Obama Vs. Palin - Palin pulls within one point of Obama

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
one being he comes from minnesota. The only good things that ever came out of minnesota is prince and fran tarkenton.

QFT!

P.S. Tarkenton was born in Richmond, VA, and, other than the association with the Vikings, pretty much seems to consider himself a Georgia boy. He is, however, "Minnesota nice."
 
Last edited:

yuppiejr

Golden Member
Jul 31, 2002
1,317
0
0
That prick increased taxes, but called them "fees" instead and claims taxes didn't go up.

That prick supports increasing ethanol percentages even though ethanol is a terrible fuel.

That prick supported raising my taxes in order to build a stadium for bunch of rich assholes.

There are plenty of reasons not to like Pawlenty.

I can't disagree with any of the 3, I still respect what he's done with the overall state budget given pressure from the DFL house and senate to increase spending and taxes in the current recession. The fees thing is only excusable in the sense that I much prefer to see those who utilize a government service being charged usage fees for said service rather than throwing the money into a big government spending slush fund like traditional tax revenues.

I don't expect to agree with any candidate on all of their plans or past positions. I REALLY dislike the ethanol bit and as someone who pays sales tax in Minneapolis regularly the stadium gift chaps my ass... but in the larger balance of issues facing the country I think he's got a lot to offer in terms of experience and substance over another Republican candidate including Sarah Palin.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
Thanks for a chance to say you are being sane here. That's the difference between the people I criticized as biased, and your not being biased on this.


We'll always disagree on some issues, but not on this. I think I have figured out why she is so appealing to many. She talks about the glory of the US as some people wish it were, recalling times that didn't exist.

What she does is substitutes emotion for intellect, nostalgia for historic truths. She's the gut feeling of the way things "ought to be" as seen by people who can't tell you just what that is.

She's filled an emotional niche for people unwilling to tackle issues they don't understand and are looking for someone to lead them back to the Leave it to Beaver days, like everyone wore a tie and smoking jacket around the house.

The Dems ought to be delighted because people like me (the independent voter) who have no strong commitment to her kind of thinking (or lack thereof) aren't going to support her period.

I've noticed that there is little to no support for an intellectual Conservative approach. The ones we had were not committed to ideology defining reality. Buckley and others were able to work with liberals of their day because the important thing was to move the country forward, although what that meant often differed. Since Reagan, the intelligentsia has been displaced by oaths of loyalty. There is no mind, just an animal who can only circle in the Right direction.

To me that's sad, because without a functioning intellectual community offering a variety of ideas a nation can only suffer. There is no discourse, just sloganeering.

Not good.
 

yuppiejr

Golden Member
Jul 31, 2002
1,317
0
0
We'll always disagree on some issues, but not on this. I think I have figured out why she is so appealing to many. She talks about the glory of the US as some people wish it were, recalling times that didn't exist.

What she does is substitutes emotion for intellect, nostalgia for historic truths. She's the gut feeling of the way things "ought to be" as seen by people who can't tell you just what that is.

She's filled an emotional niche for people unwilling to tackle issues they don't understand and are looking for someone to lead them back to the Leave it to Beaver days, like everyone wore a tie and smoking jacket around the house.

The Dems ought to be delighted because people like me (the independent voter) who have no strong commitment to her kind of thinking (or lack thereof) aren't going to support her period.

I've noticed that there is little to no support for an intellectual Conservative approach. The ones we had were not committed to ideology defining reality. Buckley and others were able to work with liberals of their day because the important thing was to move the country forward, although what that meant often differed. Since Reagan, the intelligentsia has been displaced by oaths of loyalty. There is no mind, just an animal who can only circle in the Right direction.

To me that's sad, because without a functioning intellectual community offering a variety of ideas a nation can only suffer. There is no discourse, just sloganeering.

Not good.

This is a good post though I have to point out that you can make EXACTLY the same criticisms about Obama's cult of personality (leading us back to the glory days of FDR and the New Deal with a progressive nod to European socialism). Palin is effectively the anti-Obama, same tactics from the opposite end of the political spectrum.

The issue isn't about the right not coming far enough left or vice versa - it's a cultural problem in which people are simply too busy or lazy to form their own opinions. Just pick your banner and adopt the pick-list of positions and criticisms of the other side, why bother thinking when someone else can do it for you. Slogan tossers on both sides have effectively shouted down any sort of dissent and stifled meaningful change in government for the betterment of it's people.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
This is a good post though I have to point out that you can make EXACTLY the same criticisms about Obama's cult of personality (leading us back to the glory days of FDR and the New Deal with a progressive nod to European socialism). Palin is effectively the anti-Obama, same tactics from the opposite end of the political spectrum.

The issue isn't about the right not coming far enough left or vice versa - it's a cultural problem in which people are simply too busy or lazy to form their own opinions. Just pick your banner and adopt the pick-list of positions and criticisms of the other side, why bother thinking when someone else can do it for you. Slogan tossers on both sides have effectively shouted down any sort of dissent and stifled meaningful change in government for the betterment of it's people.


As I said, I'm not an Obama supporter however that's based on his policy decisions. As with Bush, I can look at what is being proposed and has been done and make arguments for or against various courses of action.

With Obama, I feel that he has done things which were unwise, but the "nuts and bolts" of his mind are there. With Palin I don't see the bolts, as it were.

To repeat a stereotype, if the left is composed of distant intellectuals, the right has picked the opposite. Ignorance in our face.

In truth, I don't completely agree with the last statement, because there are fine people who have the best interests of the public at heart, but they get lost in the background noise of those who shout the loudest.

That leaves me perplexed with whom to support. I don't have a problem with Obama himself. I don't buy the "secret muslim communist blah blah blah" rhetoric, but neither do I believe he has made the best choices.

On the other hand the ground support for Palin is fairly strong on the right, and I believe that's because there is no one interested in a Bill Buckley anymore.

So who can I and others like me support?

In any case, as I posted elsewhere my main beef isn't Obama or Palin, but the unrealistic expectations and general laziness of the American citizen who most likely can't name the 50 states if they had a map.

We have a representative form of government, and ultimately it is the quality of the public that determines the worthiness of the elected.

Who can we really blame but ourselves?
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
with the way you rationalize your arguments and how you present your "opinion" you are nothing more than a used car salesman in some backend lot.

I don't believe a word you say...and I know I'm not alone.

And since I have an IQ of 250 and I have billions of dollars in the bank what I say has more weight than what you say....

sound good?

Someone referred me to Townhall.com and I ran across this piece that you might be interested in reading. It depends on what you read, doesn't it?

I talk to business people all day long, few students or college professors, a few scientists, a number of people in government and diplomatic service, a few military officers. I also read constantly.

Maybe if you broadened your horizons you might encounter guys like this...

http://townhall.com/columnists/DanK...s_the_great_ozbama?comments=true#postComments

Small Business vs. the Great Ozbama
Dan Kennedy
Wednesday, December 09, 2009

A number of business owners have let me know of their new annoyance. They’re taking umbrage. The Great and Powerful Ozbama has chosen a new demon: the small business community. Not long ago, the rhetoric was about the need to assist small business. Now it is about hanging his unemployment crisis around small business’ necks.

The problem, Obama suggested in a speech this past week, is that small business is not hiring enough, and squeezing its too-few workers to do more. How dare they? Small business owners should hire even if not making profits. And, he apparently reasons, greedy owners must be taking excess profits instead of hiring. Otherwise, gee, there’d be more jobs.

Since neither Oz nor many of the socialists around him has business experience, I offer this week’s column as an educational gift to them. It’s just two lessons called Business 101, based on one of my 13 books, “No B.S. Guide to Ruthless Management of People and Profits.”

Lesson #1: The purpose of business ownership is not to be a provider of jobs. The purpose is maximum profit. Anything or anyone interfering with achieving that mandate must be ruthlessly dealt with. Or economic reality will ruthlessly deal with you.

This piece of information might come in handy, now that – with zero relevant experience – Obama is managing quite a few businesses we all own: Government Motors, a welfare program for 35,000 UAW members masquerading as a car company; AIG; and assorted zombie banks too big to be buried.

Dear President Oz, your no. 1 task is to make these entities make profits. And if they can’t, hand them over to bankruptcy court. With ruthless decisiveness. Take out the garbage before it infects the entire place with toxic mold and fumes.

No business or business owner has any obligation to create jobs or to provide jobs, unless doing so produces more profit than could be made otherwise. Each person employed must be worth a multiple of their cost, or they must go. And the fact that productivity and unemployment are both up tells you that there have been plenty of businesses tolerating unnecessary, unprofitable employees, and companies are discovering far and wide that supervision has gotten sloppy.

Lesson #2: Debt is evil. Sure, business start-ups and expansion require private capital from investors (not taxed into paralysis) as well as financing from lenders. But the idea that tight credit is causing small business not to hire more people and create more jobs is fanciful. If you are running a business and need to go deeper and deeper into debt in order to meet payroll, hiring more people is like adding passengers and cargo to a small, leaky boat. (Sort of like creating a giant new federal health care program when the smaller one you already have is, by your own admission, drowning in waste and fraud, and functionally bankrupt.)

Almost 30 years back, I made that very mistake, and it didn’t turn out well. To quote Maggie Thatcher, sooner or later you run out of other peoples’ money. If you’re running a credit dependent business, it’s sooner. A lot sooner than if you’re running, say, a government. But at your pace of drunken-sailor spending and debt accumulation, President Oz, you will get there. I have every confidence.

Mr. President, the bulk of the job losses at the small business level aren’t tied to tight credit at all. They are the result of your policies and threats of policies that target business owners. I have lost count of the different ways you and your Democratic Congress and your czars have threatened to take money away from business owners. I was up to 30, and just gave up.

The job losses are the result of a climate of uncertainty and fear you have created. They are anticipatory; a shedding of employees before unknown burdens tied to Obamacare occur. And you are about to see another tidal wave of such job losses, right after the new year, as countless small businesses that hung on through the holidays received no Christmas miracles, and eliminate another job or two each, or, in many cases, shutter their doors permanently.

I know these things and, perhaps, you don’t, because I am a small business owner, and I’m in constant communication with about 25,000 others who are too. You, on the other hand, are busy calling a lunch and a photo op with CEO’s of big business a Jobs Summit. Or squeezing in a campaign stop in Allentown between the climate change (ie. economic destruction) conference in Copenhagen and taping your part in Oprah’s Christmas special.
 

Arkaign

Lifer
Oct 27, 2006
20,736
1,379
126
As I said, I'm not an Obama supporter however that's based on his policy decisions. As with Bush, I can look at what is being proposed and has been done and make arguments for or against various courses of action.

With Obama, I feel that he has done things which were unwise, but the "nuts and bolts" of his mind are there. With Palin I don't see the bolts, as it were.

To repeat a stereotype, if the left is composed of distant intellectuals, the right has picked the opposite. Ignorance in our face.

In truth, I don't completely agree with the last statement, because there are fine people who have the best interests of the public at heart, but they get lost in the background noise of those who shout the loudest.

That leaves me perplexed with whom to support. I don't have a problem with Obama himself. I don't buy the "secret muslim communist blah blah blah" rhetoric, but neither do I believe he has made the best choices.

On the other hand the ground support for Palin is fairly strong on the right, and I believe that's because there is no one interested in a Bill Buckley anymore.

So who can I and others like me support?

In any case, as I posted elsewhere my main beef isn't Obama or Palin, but the unrealistic expectations and general laziness of the American citizen who most likely can't name the 50 states if they had a map.

We have a representative form of government, and ultimately it is the quality of the public that determines the worthiness of the elected.

Who can we really blame but ourselves?

Bah, darn Hayabusa Rider, bringing honesty, personal integrity, and a balanced opinion to P&N. ;)
 

seemingly random

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2007
5,277
0
0
[ ... more blathering ...]

[ ... more lies ... ]

Maybe if you broadened your horizons you might encounter guys like this...

Small Business vs. the Great Ozbama
Dan Kennedy
Wednesday, December 09, 2009

A number of business owners have let me know of their new annoyance. They’re taking umbrage. The Great and Powerful Ozbama ...

You are one brilliant mf. Trying to convert someone with an article that starts out with insults and therefore immediately loses credibility. On the other hand, this modus operandi sounds familiar. Did you write this article?

But then this probably wasn't your intention anyway. Just trying to get another jab in. Seems you're just as small as those you accuse of being small.
 
Last edited: