Printable View
What do you think? Is the pick of a fairly unknown (on the national level) female meant to counter a mainstream popular minority canidate?
Does a Govenor from Alaska have the moxy to bolster the McCain ticket?
Will it help or hurt the GOP?
Will it help or hurt the Obama ticket?
Will it help or hurt America?
Everyone is invited to chime in ... what intresting times we live in!!!
Yup plus she'll bring in the disenfranchised women voters from Hilary's run. She's got more political experience then Obama from what it sounds like
Help McCain, Hurt Obama
I think the jury is still out on this one.
The fact that we don't know much or nothing about her is not her fault, her accomplishments are know facts, all it takes is a little research.
In my opinion she's already made an impact on the campaign, she's seems to be a very strong person, that doesn't let anything intimidate her.
I cant wait to see her next week again.
Agree that time will tell. Not much time left, however. We now enter the home stretch when most people pay attention.
Objectively, from a strategic view, a coup. It may or may not offer a tactical advantage.
I was of the opinion that McCain's VP choice didn't matter much as long as it wasn't Liberman. I may have been wrong. I respect Joe for his national security stand, but other than that, he is a democratic socialist through and through.
The talking heads are saying that her position on the ticket would never have happened if Hillery was the Democratic VP candidate. Irrelevant as Hilliary was never considered (some are really angry).
From a personal standpoint, my initial impression is that she is a crackerjack, no holds barred good gal reformer nonconformist that is a good fit with McCain. If she likes moose stew, she might just be OK.
Also, as the father of three, two of whom are adopted, I am very pro life.
When those of us that served came back from Viet Nam we were called baby killers and spat upon. I, nor any of the people with whom I served, ever killed anyone that didn't shoot at us first (those were the orders in 1969).
Did bad things happen? Yes, it was a war. Did good things happen? Yes, it was a war.
So, if you will pardon my context, I find it queer (used in the former meaning) that the real babe killers have re-branded the practice "pro choice" and it is celebrated as one of the great rights (not granted by the Constitution or the Bill Of Rights) in this nation.
More experience than Obama? She was first elected in 2006 and her only prior claim to fame was that she WASN'T Miss Alaska! She admitted, on July 31st of this year that she has no idea what the VP actually does, and she thinks creationism should be taught in schools even though that violates the separation of church and state, but I bet she doesn't know that. Either the Republicans are completely out of touch with reality or they're throwing in the towel. I predict America's first non white president.
X
Sorry Xman, have to disagree.
Governor in 2006. Mayor prior to that and on the Oil Commission after loosing the Lt. Governor race. She has more executive, that means decision making, experience than Obama or Biden put together. All they decide is what to have for lunch in the tax payer underwritten Senate lunch room.
She also uncovered corruption in the Oil Commission, and bucked the Republican machine to root it out.
How may Democrats have done that lately? Last I recall having $900,000 cash in your freezer was just fine with the Dems.
Please don't regurgitate party talking points.
There is no separation of church and state in the Constitution, the founding fathers only wanted to avoid a state church as was the case in England. The separation of church and state was a comment in Jefferson's personal correspondence to a friend.
The comment on the job duties of the VP were that no one had explained them. There are Constitutional duties, but each President delegates some functions to the VP and those duties vary.
I don't recall which VP said it, but something along the line that the job was worth a warm bottle of ****.
I think I'll leave now before I get in too much trouble.
Yes, more experience than B. Hussein Obama. Obama never had anything passed during his tenure in the Illinois Congress, had his ass handed to him in 2000. Additionally, he has had no legislation passed in the Senate. Actually, he has not done much since going to DC, missing a majority of votes because he is always out of Washington. He started his run for US Senate shortly after getting elected in Illinois Senate, so not much has changed. Plus now people are looking into his place of birth. The birth certificate submitted for him, looks surprisingly similar to the one attributed to his sister's birth, which was documented to have taken place in Hawaii. No one actually remembers BHO, being born in HI...interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by xman
Doesn't matter who runs, Bilderberg Group has already made the decision.:w
Obviously this is an election year and everybody has an opinion, let's just try and keep the discussions Gentlemanly....
I think more people have heard of my third garde teacher, Mrs. Patrick. Before being elected governor of Alaska (by 17 of the 28 people voting in that election) Palin was mayor of a town of 7000 people. She may bring in the feminazis (some of the 18 million cracks Hillary bragged about) that would rather eat broken glass smeared with dog crap than vote for Obama.
Personally I get the idea that McCain doesn't really want to be president. To have this woman only a heartbeat away from being president of the United States of America would be distressing to me, especially when McCain is so old.
"Yes, more experience than B. Hussein Obama."
Interesting that you chose to focus on Obama's middle name, especially since neither he, nor McCain, nor Clinton, nor Thompson, nor Edwards, nor Huckabee, campaigned using their middle name, and no one ever brings up their middle name, except when it comes to Obama. Gee-why do you think some folks go out of their way to reference Obama's middle name when they never seem to do the same for any of the other candidates? Hmm. Let me think. Could it be because they think there's some correlation between his middle name and, oh, say, a deposed Iraqi dicatator who happened to have the same name, with the goal of underhandedly inferring that Mr. Obama and Saddam Hussein have some true connection since, after all, they share the name name? Gee, I wonder. Do you think that's maybe the reason why virtually no one knows the middle names of McCain, Thompson, Clinton, etc,. yet virtually everyone knows Obama's middle name, even though none of the aforementioned candidates, including Obama, used their middle names publiclly during the election process? Gee. I wonder.
No-it couldn't possibly be that some folks think it's valid to try to draw a false correlation between someone's middle name and, say, terrorism, when there's no true correlation, via the sleazy innuendo of attempting to link a US citizen running for the office of president of the US with a deposed despot, could it?. That would be nothing more than a despicable act of fear-mongering. And we all know that only those who can't prevail on the facts, and who harbor bigotry in their hearts, are the ones who retreat into the realm of fomenting fear-mongering. Right?
Pathetic. Truly pathetic...
Surely you could have used less passive aggressive sarcasm. Anyhow John McCain's middle name is Sidney and he is actually a 3rd. So his full name is John Sidney McCain III. I knew this without having to look it up and frankly could care less about anyones middle name (heck mine is Walter so who am I to judge) it's their policies and experience I disagree with.Quote:
Originally Posted by billyjeff2
No one, and I mean virtually no one, can tell you the middle names of McCain (Sidney as you correctly noted) or Clinton (Diana) or Thompson (Dale); yet ask virtually anyone and they can tell you Obama's middle name. Why? It's not because Obama campaigned using his middle name. None of the Republican or Democratic candidates did. Yet why does everyone know Barack's middle name and not any other candidate's?
We all know why...
Quote:
Originally Posted by billyjeff2
Swish...nothing but net. I love when people fall for this stuff. It is so easy to set them up and watch them knock them down. Do you really think that getting BO in the seat is going to make a difference? First day, "Mr. President, here are the aliens, JFK's brain, and these are the people who really run the government. Be a good boy and don't say anything or you will end up like JFK and RFK." Biden is his good buddy. So when did Biden lie? When HE was trying to get elected or now that he says BO has enough experience? In between the time Biden said it and now, all BO has done is the endless campaign. So he has experience with a lot of airports, baggage handlers and expanding his carbon foot print.
Oh yeah, BTW...you glossed over any mention of His Holiness' "accomplishments" as compared to Palin. Not to mention any of the other points brought up.
Have a nice day!
BTW II- John Sidney McCain
Fred Dalton Thompson
Hillary Rodham Clinton
John Reid Edwards
Mike Dale Huckabee
Willard Mitt Romney
Dennis John Kucinich
Like I said...Bilderberg Group has already decided who is going to be president. This is all meant to divide the nation further. Google it.
"Swish-nothing but air between the ears."
I was not addressing anything other than your interesting presentation of the candidate's name. I must have missed your similar reference to the other candidate's middle name, since that would no doubt be equally relevant to the substance of your post.
I have no problem in debating the substantive differences between the candidates. However, I have a real problem with folks who believe someone's birth name has some relevance, and who are all too happy to go out of their way to highlight a meaningless factoid knowing full well its appeal to the uneducated, the ignorant, and the bigoted of this world.
QED, sir.
btw--Hillary Clinton's miidle name isn't Rodham-that's her maiden name. Her middle name is Diana.
Yeah, the mainstream media blasted it all over at the beginning of the campaign. :roflmaoQuote:
Originally Posted by billyjeff2
Remember kids don't feed the troll.Quote:
Originally Posted by billyjeff2
"Yeah, the mainstream media blasted it all over at the beginning of the campaign."
Not exactly accurate. But who cares about being accurate, right?:y
I hope that McCain's advisors know what they are doing because how do you give your Vice President candidacy to someone that you have only met with (and talked to) a few times? I would hope that
As to the original questions,
This will pull some of Hilary's votes to McCain, but it will make him look like an a**hole to alot of other women who recognize that he chose Palin to bring aboard women votes.
But what do i care, i dislike both cadidates.
One is a another Bush (who i think is the worst president in recent history) except this time he is 72 and just a few years shy of death .Thats just a guess looking at his past medical history. The other candidate is the Pied Piper, leading everyone to their enevitable fate just by the fact that he is simply an amazing public speaker and the team that writes his speeches and organizes his conventions should be paid millions. He comes across as an absolute golden boy and there is no way he can achieve all the things he was trying to promise on Thursday night (the convention). No even over the next 10 years. Which i find funny he kept mentioning decade and the longest he would be around if everything went well is 8 years. Then something else will try to fix his mistakes.
Funny. It's hard to recall an election when either party's candidate was held in regard higher than being the lesser of two evils. Most candidate's supporters seem to offer little more than a tepid endorsement, but of course there's virtually no limit to the invectives to be hurled at the opposing aspirant. Perhaps we've become a nation of cynics. A citizenry weary of the nasty, corrosive tone of electioneering devoid of substance. We've lost faith in the process of picking our nation's leaders, and find ourselves left with the by-product of assured mutual destruction.
Then again, maybe it's late and I'm just tired...
I think it is ludicrous to think that McCain's pick will help to get Hillary Clinton supporters. She is the polar opposite of Clinton and her supporters were not voting for just because she is a woman. I do believe that his handlers believe that however, and are hoping to get something out of this. It just shows how desperate McCain is to begin pandering to the fundamentalist wing of the Republican party. Proof once again that he is an empty shell with no new ideas. Hes got nothing to offer.
I am a cynic about all things, and i must say when it comes to the man who is supposed to lead our country for the next 4 years, you bet im even more skeptical and cynical than with most things. I dont like the choices we were given this year. They are even worse than Gore/Kerry. I do love the freedoms our country gives us, but i really think the money driven, slanderous event we call an election is an atrocity and in no way what the original Framers of the constitution thought would be how the process of electing our Commander in Chief would take place. At the time the electoral college was first created, it was almost impractical for the country to get the news out to its people about who the choices for president were going to be. It sometimes took weeks and months for political news to reach from one state to the next. The college was to allow a census of the states to be obtained because a total popular vote (the whole country instead of state-by-state) would be easy to obtain if only so many areas knew about what was going on. or at least to a wider portion of the population than simply a few densely populated cities or areas. Now flash forward to today where news comes to us in an instant and we get to listen to the candidates rip into each other every week on TV, Radio, newspaper, etc... We as a whole can make a decision, it is no longer necessary for each state to represent a census because we can, and should, represent ourselves as one, united nation.
Enough ranting for now, its past 4 in the AM, i got to at least catch a nap before i head out to work.
Which is probably why they never ever mention it.Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronX
Because it would cost him working class votes.
EDIT: about his choice for VP: I never heard of her, but for the purpose of his campaign it was a brilliant move. He will get a lot of votes that he would lose if he had taken a cheney clone.
The one point I haven't seen yet: this lady is pretty hot:w:y
I'm not voting for McCain or Obama, but I think this was a good move for McCain. I know a lot of disgruntled democrats that would much rather vote for McCain over a black man (their words, not mine), and now that he has a woman running with him, they can feel better about voting for him.
The American people are getting screwed for the next 4 years regardless...at least there's a chance one of the people screwing us might not look so bad:rolleyes:
billyjeff2:
Does the middle initial W means anything to you?
Have you see it used on regular basis?
Why not to use H then?
What other names should be hidden and avoided that could denote associations?
Dems seem to be very upset about the designations of Gov. Palin for the VP post, why?
According to their points of view they should be jumping in joy and celebrating the poor decision of McCain.
Or is it that Gov. Palin will unify the Republican Party and go a step beyond and tap some of the female votes loyal to Hillary?
Just some food for thought!!
"billyjeff2:
Does the middle initial W means anything to you?
Have you see it used on regular basis?
Why not to use H then?
What other names should be hidden and avoided that could denote associations?"
The "W" has been employed when referring to our current president to distinguish him from his father, "HW".
Can't recall seeing too many posts here that referred to him as "G. Walker Bush", similar to how the poster to whom I was responding chose to refer to Barack Obama.
My point remains: None of the candidates who ran on either ticket used their middle names. Yet Obama's middle name was routinely highlighted by those who are all to happy to seek to infer something negative about a presidential candidate solely based on the name his parents gave him. Anyone who thinks the candidate's middle name is fair grounds upon which to judge a candidate's credentials, especially when the motivation for bringing the entire subject up is based on fear-mongering and ethnic adversion is, in my view, despicable.
Billyjeff2,
I know Barack Obama's middle name because it's Hussein. If it was Joe or Sam or even Dick I wouldn't have remembered it.
Can we get back on topic now that I've answered the question? Or is there still some nagging ambiguity that needs to be addressed
I would vote for someone with the middle name "Hitler" if I actually thought he would help this country. I miss Bill Clinton. Bill would have definitely gone put Palin in her place.....on her knees????
For now I've closed this thread. When you don't play nice you go to your rooms. The last thread about Clinton and Palin was the last straw.