Why all the Palin angst?

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: Budmantom
Palin might not be the most qualified but she is substantially more qualified than Obama.

At least Obama knows about the existence of birth control. At least Obama has a higher than average IQ and an exceptional academic background. At least Obama understands the intricacies of constitutional law. At least Obama isn't enough of a moron to become a religious nutjob.

I don't particularly like Obama or his immigration policies (nor Juan McAmnesty's for that matter) but at least he has the brains to perhaps implement a few good policies here and there. He's the less worse of two bad candidates. Neither of them will properly advocate for the American working class and middle class.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: Perknose
-snip-
A person who NOW says she is against earmarks, but who, as mayor of a town of 6,000 or so people, hired a paid lobbyist to go to Washington to suck off the federal teat and came away with 28 million dollars worth of earmarks, out of our tax money?

I don't confuse the poeple who ask for tax money with those who give it away.

Requesting != granting

IMO, it's Congresses fault for giving it away, I do not blame those who requested it.

Nor do I see how (successfully) asking for funds is any type of a indicator of giving (earmarks) freely.

As mayor or governorshe'd be stupid not to garner what she could for her city/state. We should all know by now that whatever she declined to accept for her city/state would have had zero impact on the natuional deficit. The money would have just been given to some other earmak/project.

Fern

Definitely true. Don't you think it's a little disingenuous of her to talk about refusing federal tax money though?

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Fern
As mayor or governorshe'd be stupid not to garner what she could for her city/state.

Agreed, but then she shouldn't parade her fiscal independence in her speeches.

"Thanks but no thanks!"
But you kept the money Sarah.
"But not for the bridge, we kept it for other things."
But you did take the money, so shouldn't you just say 'thanks.'? Where's the "no thanks" thing come in?

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I think there is genuine concern McSenile nominated a total nobody out of right field who has no qualifications at all to be President simply to try to win an election, and the consequences, if he dies, be damned. It's damn sad and pathetic.

Unlike Obama?

Palin might not be the most qualified but she is substantially more qualified than Obama.

Seriously. I mean Alaska's next to Russia and Canada...she has to have developed keen foreign policy knowledge by osmosis!

What foreign policy does Obama have besides not voting?

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

You should ask the American voters. Since Palin was selected on Friday McCain has dropped like a iron log in shallow water;

http://www.realclearpolitics.c...s_obama-225.html#polls
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08.htm

The links you posted do not back up that assertion. The real clear politics aggregation of polls are all over the map, with an overall average placing Obama a mere +5.8 points above McCain.

Given the nation's discontent with the Bush Administration, and Obama's almost celebrity like following, one would think that he would command a more dominant lead...especially considering the post-DNC convention bounce and the alleged misgivings about the Palin decision.

Palin is fresh political meat and the latest media target...her speech will largely decide how the public perceives her appointment moving forward.

It's still a long road to November.

Bolded for speculation.

The last few elections have been almost 50/50 when it comes to vote tallys...the polls should be reflecting similar figures.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I think there is genuine concern McSenile nominated a total nobody out of right field who has no qualifications at all to be President simply to try to win an election, and the consequences, if he dies, be damned. It's damn sad and pathetic.

Unlike Obama?

Palin might not be the most qualified but she is substantially more qualified than Obama.

Seriously. I mean Alaska's next to Russia and Canada...she has to have developed keen foreign policy knowledge by osmosis!

What foreign policy does Obama have besides not voting?

Besides sitting on the Senate Foreign Relations committee and having traveled the world? Besides having studied for years and articulated policies for every foreign policy issue we currently face? Enough. Go read something.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Ballatician

I read some story about her anti-Jewish preacher and seeing how important Jeremiah Wright was in people judging Obama, I'm surprised it hasn't been made a bigger deal.

Some story:

Jewish voters may be wary of Palin


By BEN SMITH

ST. PAUL, Minn. ? Barack Obama has struggled for 18 months to lock down the support of a traditionally Democratic group, Jewish voters.

In the past week, John McCain may have helped Obama with his Jewish problem by choosing Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate.
.
.
An illustration of that gap came just two weeks ago, when Palin?s church, the Wasilla Bible Church, gave its pulpit over to a figure viewed with deep hostility by many Jewish organizations: David Brickner, the executive director of Jews for Jesus.

Palin?s pastor, Larry Kroon, introduced Brickner on Aug. 17, according to a transcript of the sermon on the church?s website.

?He?s a leader of Jews for Jesus, a ministry that is out on the leading edge in a pressing, demanding area of witnessing and evangelism,? Kroon said.

Brickner then explained that Jesus and his disciples were themselves Jewish.

?The Jewish community, in particular, has a difficult time understanding this reality,? he said. Brickner?s mission has drawn wide criticism from the organized Jewish community, and the Anti-Defamation League accused them in a report of ?targeting Jews for conversion with subterfuge and deception.?

Brickner also described terrorist attacks on Israelis as God's "judgment of unbelief" of Jews who haven't embraced Christianity.

"Judgment is very real and we see it played out on the pages of the newspapers and on the television. It's very real. When [Brickner's son] was in Jerusalem he was there to witness some of that judgment, some of that conflict, when a Palestinian from East Jerusalem took a bulldozer and went plowing through a score of cars, killing numbers of people. Judgment ? you can't miss it."

Palin was in church that day, Kroon said, though he cautioned against attributing Brickner?s views to her.

The quote is accurate. The link in the article goes to a list of sermons downloadable as Word documents.

How much of this anti-semitic crap is Palin's belief is hers to explain, but considering the stink Republicans made about Jeramiah Wright's sermons, Palin owes the same kind of public explanation of her own beliefs as Obama gave about Rev. Wright's statements.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I think there is genuine concern McSenile nominated a total nobody out of right field who has no qualifications at all to be President simply to try to win an election, and the consequences, if he dies, be damned. It's damn sad and pathetic.

Unlike Obama?

Palin might not be the most qualified but she is substantially more qualified than Obama.

Seriously. I mean Alaska's next to Russia and Canada...she has to have developed keen foreign policy knowledge by osmosis!

What foreign policy does Obama have besides not voting?

If being a city mayor, and being a governor for 2 years is all it takes to have the "executive" experience required to be President (or VEEP), then why are we wasting our time electing Senators to run for POTUS!?!?

I don't know about you, but Jesse Ventura has more "Executive Experience" than McCain and Obama combined...maybe we should be voting for him!!!

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

You should ask the American voters. Since Palin was selected on Friday McCain has dropped like a iron log in shallow water;

http://www.realclearpolitics.c...s_obama-225.html#polls
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08.htm

The links you posted do not back up that assertion. The real clear politics aggregation of polls are all over the map, with an overall average placing Obama a mere +5.8 points above McCain.

Given the nation's discontent with the Bush Administration, and Obama's almost celebrity like following, one would think that he would command a more dominant lead...especially considering the post-DNC convention bounce and the alleged misgivings about the Palin decision.

Palin is fresh political meat and the latest media target...her speech will largely decide how the public perceives her appointment moving forward.

It's still a long road to November.

Huh? ~6 points is a dominant lead in a Presidential race, especially in an openly contested race. That would be the largest margin of victory since GHW beat Dukakis.
The facts are that this race was statistically tied until just last week, when the Dems held a highly successful convention, followed by a very questionable VP pick by McCain.
Gallup tracking

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I think there is genuine concern McSenile nominated a total nobody out of right field who has no qualifications at all to be President simply to try to win an election, and the consequences, if he dies, be damned. It's damn sad and pathetic.

Unlike Obama?

Palin might not be the most qualified but she is substantially more qualified than Obama.

Seriously. I mean Alaska's next to Russia and Canada...she has to have developed keen foreign policy knowledge by osmosis!

What foreign policy does Obama have besides not voting?

When was the last time McCain even voted in the Senate? January?

 

[ayabe]

Let's frame this a different way, the two issues in this election are the economy and Iraq, with a few subcategories of these, like energy which I lump in with the economy.

So, what about her message on either of these issues, makes her appealing? Does she even have a message?

What was trotted out as her MO? Being a reformer, ok got that, though that's been torn to shreds...so what else ya got? Bridge to nowhere, Ambramoff lobbying ties, pork out the ying-yang.

Iraq, ok, got that too, she thinks we're going God's will. That's the totality of her position.

Otherwise, she's just pro-gun, anti-choice, end-timer evangelical, which a penchant for wanting to ban subversive literature. This appears to be your litmus test Budmanton, please correct me if I'm wrong.

What is there for anyone to root for? What is she bringing to the table?

 

[jpeyton]

I posted this in another thread. Basically:

We've had 18+ months to learn about, dissect, and discuss Obama. If you search this forum and its archives, you'll discover that we've made hundreds of threads and tens of thousands of posts about Obama.

Biden has been on the large political scene for decades; he's run for president a few times. Same with McCain.

Palin is new blood. She was such a long shot for the VP slot that nobody vetted her seriously. The "media eruption" on Palin is basically a condensed version of what the other candidates went through.

She will be discussed. Democrats will tear her life apart and go through it with a fine toothed comb. Republicans will drink the party Kool-Aid and recite lines about her "executive experience". Independents will choose where their loyalties lay, but polls are showing that they are NOT so hot about Palin.

 

[jonks]

Ha. Just walked past a tv and the CNN headline was "Palin speech tonight to be most important of her career." Well, yeah! As opposed to what, that speech she gave to the PTA in 1999?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I think there is genuine concern McSenile nominated a total nobody out of right field who has no qualifications at all to be President simply to try to win an election, and the consequences, if he dies, be damned. It's damn sad and pathetic.

Unlike Obama?

Palin might not be the most qualified but she is substantially more qualified than Obama.

Seriously. I mean Alaska's next to Russia and Canada...she has to have developed keen foreign policy knowledge by osmosis!

What foreign policy does Obama have besides not voting?

He has his advisors and when he becomes President he'll have his cabinet members and their staff. What he won't have is the old failures that make up the Republican foreign policy experts who served Bush and America all so well...wait they didn't, in fact they fucked us.

We don't need the experience McBush and Palidan are offering that's for sure.

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: Budmantom
Palin might not be the most qualified but she is substantially more qualified than Obama.

At least Obama knows about the existence of birth control. At least Obama has a higher than average IQ and an exceptional academic background. At least Obama understands the intricacies of constitutional law. At least Obama isn't enough of a moron to become a religious nutjob.

I don't particularly like Obama or his immigration policies (nor Juan McAmnesty's for that matter) but at least he has the brains to perhaps implement a few good policies here and there. He's the less worse of two bad candidates. Neither of them will properly advocate for the American working class and middle class.

Do you mean abortions?

Higher IQ, have you heard the man talk? he sound like Pork Pig.

He is a religous nutjob, have you heard about his church?

I agree with you about immigration.

I agree I doubt either will advocate for the middle class.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Huh? ~6 points is a dominant lead in a Presidential race, especially in an openly contested race. That would be the largest margin of victory since GHW beat Dukakis.
The facts are that this race was statistically tied until just last week, when the Dems held a highly successful convention, followed by a very questionable VP pick by McCain.

The last few elections have been almost 50/50 when it comes to vote tallys...the polls should be reflecting similar figures.

I beg to differ. Kerry commanded a 6 point lead over Bush after the 2004 DNC...unfortunately, he was unable to sustain that lead:

Convention Gives Kerry Slight Lead Over Bush

Presidential race: Convention brings Kerry poll bounce over Bush

Obama is essentially enjoying the same poll bounce that Kerry gained over Bush...the question now remains whether or not Obama can sustain the lead.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Maybe Palin can show Americans how they, too, can have five children per couple and explode the nation's population? Will she try to make birth control illegal? Will she try to make certain books that offend Christian sensibilities illegal? I hope she generates some humorous attack ads.

 

[fskimospy]

As I've said before this discussion has gotten totally off base. The issue is really not which one, Obama or Palin has less experience. Neither one of them has very much. That's the whole point though, McCain made the experience thing an issue, and then nominated someone who didn't have any. Considering his self professed standard for a VP is 'someone able to succeed him', this implies that he believes Palin has enough experience to do so. If she does, then Obama does.

You can't talk about experience and then nominate someone that you have to pathetically claim has foreign policy experience because a remote corner of her mostly unpopulated state technically borders a remote corner of a mostly unpopulated region of Russia. Just admit it people, McCain's pick doesn't square with his campaign talk. Maybe Palin is a great pick for other reasons, but she undermines his central message.

 

[eleison]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I think there is genuine concern McSenile nominated a total nobody out of right field who has no qualifications at all to be President simply to try to win an election, and the consequences, if he dies, be damned. It's damn sad and pathetic.

Unlike Obama?

Palin might not be the most qualified but she is substantially more qualified than Obama.

Seriously. I mean Alaska's next to Russia and Canada...she has to have developed keen foreign policy knowledge by osmosis!

What foreign policy does Obama have besides not voting?

Besides sitting on the Senate Foreign Relations committee and having traveled the world? Besides having studied for years and articulated policies for every foreign policy issue we currently face? Enough. Go read something.

Don't forget, Obama was also involved the largest circle jerk in europe where over 200 thousand europeans were able to shake his nutsack and shallow his "hope" juice. If thats not foreign relation experience, I just don't know

 

[davestar]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: davestar

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I think there is genuine concern McSenile nominated a total nobody out of right field who has no qualifications at all to be President simply to try to win an election, and the consequences, if he dies, be damned. It's damn sad and pathetic.

Unlike Obama?

Palin might not be the most qualified but she is substantially more qualified than Obama.

Putting the label "executive" on her VERY limited experience does not make her more qualified than Obama.

What has Obama been in charge of?

why do you refuse to look at things in context when it suits you? sure, a candidate with previous executive experience sounds nice, but does it matter in practice? Presidents with no previous executive experience:

J.Q. Adams
Madison
Lincoln
JFK

plenty others only have tenuous claims to executive experience. face it, claiming that Palin's political experience is more valid than Obama's because it can be labeled as "executive" is just a ploy to justify her presence on the ticket.

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: eleison
Don't forget, Obama was also involved the largest circle jerk in europe where over 200 thousand europeans were able to shake his nutsack and shallow his "hope" juice. If thats not foreign relation experience, I just don't know

Man I love that argument, goes well with my Freedom Fries.

If the rest of the world doesn't hate us, then we're not doing a good enough job. The fact that europeans aren't immediately offended and scared by Obama must mean that he's a pussy and/or gay.

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: jonks
Ha. Just walked past a tv and the CNN headline was "Palin speech tonight to be most important of her career." Well, yeah! As opposed to what, that speech she gave to the PTA in 1999?

She should consult with Obama he has made his career making speeches.

 

[Red Dawn]

What executive experience does McCain have? Oh right, he was a POW.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Huh? ~6 points is a dominant lead in a Presidential race, especially in an openly contested race. That would be the largest margin of victory since GHW beat Dukakis.
The facts are that this race was statistically tied until just last week, when the Dems held a highly successful convention, followed by a very questionable VP pick by McCain.

The last few elections have been almost 50/50 when it comes to vote tallys...the polls should be reflecting similar figures.

I beg to differ. Kerry commanded a 6 point lead over Bush after the 2004 DNC...unfortunately, he was unable to sustain that lead:

Convention Gives Kerry Slight Lead Over Bush

Thats great? I think you've made my point. Vote tallys for Kerry and GWB, and for Gore and GWB and probably going back to the Clinton years, were much closer than what any poll calculated before actual votes were cast.

If any candidate wins by more than 2% points of total votes it will be a "landslide" Such is the make-up of the country's voters. If you are looking for astronomical polling figures for Obama OR McCain I think you are going to be dissappointed, because this country has recently been pretty evenly split down the middle with the way it votes.

This whole idea that Obama should be 10 points ahead or some other gaudy figure is just another way to undermine the Obama campaign. Polls at this stage of the game will never reflect such gaudy numbers for any candidate. unless the poll itself is slanted in some way.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
As I've said before this discussion has gotten totally off base. The issue is really not which one, Obama or Palin has less experience. Neither one of them has very much. That's the whole point though, McCain made the experience thing an issue, and then nominated someone who didn't have any. Considering his self professed standard for a VP is 'someone able to succeed him', this implies that he believes Palin has enough experience to do so. If she does, then Obama does.

You can't talk about experience and then nominate someone that you have to pathetically claim has foreign policy experience because a remote corner of her mostly unpopulated state technically borders a remote corner of a mostly unpopulated region of Russia. Just admit it people, McCain's pick doesn't square with his campaign talk. Maybe Palin is a great pick for other reasons, but she undermines his central message.

BUT BUT!

"executive experience" is the REAL experience that counts!! :roll:

I have a feeling this term "executive experience" is going to be this years "flip flop" or "chad" or 9/11" breakout term of the election!!