29
   

FINAL COUNTDOWN FOR USA ELECTION 2008

 
 
squinney
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 12:08 pm
Palin: "We have trade missions back and forth. ... It is -- from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there."

So, what is she saying? These (fictional) trade missions are for spying on Russia? What trade missions are in place between Alaska and Russia that she is referring to as giving her foreign experience?


cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 12:13 pm
@squinney,
squinney, There's an article in today's newspaper about Woodward's new book about the "surge," and how it dismantled the Iraqi government to arrive at an agreement. The violence in Iraq was not stopped by the "surge." The real cause that stopped the violence was because Iraqi's got tired of protecting the insurgents, and started to take action against them.

That McCain continues to say that the "surge" worked shows he doesn't understand much about the Iraq war or their government.
Debra Law
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 03:19 pm
@cicerone imposter,
CI wrote: "JM, You still can't see the forest for the trees. Palin is way over her head, but people like you will not admit it or confess she's unprepared as veep. There's already been enough exposure to confirm her inexperience, but it seems that's not enough for the likes of you."

Neither McCain nor Palin have the "presidential" qualities that most people would desire in the leaders of the "free world." I also find Palin's extremist, right-wing ideology to be inimical to our core beliefs as a nation. Politically, I don't want McCain or Palin anywhere near the White House. Personally, I'm not so heartless that I want to see Palin sacrificed on McCain's altar of stupidity. At this point, however, I don't see how she can return to Alaska with any remaining dignity whatsoever. That's not the media's fault. That's McCain's fault. Foxfyre and her ilk need to face reality and refocus their wrath upon the real culprit.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 03:22 pm
@Debra Law,
That's been the SOP for Bush, and we know how many good people were "sacrificed" for the good of Bush (only). So many have voluntarily sacrificed their long good name by connecting themselves with a loser, but they make their own beds.
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 03:28 pm
@Debra Law,
Quote:
Neither McCain nor Palin have the "presidential" qualities that most people would desire in the leaders of the "free world." I also find Palin's extremist, right-wing ideology to be inimical to our core beliefs as a nation. Politically, I don't want McCain or Palin anywhere near the White House. Personally, I'm not so heartless that I want to see Palin sacrificed on McCain's altar of stupidity. At this point, however, I don't see how she can return to Alaska with any remaining dignity whatsoever. That's not the media's fault. That's McCain's fault. Foxfyre and her ilk need to face reality and refocus their wrath upon the real culprit.


I also want to add, I think Palin herself is smart enough to know that McCain is responsible for undermining her confidence and making her look like a horse's ass to the whole world. As I stated several times before, Palin is not adverse to biting the hand that feeds her. What is she capable of doing when the person who parades her around on a leash beats her down with a stick? There is still plenty of time for "Pit Bull" Palin to turn on McCain and bite him hard.
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 04:06 pm
September 28, 2008
McCain retracts Palin's Pakistan comments
____________________________________

WASHINGTON (CNN)" Sen. John McCain retracted Sarah Palin's stance on Pakistan Sunday morning, after the Alaska governor appeared to back Sen. Barack Obama's support for unilateral strikes inside Pakistan against terrorists

"She would not…she understands and has stated repeatedly that we're not going to do anything except in America's national security interest," McCain told ABC's George Stephanopoulos of Palin. "In all due respect, people going around and… sticking a microphone while conversations are being held, and then all of a sudden that's"that's a person's position… This is a free country, but I don't think most Americans think that that's a definitve policy statement made by Governor Palin."

Saturday night, while on a stop for cheesesteaks in South Philadelphia, Palin was questioned by a Temple graduate student about whether the U.S. should cross the border from Afghanistan into Pakistan.

"If that's what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should," Palin said.

During Friday night's presidential debate in Mississippi, Obama took a similar stance and condemned the Bush administration for failing to act on the possibility terrorists are in Pakistan.

"Nobody talked about attacking Pakistan," Obama said after McCain accused the Illinois senator of wanting to announce an invasion. "If the United States has al Qaeda, bin Laden, top-level lieutenants in our sights, and Pakistan is unable or unwilling to act, then we should take them out."

McCain emphasized Sunday, Palin "shares" his view on the matter.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 04:09 pm
@Debra Law,
Palin is being used, and is eventually expendable to the wolves in Alaska.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  3  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 04:17 pm
@Debra Law,
Debra Law wrote:

Foxfyre is making fun of Biden for an alleged gaffe.

I think it's common knowledge that FDR took office during the great depression following the 1929 market crash and, upon taking office in 1933, FDR addressed the nation by radio. FDR outlined his plans for a "new deal." FDR's speech was uplifting to the people and inspired confidence. This is the point that Biden was trying to make, but his thoughts were apparently way ahead of his speech resulting in an inadvertent gaffe.

Uh huh, that makes sense, we all know that Biden knew all of this too.

Quote:
Those of us who have followed Biden's career know that he is intelligent, knowledgeable, and charismatic. Intellectual ability is highly correlated with speech functions. We all know what Biden wanted to say, but his thoughts raced ahead of the stored up words that were intended to be spoken. Notably, Biden stuttered as a child.

Yes, Biden is extremely knowledgeable and charismatic, even if his statements do not always show it. Stuttering was probably the cause, no doubt.

Quote:
Quote:
Among the things researchers do know about stuttering is that it’s not caused by emotional or psychological problems. It’s not a sign of low intelligence. The average stutterer’s IQ is 14 points higher than the national average.


http://psychcentral.com/lib/2006/stuttering-myth-vs-fact/

It took a LOT of hard work for Biden to overcome stuttering. I will not fault him because the thoughts in his head are, at times, several sentences ahead of his spoken words. He does his best to focus during speeches and not get ahead of himself. Most of the time, he's very successful and he is truly an inspiring speaker. I like him very much as a person and as a politician.






Great guy, and I am very comforted that stuttering proves he really is a very very smart man. I am very grateful to you, Debra, for explaining this to me. He is indeed extremely inspiring and successful. Too bad there are rumors that Obama may dump the man here pretty soon, if Obama's poll numbers aren't looking good, but if the poll numbers look good, maybe Obama can keep this truly great man as vp?
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 04:29 pm
@okie,
That's dirty, low down mean okie and you should be ashamed of yourself.
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 04:53 pm
@okie,
okie wrote:
Great guy, and I am very comforted that stuttering proves he really is a very very smart man. I am very grateful to you, Debra, for explaining this to me. He is indeed extremely inspiring and successful.


You're welcome okie. I'm happy to help. In addition to being inspiring and successful, he's gorgeous! If Biden was a woman, Zardari would be fawning all over him instead of Palin. And don't you just feel it in your gut that he's the hottest vp ever! Smile
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 05:09 pm
@Debra Law,
I can't say I do DL but I'm easy with how you feel.

I heard he is a low-key tree-hugger. Is that right?
Debra Law
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 06:30 pm
@spendius,
I'm taking my cue from conservative Republicans, the deep-thinkers that they are, and focusing on the superficial qualities of the VP nominees. I.e., what does your gut tell you about them, and how huggable are they? Not allowing the truth or facts to skew our perceptions--let's adopt the Republican way of doing business and go with our instincts alone. With that criteria in mind, my gut tells me that Biden is far more "qualified" than Palin to be our nation's next huggable VP.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 06:33 pm
@Debra Law,
Many conservative men still don't "think" that way, though.
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 06:45 pm
@cicerone imposter,
But . . . CI . . . I'm trying to place myself into the high-heel shoes of a conservative woman wearing lipstick . . . and I "think" Biden is DREAMY!
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 06:48 pm
Two views on the Wallstreet/Financial Institutions bailout from the two candidates both issued Sunday, September 28, 2008.

McCain
Quote:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican presidential candidate John McCain said on Sunday he hoped to support a $700 billion Wall Street bailout package that has been brokered by the Bush administration and the U.S. Congress.

"Hopefully yes," the Arizona senator said when asked whether he would support the deal.

"This is something that all of us will swallow hard and go forward with," he said on the ABC television network. "The option of doing nothing is simply not an acceptable option."

McCain said the principles that he had laid out for such a deal had been met, including taxpayer protection, an oversight body, and provisions that prevented excessive compensation for corporate chief executives.

McCain said he would consider another stimulus package to help the economy but indicated the last one had not been very successful.

"I'll be glad to look at anything to help our economy," he said. "We did a stimulus package a few months ago as you well know. It had very little beneficial effect."
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE48R1ZI20080928


Obama
Quote:
Barack Obama says bailing out Wall Street bankers is necessary to keep the U.S. economy from crumbling even further and taking American workers down with it.

In a statement Sunday, the Democratic presidential nominee said, "regardless of how we got here, a failure to deal with the current crisis would have devastating consequences for our economy, costing millions of Americans their jobs and retirement security."

Obama says he pressed for several provisions that were in the agreement, including oversight by an independent board and measures to help homeowners stay in their homes.

He said that when taxpayers are asked to take such an "extraordinary step because of the irresponsibility of a relative few, it is not a cause for celebration. But this step is necessary."

Obama said that if he's elected president, he'll order a review to ensure the plan is working.
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/sep/28/obama-says-financial-bailout-necessary/
0 Replies
 
JamesMorrison
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 07:02 pm
@cicerone imposter,
C.I. wrote:
Quote:
JM, You still can't see the forest for the trees. Palin is way over her head, but people like you will not admit it or confess she's unprepared as veep. There's already been enough exposure to confirm her inexperience, but it seems that's not enough for the likes of you.


The forest is made up of specific trees each totally unique but each’s fate connected to the others and each striving to be the closest to the sun and it is this competition that actually adds to their value (Big and straight trees do not grow in lonely pastures). I have freely admitted to not only Palin’s inexperience in the race for VP but Obama’s in his race to be President. But, again it is not all about experience it is about who’s values would best reflect my own when they are helping run the country. In all fairness, if I had to chose between Palin and Biden for our chief executive I would chose Biden purely for his foreign policy experience (and certainly not because of domestic policy) but that’s not the choice presented to us.

Palin has my values but not necessarily even my grasp (or yours or cyclop’s) of foreign policy issues. I am not trying to be facetious here by comparing your or my foreign policy to Palin’s and finding her wanting. But you certainly must agree that by the end of this campaign she will have been exposed to and grasped more about the subject (or any other) than any of us here. I am confident therefore that she will have the necessary info and, in combination with her values, will be competent to perform VP duties by Jan of 2009.

Biden does not share my values and Obama shares Palin’s lot of inexperience with a guarantee that his values are, in my mind, misguided at best and unkown at worst. So I will vote for a McCain whose values and experience are well known and a Palin whose values and potential I agree with.

JM


cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 07:12 pm
@JamesMorrison,
Your interpretation of foreign exposure is about as shallow as I've discussed about Palin. I've also shook the hand of several congressmen, and even had lunch with Norm Mineta. That didn't give me any more insight into being a congressman or even a politician. My brother is a politician in California (the fifth largest economy in the world); he's now an Assemblyman, and will run for state office during his next run. He's won three terms with an average of 66% percent of the votes. That doesn't make me a politician or political material in any sense of the word. He was also mayor of his city of 57,000, but I wouldn't vote for him if he ran for veep or president. Do you understand why?
JamesMorrison
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 07:25 pm
@cicerone imposter,
C.I. wrote:
Quote:
The violence in Iraq was not stopped by the "surge." The real cause that stopped the violence was because Iraqi's got tired of protecting the insurgents, and started to take action against them.


And what, pray tell do you think convinced those of the Sunni Awakening in Anbar Province to do so after the surge rather than before the surge? It was the realization that the Americans were on their side, because the American leaders back home refused to desert them by setting "timetables for withdrawal" which would leave the Iraqi's in the lurch and expose them to the insurgents when America left. Because the tactic of the surge produced a new "sheriff" in town that stayed and protected them, that provided the security that all ordered societies need to exist and grow sans Wild West situations with insurgents and terrorists in control. The increase in troops allowed the sheriff's troops to stay in town to become their protector of their law abiding society to allow normalcy which all people want and need along with commerce and economic freedom. Once the people felt secure they could turn in the bad guys knowing that would improve their lot. It's not really rocket science.

JM
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 07:33 pm
@JamesMorrison,
From the Bookings Institute:

Quote:
But the surge was not the only thing that changed. Two other factors proved decisive. One was the decision by many Sunni tribal leaders to shift course and turn against the terrorist networks that had infiltrated the insurgency and their bastions. Instead of fighting Americans, the Sunni leaders in Anbar province and Baghdad neighborhoods decided to join them in defeating Al Qaeda in Iraq and other outside influences that were bent on stoking sectarian violence. Once the local population became inhospitable, the terrorists were quickly exposed.

The Sunni about face was therefore vital to recent successes. But it came before the surge had started and was decided independent of any change in U.S. strategy. The Sunnis were less interested in helping the U.S. succeed than they are in strengthening their own power and capabilities vis-à-vis other groups in Iraq. And they rightly concluded that this was far more likely to happen if they joined the Americans than if they continued to fight them. Indeed, U.S. forces have provided arms and support to many of the Sunni groups that until recently were in a bitter fight against the occupation.
0 Replies
 
JamesMorrison
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 08:13 pm
@cicerone imposter,
C.I. wrote:
Quote:
"Your interpretation of foreign exposure is about as shallow as I've discussed about Palin. I've also shook the hand of several congressmen, and even had lunch with Norm Mineta. That didn't give me any more insight into being a congressman or even a politician. My brother is a politician in California (the fifth largest economy in the world); he's now an Assemblyman, and will run for state office during his next run. He's won three terms with an average of 66% percent of the votes. That doesn't make me a politician or political material in any sense of the word. He was also mayor of his city of 57,000, but I wouldn't vote for him if he ran for veep or president. Do you understand why?"



You cite all kinds of political connections or experience or persons you know with political experience that don't seem to be qualified for Vice President for what reason? Just to convince little 'ole me that neither I nor Palin are not foreign policy experts and even ill qualified to even voice an opinion on the subject? And if your answer to that question is no, then why all the politically flavored bluster? Your post seems to imply that I have little or no idea how to voice my own opinions and you do simply because a family member got 2/3 approval or some such nonsense.

In answer to your question: I have no idea why you wouldn't vote for your brother (Perhaps we can hope he is a conservative republican?) However, in my post in question I have clearly and with relevance stated why I would vote for the McCain/Palin ticket in November. I do not need political connections or Kissinger like experience to inform my decisions.

JM

 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 6.39 seconds on 11/25/2024 at 04:19:04