hosts, who swore to campaign against McCain, are now pacified by the selection of Sarah Palin? A lot of people's minds are made up by the conservative media, and when they are talking up your ticket, rather than tearing it down, voters are going to show up at the poll.
If you are really marginalizing the effect of Sarah Palin on rural America, than you obviously haven't spent a day in the Deep South. I live in Azle, TX (population 8,000), which is as big as a Bible thumpin' town you can live in. These morons won't shut the fuck up about Palin. The Palin effect caused McCain to surge past Obama for a brief moment.
Sarah Palin's explosive debut at the Republican convention has helped John McCain surge ahead of Barack Obama in the race for the White House.
One leading poll put Mr McCain nearly 4 per cent ahead - just days after trailing his Democrat rival by as many as eight points.
It is the first time the 72-year-old Arizona senator has held a significant lead since early May.
Pundits and pollsters put the comeback down to 'the Palin effect'.
They claimed the Republican vice-presidential candidate's punchy convention speech deserved much of the credit for helping Mr McCain bounce back.
Her selection as running mate so captivated America that despite a programme truncated by Hurricane Gustav, the Republicans won the highest TV ratings ever for a U.S. political convention.
According to the Zogby survey, the McCain/Palin ticket now holds a 49.7 per cent to 45.9 per cent lead over Mr Obama and his running mate, Joe Biden.
Pollster John Zogby said: 'Clearly, Palin is helping the McCain ticket. She has high favourability numbers, and has unified the Republican Party.'
Only a week ago, nearly a quarter of those surveyed said they didn't know enough about the 44-year-old Alaska governor to have an opinion about her.
That figure has now dropped to 4 per cent.
The daily Gallup poll, which had Mr Obama eight points ahead as recently as the end of last week, now says the difference between the candidates is too close to call.
A senior political strategist said: 'The choice of Sarah Palin may well turn out to be a masterstroke for McCain. She has given the party the energy it was lacking before last week.'
The bounce in popularity comes despite a rollercoaster week for Mrs Palin when she admitted her 17-year-old daughter was pregnant and battled gossip over her marriage.
Her Right-wing views are said to have reached Republicans who were lukewarm about Mr McCain's more moderate conservatism.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/10/2361046.htm?section=world
This plan was obviously set forth to capture the female voter. That's fine.
Partly true. This was also used to satisfy the angry conservative base that hated McCain. It worked.
There are Republican females who will vote Republican regardless of who the candidate or their running mate is. You have the Democratic females who will vote for the Democratic candidate regardless of who he is or who his running mate is. You then have the swing voters who can be swayed either way. Now, you're going to take a ridiculous small portion of this group to find those that this strategy will work on; those who want to vote for a female. The amount of individuals in this group who will vote for a female just for the sake of voting for a female is tiny...far too small to make any kind of difference in the overall scheme of the election.
You're dismissing the effect of the rallied Christian base on the poll. McCain is likely to crush Obama in the rural states, and the usual battleground states are too close to call right now.
McCain needs to pay Ron Paul to put a hit on Obama, about his funding on the Iraq War, and his quotes about Iran and Pakistan. That might sway some anti-war moderates who'd side with McCain on economic issues.
McCain/Palin has no chance. Does ANYONE want to wager this against me? Please?
I really think it's too close to call right now.
I do agree with you that the Palin move was a desperate one, but that doesn't mean it didn't work. Also consider the fact that Palin wasn't selected to change your mind.
CrespoBlows
09-29-2008, 10:59 PM
Could the same thing not have been said after Bush's first term?
No, because Obama would have cleaned Bush's clock in 2004. John Kerry was the worst possible choice.
Jacoby_Ellsbury
09-29-2008, 11:00 PM
If McCain's elected, I'm going to Canada. Especially because the country's already halfway down the toilet with the wall street bullshit.
EDIT: although, since the western hemisphere's financial fortunes hang in the balance of the U.S. economy, maybe I'm fucked no matter what.
CrespoBlows
09-29-2008, 11:01 PM
If McCain's elected, I'm going to Canada. Especially because the country's already halfway down the toilet with the wall street bullshit.
EDIT: although, since the western hemisphere's financial fortunes hang in the balance of the U.S. economy, maybe I'm fucked no matter what.
Why do you think socialism is a better solution to the economic problems than the free market?
Don't get me wrong, McCain is not a huge supporter of the free market himself, but he looks like Milton Friedman compared to Obama.
Jacoby_Ellsbury
09-29-2008, 11:03 PM
Why do you think socialism is a better solution to the economic problems than the free market?
Don't get me wrong, McCain is not a huge supporter of the free market himself, but he looks like Milton Friedman compared to Obama.
When did I say anything about solutions? I don't know dick about economics. Other than the fact that the country's in a royal shithole.
CrespoBlows
09-29-2008, 11:04 PM
When did I say anything about solutions? I don't know dick about economics. Other than the fact that the country's in a royal shithole.
I was confused by the fact that you chose to bring up solely John McCain, but neglected Barack Obama. (While mentioning Wall Street and Canada, a socialistic country)
Jacoby_Ellsbury
09-29-2008, 11:05 PM
I was confused by the fact that you chose to bring up solely John McCain, but neglected Barack Obama. (While mentioning Wall Street)
I'll say this.
I dislike Obama, but I dislike McCain a lot more (speaking from a policies and ideas standpoint). I think that if Obama's elected, things have a better chance of getting better sooner than if the Sarah Palin show wanders into the Oval Office.
I'm not banking on anything though (no pun intended).
CrespoBlows
09-29-2008, 11:09 PM
I'll say this.
I hate John McCain, I dislike Barack Obama. I think that if Obama's elected, things have a better chance of getting better sooner than if the Sarah Palin show wanders into the Oval Office.
Sarah Palin will have no effect on Wall Street. Obama and McCain both endorsed the bailouts. I don't see the difference. Obama's campaign promises total $1 trillion dollars. McCain wants to nuke Iran. They both are horrible candidates.
Jacoby_Ellsbury
09-29-2008, 11:10 PM
I'm talking in a general sense. Though I do think we should have passed the bailout bill but whatever.
It didn't work. McCain is still going to lose, only now he's going to look ridiculous doing it. This is such a failed marketing plan because it goes after such a small group. Or at least, it will only potentially work on a small few. Think about it...
This plan was obviously set forth to capture the female voter. That's fine. There are Republican females who will vote Republican regardless of who the candidate or their running mate is. You have the Democratic females who will vote for the Democratic candidate regardless of who he is or who his running mate is. You then have the swing voters who can be swayed either way. Now, you're going to take a ridiculous small portion of this group to find those that this strategy will work on; those who want to vote for a female. The amount of individuals in this group who will vote for a female just for the sake of voting for a female is tiny...far too small to make any kind of difference in the overall scheme of the election.
McCain/Palin has no chance. Does ANYONE want to wager this against me? Please?
I will. Not that I advocate McCain [I haven't made up my mind] but I think it's far from decided.
CrespoBlows
09-29-2008, 11:14 PM
I'm talking in a general sense. Though I do think we should have passed the bailout bill but whatever.
Why?
Why do failing businesses deserve a safety net?
Why should we reward speculators with bailouts?
Why should the taxpayers pay for this?
How can we afford to print more money, when the dollar is already in a free fall?
How can this country, with a $10.6 trillion dollar debt, afford to be spending another $1 trillion on this horrible plan?
How does encouraging more borrowing and spending fix the crisis in this country?
CrespoBlows
09-29-2008, 11:16 PM
HOSN,
Do you consider yourself to be a Keynesian?
a700hitter
09-29-2008, 11:19 PM
I hate John McCain, I dislike Barack Obama. But I think that if Obama's elected, things have a better chance of getting better sooner than if the Sarah Palin show wanders into the Oval Office.
I'm not banking on anything though (no pun intended).What is the basis for your "hatred" of John McCain. That's a pretty strong word, especially for a guy who gave what he gave to this country before he ever became a politician.
As far as the Sarah Palin Show is concerned, VP's almost never have any power or influence in the Oval Office. Cheney was an extremely rare exception. VP's go to official state functions and attend funerals. That's about it.
Jacoby_Ellsbury
09-29-2008, 11:25 PM
Why do failing businesses deserve a safety net?
I keep hearing how we need to 'let them learn from their mistakes'. Uh, yeah, hello? They're not going to learn. This resembles the 1929 fiasco when the government didn't want to get involved in what was clearly a major shitstorm in the making.
Why should we reward speculators with bailouts?
I guess this goes with the above thought.
Why should the taxpayers pay for this?
Well the alternative is a fuckload of failing businesses and economic disaster. Why does that need to happen? I'm assuming you're a Republican from your arguments thus far, these businesses/banks failing will only drastically hurt the Republican financial theories (the 'trickle-down' is what I call it).
How can we afford to print more money, when the dollar is already in a free fall?
Better than nothing. We'll have one big-ass depression otherwise. Not that the rich republicans give a shit, they're all about stealing from the middle-class/poor and giving back to the rich under the ridiculous assumption that the money will find its way back to the middle-class in the form of more jobs and more produced goods. How's that working out?
How can this country, with a $10.6 trillion dollar debt, afford to be spending another $1 trillion on this horrible plan?
This probably goes in with my first thought of this post.
How does encouraging more borrowing and spending fix the crisis in this country?
Well if we just sit and do nothing, shit's gonna collapse.
Jacoby_Ellsbury
09-29-2008, 11:27 PM
What is the basis for your "hatred" of John McCain. That's a pretty strong word, especially for a guy who gave what he gave to this country before he ever became a politician.
Yeah hatred's strong, I agree. I'll get rid of that. Let's just say I'm not in love with his ideas.
As far as the Sarah Palin Show is concerned, VP's almost never have any power or influence in the Oval Office. Cheney was an extremely rare exception. VP's go to official state functions and attend funerals. That's about it.
And if something happens to McCain and she becomes the President of the United States... that doesn't scare the shit out of you?
TheKilo
09-29-2008, 11:40 PM
What is the basis for your "hatred" of John McCain. That's a pretty strong word, especially for a guy who gave what he gave to this country before he ever became a politician.
As far as the Sarah Palin Show is concerned, VP's almost never have any power or influence in the Oval Office. Cheney was an extremely rare exception. VP's go to official state functions and attend funerals. That's about it.
To be fair, Kerry gave to his country and his named was dragged through the mud by the Bush campaign.
Can't have it both ways.
CrespoBlows
09-29-2008, 11:41 PM
I keep hearing how we need to 'let them learn from their mistakes'. Uh, yeah, hello? They're not going to learn. This resembles the 1929 fiasco when the government didn't want to get involved in what was clearly a major shitstorm in the making.
You need to study the Great Depression, and how government involvement made it worse.
This financial crisis is a result of our flawed monetary policy. The Federal Reserve can artifically keep interest rates low, and the government passed legislation that forced banks to approve loans to people who are usually considered credit risks. The Federal Reserve created the financial bubble out of thin air, and predictibly, when the market needs to correct itself, the shit came crashing down.
The housing market is suffering, because we built too many houses, and the value began slipping dramatically, when the bubble couldn't sustain itself. The government wants to prop prices upward, which might stave off the inevitable recession for a little bit, but the more and more money we print is going to cause the ENITRE economy to collapse.
Well the alternative is a fuckload of failing businesses and economic disaster. Why does that need to happen? I'm assuming you're a Republican from your arguments thus far, these businesses/banks failing will only drastically hurt the Republican financial theories (the 'trickle-down' is what I call it).
A Republican president supports these bailouts. A Republican presidential candidate also supports it. Why am I a Republican? Because I'm a fiscal conservative?
I'm a Libertarian. (Or a Robert Taft Republican)
Better than nothing. We'll have one big-ass depression otherwise. Not that the rich republicans give a shit, they're all about stealing from the middle-class/poor and giving back to the rich under the ridiculous assumption that the money will find its way back to the middle-class in the form of more jobs and more produced goods. How's that working out?
We'll have a long depression if we keep creating credit and dollars out of thin air. A recession will probably happen, but it would be over relatively quickly, as soon as the market corrected the flaws that government is trying to fix. They wanted to buy $700 billion in illiquid assets? Why do you think Wall Street is so supportive of these bailouts? They get to dump their poor investment decisions on the American people. No one wants them. There's a reason they are called illiquid. The government thinks they can make a profit of them? What kind of lunatic reasoning is that?
The boom came, because of the increase in the supply of money, not due to the demand in consumers. This is called malinvestment.
Well if we just sit and do nothing, shit's gonna collapse.
It'll hurt for a little bit, but a bad year is a whole hell of a lot better than a bad decade. Kind of like the Great Depression.
Jacoby_Ellsbury
09-30-2008, 08:10 AM
Well I guess what the election boils down to for me is...
We tried it the Republicans' way for the past 8 years, and look at shit right now. And now we want to put McCain into office, who is also a Republican and voted with Bush 90% of the time. I mean, come on. Are we stupid, blind, or just stubborn?
a700hitter
09-30-2008, 09:05 AM
And if something happens to McCain and she becomes the President of the United States... that doesn't scare the shit out of you?It scares me less than an idiot political hack liberal who is also an inveterate liar becoming President if something happened to Obama. The Presidency is a bully pulpit. That is the President's main power. She speaks for politically conservative positions of lower taxes and smaller government. Does she know the details of global economics and politics? No, she does not, but very few Governors know much about those matters prior to becoming President. It is just not part of the duties of being Governor. If she were to maintain and promote conservative principles and appoint qualified cabinet members and other appointees with similar foundational conservative principles, I would have no problems with her stepping into the role. Presidents who attempt to micro-manage cannot be successful. Those who delegate power judiciously are successful. The most intellectual President of the last century arguably was Nixon. Due to his issues of paranoia, he also tended to micromanage everything. His presidency failed big time.
a700hitter
09-30-2008, 09:07 AM
To be fair, Kerry gave to his country and his named was dragged through the mud by the Bush campaign.
Can't have it both ways.
Kerry served 8 months in Vietnam. I don't know of anyone who served less than 11 mos. and 29 days (the tour of duty) unless they were killed or suffered severe injury or disability. I know a lot of guys that served starting with my family and neighbors. McCain was a POW for 4 or 5 years, and they offered to let him come home, but he did not use his privileged background to come home earlier than those who had been in captivity longer. That's character. Compare that to Kerry coming home and testifying that his fellow GI's were regularly engaging in war crimes.
From Kerry's testimony
...war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.
cut off ears, cut off heads, tape wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the country side of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.
Was Kerry criticized for his service? No. But what he did after returning from the war was despicable. This type of behavior emboldened the enemy, prolonged the war and caused more young men to die. Despite this traitorous behavior, I am hard pressed to find anyone using the word "hate" in a post when discussing Kerry. Even the military guys don't say that. There is no disputing McCain's valorous service and he has never done anything to dishonor his service as did John Kerry. My question to the poster was what has a man such as John McCain done for him to be hated by the poster. The poster has admitted that "hate" was too stong and has since edited that post.
Jacoby_Ellsbury
09-30-2008, 12:03 PM
It scares me less than an idiot political hack liberal who is also an inveterate liar becoming President if something happened to Obama. The Presidency is a bully pulpit. That is the President's main power. She speaks for politically conservative positions of lower taxes and smaller government. Does she know the details of global economics and politics? No, she does not, but very few Governors know much about those matters prior to becoming President. It is just not part of the duties of being Governor. If she were to maintain and promote conservative principles and appoint qualified cabinet members and other appointees with similar foundational conservative principles, I would have no problems with her stepping into the role. Presidents who attempt to micro-manage cannot be successful. Those who delegate power judiciously are successful. The most intellectual President of the last century arguably was Nixon. Due to his issues of paranoia, he also tended to micromanage everything. His presidency failed big time.
Which brings me to another point -- Obama's 47. McCain's 72. I'm not a doctor but I think the chances of McCain encountering some health problems in office are far greater than Obama's.
a700hitter
09-30-2008, 12:12 PM
Which brings me to another point -- Obama's 47. McCain's 71. I'm not a doctor but I think the chances of McCain encountering some problems are far greater than Obama's.Statistically, we have lost more President's to assassination and resignation than death from natural causes. I am not concerned about it. He has made his medical records public and there is nothing concerning about his physical condition. Has Obama made his medical records public? After all, our youngest President, Kennedy had the most serious life threatening illness of any president in more than 100 years, and it was not disclosed until after he had been assassinated. McCain's medical records are public, and he is suffering from no life threatening condition. Considering his physical condition, his age is not an issue. It is ageism to to make it an issue.
Jacoby_Ellsbury
09-30-2008, 12:22 PM
The possibility still exists though, in a big way. Although, I do hate to go this route, but Obama would be more likely to get assassinated.
BigPapiEnFuego
09-30-2008, 05:08 PM
The hell with what McCain did for this country. It was Vietnam. It was a useless war. And he was a horrible pilot
CrespoBlows
09-30-2008, 06:12 PM
The hell with what McCain did for this country. It was Vietnam. It was a useless war. And he was a horrible pilot
.....
CrespoBlows
09-30-2008, 06:13 PM
Well I guess what the election boils down to for me is...
We tried it the Republicans' way for the past 8 years, and look at shit right now. And now we want to put McCain into office, who is also a Republican and voted with Bush 90% of the time. I mean, come on. Are we stupid, blind, or just stubborn?
What about George W. Bush makes you call him a Republican?
You are an easy target for political demagoguery. I wouldn't be surprised if the only book you read about economics was Rainbow Fish
BigPapiEnFuego
09-30-2008, 06:56 PM
.....
Disregard that. I shouldn't of said it like that.
But still, he was not a good pilot. And I read he was horrible at the naval academy too.
Disregard that. I shouldn't of said it like that.
But still, he was not a good pilot. And I read he was horrible at the naval academy too.
Regardless of how good he was, he put his life on the line for his country. You deserve respect for that, no matter what.
BigPapiEnFuego
09-30-2008, 08:17 PM
Regardless of how good he was, he put his life on the line for his country. You deserve respect for that, no matter what.
No doubt.
Jacoby_Ellsbury
09-30-2008, 10:32 PM
What about George W. Bush makes you call him a Republican?
Maybe the fact that he ran on the Republican fucking ticket? Rocket science, FTW!
You are an easy target for political demagoguery. I wouldn't be surprised if the only book you read about economics was Rainbow Fish
:lol:
I got you cornered by point out that Bush and his party flopped, and you just insult me. Gotta love that.
Well then, fuck off.
a700hitter
09-30-2008, 11:03 PM
Well I guess what the election boils down to for me is...
We tried it the Republicans' way for the past 8 years, and look at shit right now. And now we want to put McCain into office, who is also a Republican and voted with Bush 90% of the time. I mean, come on. Are we stupid, blind, or just stubborn?This fault for this entire financial and economic meltdown lies right at the feet fof Democratic and liberal policies starting in the 1970's and earlier. Fannie Mae started in the 1930's and Freddie Mac in the 1970's. In the 1990's, these organizations were used to provide cheap loans to low income and no income borrowers with the goal of making home ownership available to all Americans. Private financial institutions were encouraged to offer loans in areas where they had previously refused to extend credit. With the promise of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac guarantees, financial institutions carried out the mandate of the liberals in Congress and sold the hell out of the stuff. The Bush administration repeatedly warned of the financial risks presented by Fannie mae and Freddie Mac. I have attached a link where they repeated this warning in 2003. They had warned the US Congress even earlier. These warnings were met with derision by liberals such as Barney Frank on the Financial Services Committee and the Congressional Black Caucus as attempts to curtail minority home ownership. The Bush Administration had no control over Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Barack Hussein Obama was and is the second biggest recipient of contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. If Congress had heeded the Bush Administration warnings, this economic meltdown never would have happened. The heads of these organizations were his top campaign advisors and the former head of Fannie Mae headed the task force to select Obama's VP running mate. These organizations were filled with Bill Clinton cronies who presided over these organizations as their books were phonied up and made millions of dollars.
http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7B74DABC67-B059-465E-AF68-6DB22EB961CD%7D
http://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/gsemankiw_speech_nov_6_2003.pdf
CrespoBlows
10-01-2008, 12:05 AM
Maybe the fact that he ran on the Republican fucking ticket? Rocket science, FTW!
Just because someone calls himself a Republican, doesn't mean that he is a Republican. You seem to be missing that concept.
I got you cornered by point out that Bush and his party flopped, and you just insult me. Gotta love that.
Well then, fuck off.
Uh, I agree with you? Why are you pointing this out?
Sorry, I can't even credit you the ability to comprehend Rainbow Fish.
yankees228
10-01-2008, 02:28 AM
Regardless of how good he was, he put his life on the line for his country. You deserve respect for that, no matter what.
Just for the sake of pointing out the facts he finished 5th from the bottom of his class.
Also, I completely agree and I respect him for his time serving our country, but that does not qualify him to be President (I know you never said that, I'm just making my own statement).
a700hitter
10-01-2008, 10:37 AM
Just for the sake of pointing out the facts he finished 5th from the bottom of his class.
Also, I completely agree and I respect him for his time serving our country, but that does not qualify him to be President (I know you never said that, I'm just making my own statement).So McCain has a hard time flying supersonic jets while taking enemy fire. Obama can only bowl a 37. Who is the bigger spaz? and is either fact relevant?
yankees228
10-01-2008, 03:09 PM
So McCain has a hard time flying supersonic jets while taking enemy fire. Obama can only bowl a 37. Who is the bigger spaz? and is either fact relevant?
When did I say it was relevant? If anything I said that McCain's service time does not qualify him to be president. Someone stated that he did not do well at his academy, I was just clarifying exactly where he finished.
BigPapiEnFuego
10-01-2008, 06:38 PM
So McCain has a hard time flying supersonic jets while taking enemy fire. Obama can only bowl a 37. Who is the bigger spaz? and is either fact relevant?
He didn't fly a supersonic jet. The first planes he flew were propeller driven, and then he flew A-4's which are not supersonic. He only got shot down once, and one time his engine quit on him, and another time he flew into power lines. Who flies into powerlines? He was also known to not give a damn about reading his manuals or studying for flying, and would rather sit around and read a history book or go hang out at bars or with strippers.
And is either fact relevant? This is relevant. If he wants to keep using his military history as some reason why he should be elected (like he's been doing) he should of at least not half-assed his way through training and everything. Sure he was a POW, and that sucks, and that earns respect, but its starting to get overdone.
I don't think I would vote for someone who came in the bottom 5 of their class and would rather party and hang out at a titty bar than prepare himself for a war :rolleyes:
a700hitter
10-01-2008, 07:06 PM
Sure he was a POW, and that sucks, and that earns respect, but its starting to get overdone. How much more character could someone have than to turn down freedom from captivity and torture, because he did not want to be given special treatment because his father was an admiral. That story can never be over done.
I don't think I would vote for someone who came in the bottom 5 of their class and would rather party and hang out at a titty bar than prepare himself for a war :rolleyes:How come B.O. has not released his scholastic records?
BigPapiEnFuego
10-01-2008, 07:25 PM
How much more character could someone have than to turn down freedom from captivity and torture, because he did not want to be given special treatment because his father was an admiral. That story can never be over done.
How come B.O. has not released his scholastic records?
Most men in a POW camp would not be released unless those before them are also released. It's pretty much a code amongst soldiers to do that. If they don't they are cowards.
And it's pretty well known that Obama graduated with Honors from Harvard.
a700hitter
10-01-2008, 09:27 PM
Most men in a POW camp would not be released unless those before them are also released. It's pretty much a code amongst soldiers to do that. If they don't they are cowards.Most? Where are all of these people that made the same courageous choice. Please don't denigrate what he did in this way. We are not talking about cutting a supermarket line here.
And it's pretty well known that Obama graduated with Honors from Harvard.Then why hasn't he released his academic records. We know so little about this man as it is and he has accomplished so little as it is.
a700hitter
10-02-2008, 01:13 PM
Then why hasn't he released his academic records. We know so little about this man as it is and he has accomplished so little as it is.Also, we hear so much about his noble community organizing, but what do we know about it? Nothing. The Press has not investigated the Woods Foundation where Obama served as a community organizer on a board with a domestic terrorist, William Ayres. Here's the Introduction from page 7 of the Wood's Foundation SouthSide Initiative:
Chicago is home to a rich legacy of community organizing, the place where Mother Jones became an organizer, A. Philip Randolph achieved his first major organizing victory, and Saul Alinsky defined modern organizing. Community organizing and coalition building has recently won major campaigns to increase the city’s affordable housing supply, reform public school governance, increase the fairness of labor practices, create a statewide diversion program for people arrested for drug convictions and rein in predatory lending. Just as important as the victories themselves, these campaigns were both the product of and the fuel for engaging residents in the democratic process—building “people’s organizations” that provide a platform for residents to have a real voice in the decisions that affect them.
http://www.woodsfund.org/File_1204077272242
As a follower of the philosophy of Alinsky and Mother Jones, you would think the press would be duty bound to tell you something about those individuals. Mother Jones was a radical unionizer who died in 1930, but her legacy has lived on in a very left wing magazine and more recently MotherJones.com that has been edited by Michael Moore among others.
As for Alinsky, he is the author of "Rules for Radicals". Here's a very interesting article about Alinsky's tactics in community organizing. As he says the "concern is with the tactic of taking; how the Have-Nots can take power away from the Haves." It's interesting and alarming reading.
http://www.semcosh.org/AlinskyTactics.pdf
This is how Obama spent his formative years-- furthering this philosophy. People should know this.
a700hitter
10-03-2008, 09:46 AM
To follow up on my previous post, I thought this investment article indicates that the "Rules for Radicals" are in action at the current time.
http://biz.yahoo.com/tm/081003/18126.html?.v=1
CrespoBlows
10-10-2008, 08:46 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/10/palin.investigation/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
lol it's over.
I take it back. Awful fucking pick. Palin has poured gas on the imploding McCain campaign.
Jacoby_Ellsbury
10-10-2008, 10:14 PM
IMHO, McCain defending his supporters who were shouting 'treason', 'kill him' and whatever else they said, by flinging more shit back at Obama, wasn't exactly a genius move. Not publicly disagreeing with that, at least I would think, doesn't really help to garner support. But what do I know??
a700hitter
10-10-2008, 10:19 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/10/palin.investigation/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
lol it's over.
I take it back. Awful fucking pick. Palin has poured gas on the imploding McCain campaign.I disagree. I think she gave it life when it had none. The financial meltdown turned the tide back to Obama big time. It would be almost impossible for McCain to come back.
As for this investigation, let's not lose sight of the fact that she fired her brother in law. It's not Watergate.
CrespoBlows
10-10-2008, 10:55 PM
I disagree. I think she gave it life when it had none. The financial meltdown turned the tide back to Obama big time. It would be almost impossible for McCain to come back.
As for this investigation, let's not lose sight of the fact that she fired her brother in law. It's not Watergate.
Dude, she's toast. She used her power to pursue a personal vendatta. That's a death blow, especially with the public perception of Bush. The moderates who viewed her as an outsider, aren't going to be having the same opinion.
a700hitter
10-10-2008, 11:02 PM
Dude, she's toast. She used her power to pursue a personal vendatta. That's a death blow, especially with the public perception of Bush. The moderates who viewed her as an outsider, aren't going to be having the same opinion.The race was over anyway. This will not make a difference. She shit-canned her brother in law who was a scumbag cop. It will not hurt her career one bit.
CrespoBlows
10-10-2008, 11:18 PM
The race was over anyway. This will not make a difference. She shit-canned her brother in law who was a scumbag cop. It will not hurt her career one bit.
No, she's getting investigated, because she fired Walt Monegan, the Public Safety Commissioner, for not firing her brother-in-law.
a700hitter
10-10-2008, 11:20 PM
Obama will win this race, and he will be this generations Jimmy Carter. We'll be told to lower our thermostats and conserve. Taxes will go up the economy will stagnate after it pulls out of this death spiral. It will be interesting to see how fast Obama gets around to his version of the "Malaise" speech.
CrespoBlows
10-10-2008, 11:21 PM
Obama will win this race, and he will be this generations Jimmy Carter. We'll be told to lower our thermostats and conserve. Taxes will go up the economy will stagnate after it pulls out of this death spiral. It will be interesting to see how fast Obama gets around to his version of the "Malaise" speech.
I agree, but who knows? Maybe after four years of Marxist government, people will get tired, and vote for true limited government candidates.
a700hitter
10-10-2008, 11:26 PM
No, she's getting investigated, because she fired Walt Monegan, the Public Safety Commissioner, for not firing her brother-in-law.Because he wouldn't fire her scumbag brother in law. It's still no biggie. Reinstate the guy and reprimand her. She'll breeze to another term as Governor, and she's already been vaulted to the national stage, so she'll be back in 2012 or 16. Executive throwing their weight around is not that unusual. FDR tried to pack the Supreme Court. That was unconstitutional, but it didn't hurt his career.
a700hitter
10-10-2008, 11:39 PM
I agree, but who knows? Maybe after four years of Marxist government, people will get tired, and vote for true limited government candidates.First, one would have to emerge. They have either gone the way of the dinosaur or they are hiding very well. Also, if more layers of permanent bureaucracy are added in the next 4 years, it would be nearly an impossibility for a President to reduce the size of the government. Reagan came to office with a landslide and a true mandate, and he couldn't get it done. He was able to achieve his tax initiative and he rebuilt the military, but he couldn't shrink the government. If he had a republican congress, he might have been able to make some strides, but the Dems killed every one of his budgets. They were termed "DOA."
Things were truly horrible under Carter. There wasn't anything positive about his term. There was a lot of suffering that had to occur to allow a real national political outsider like Reagan to sweep into office. Today conservative principles are discussed on TV and the radio every day. When Reagan came onto the scene, he was saying things that people never heard from politicians or read in newspapers. My point is that things will have to get really bad for a true limited government conservative to emerge, get elected and have
a successful administration. It's not a pleasant prospect.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.1 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.