Printable View
Not only that she slept with a member and spawned his off spring, wow.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nord Jim
I really hate this tit for tat guilty by association, it was a stupid path to go down. The vast majority of people at sometime in their life has had some type of association with someone who would stand the publics scrutiny. What decent person would even aspire to run for office?
Well, the thing with negative campaigning is that what matters is throwing enough mud at your opponent. As long as your opponent remains the focus you don't even have to answer anything about yourself (not that she ever feels she needs to answer a question).
To me negative campaigning is nothing but a sign of impotence and it panders to the worst in people. Sometime it works, but somehow I can't see it working in the current situation. We'll have to see though.
In defense of the McCain campaign's strategy - they have got no other option at this point. After such a long campaign my impression is that McCain lacks the discipline and determination to win. Instead of sticking to a strategy and just sticking to few cornerstone positions, he has relied heavily on gamble moves.
On the original subject of the thread I'm finally convinced that Sarah Palin was a desperate gamble, but they failed in executing it properly. She was a terrible pick and McCain will lose partly because of it. If he had picked Romney the race may have been a lot closer today.
Hi All,
I'd think there might be another good reason to keep Mrs Palin under tight control, and it's not because there's a fear of her being ignorant on some important issues. Actually, this reason's a fair bit worse, and would also be a liability if true.
Recently, when asked what she read, Mrs Palin seemed to draw a blank. Now really, you think that was because she doesn't read anything? No papers or publications of any kind? Or maybe you think she just panicked and couldn't come up with even one name? Well, it's a stretch.
How about she clammed up because she DOES subscribe to numerous publications, but thought it smarter not mention any. She was told not to bring anything up that could put her in a bad light, and possibly that's the reason she came up answerless. Now THAT makes more sense than her not reading anything at all, which was how she came out looking. Be interesting to get a list of magazine subscriptions and other material paid for by Mrs Palin herself.
So, that other reason for the lack of access might be because what her handlers are afraid will come out of the darkness. They may be spooked to let her say what she REALLY thinks, rather than what she's been told to say.
Nah........I'm probably just being paranoid............that darned politics will do that to me........heh.
Martin
Hi there,Quote:
Originally Posted by thebigspendur
You know, that's exactly right about the mods keeping on top of things. I shoulda mentioned that part of the story, but wanted to kinda keep things short (not likely). Yeah, the mods screwed up on that site, but it wasn't their fault really. They were looking for guidance from the owner, and he couldn't do what needed to be done. That included not banning numerous members (some of which were his friends) and not making other hard decisions, and the mods always take their cue from the top. The owner sets the tone in every forum I've ever participated in.
Hehe, I said some things to the owner that I thought might really **** him off........trying to get him off that damned fence. Didn't do a bit of good, which was a shame. The forum used to be.........it was a fun place to post in and read others comments as well. There were a LOT of smart, witty people, with plenty of banter going on between members. Sigh........I love banter, especially live chat. Nothing like schmoozing with some people who I like and who also make me laugh.
Ok, I'm done,
Martin
Just listening to her rally in Greenville NC, the rallies remind me of the Hitler rallies, not saying that she is Hitler (nor anything like that), but the crowd is worked up in such a fervor, I can't say that I've seen any politically rally in recent times like these. They respond to her half truths and lies like a pack of hungry lions, if the let Obama in there I'd swear that they would tear him limb from limb. The real problem is she's preaching to the choir, and I don't think it plays well with undecided moderates and independents, which they need to win.
You must not have watched the DNC conventionQuote:
Originally Posted by Hutch
Oh I did, it's nothing like the live rally that I'm still listening to, not even close. It makes, McCain and Obama rallies sound like high tea. You'd think she was running for President.
What, the DNC had shouts of "Kill him!!"? I must have missed that. That, and where they started shouting racial epithets at the TV crew's sound man.Quote:
Originally Posted by hoglahoo
As far as competing negative associations are concerned, it's not so much about that as it is about hypocracy. The Repugs have that market cornered. For them to try to build up a less-than-casual association Obama had with a '60s radical, decades after his radical activities, when Palin had numerous recent and profoundly disturbing ties herself shows not only an unprecedented level of hypocracy, but a cynicism about this country and a lack of judgement that frankly blow my mind.
j
hmm, I'll have to listen to this greenville rally, it must be quite a spectacle!
You guys are just slinging stuff against the wall in hopes that something sticks! Can we get back to more reasoned conversation?