I'm doubting she would answer her dad's question with something less than 6,000 years old.


i share that doubt in one sense (dont make daddy angry) but not in the more meaningful one (what she believes).

sounds like shes a creationist dancing around the questions. this "its just debate" bullshit is a classic creationist talking point.

eh, well at least she's open minded.

She's strictly pro-life right?

pffff

Just watch. Biden's been cut off at the knees now. If he goes negative (as he's so apt to do), then don't think for a second that the GOP won't pull out the "way to pick on a girl, asshole" card. And it'll probably work, since Biden has such a tendency to get nasty and let his mouth get ahead of his brain. It's gonna be hard for Biden to find the right balance I think.

who said anything about firing across the bow of "christianity"? itd be firing across the bow of "fundamentalism," or some other such judicious framing.
call me crazy, but, warped as america is, i cant see the revelation that a candidate believes the earth is 6000 years old (if she in fact does, im just assuming based on her creationism) as being a net positive, people simply cannot be that fucking dumb. there are loads of religious nuts out there, sure, but, as i was saying, voting on someone for the second highest office in the land with these beliefs will kinda put the lie to it, i think, people will be forced to cut the shit.

Being creationist is not a net positive in and of itself. I think you're right in that regard. But, it can become a positive if the fundamentalist right thinks their views and their way of life are under some kind of broader assault, because they'll rally to defend those things. If the question driving the election comes down to whether or not someone who believes in creationism is too stupid to be VP, then it's a winner for the GOP, because fundamentalists are going to turn out and push hard for McCain if for nothing else than to validate their religion. And face it, there are a lot more of them than there are of you.

Not all creationists think that Earth is only 6000 years old :P

Just watch. Biden's been cut off at the knees now. If he goes negative (as he's so apt to do), then don't think for a second that the GOP won't pull out the "way to pick on a girl, asshole" card. And it'll probably work, since Biden has such a tendency to get nasty and let his mouth get ahead of his brain. It's gonna be hard for Biden to find the right balance I think.

if she casts herself as "innocent soccer mom" than maybe, but thatd be a mistake for other reasons. i think she'll present herself as strong and bold and capable and all that, out of other political considerations, and then she wont be able to have it both ways if she comes in for tougher treatment.
in any case, youre right to a point. they cant really hit too hard, but i think theyre not as hamstrung as you think, especially if she puts herself out there.



Being creationist is not a net positive in and of itself. I think you're right in that regard. But, it can become a positive if the fundamentalist right thinks their views and their way of life are under some kind of broader assault, because they'll rally to defend those things. If the question driving the election comes down to whether or not someone who believes in creationism is too stupid to be VP, then it's a winner for the GOP, because fundamentalists are going to turn out and push hard for McCain if for nothing else than to validate their religion. And face it, there are a lot more of them than there are of you.

i dont know, it seems like mccain cant really claim the religious the way bush could, where any threat to religious sensibilities translated into direct support for bush. obama is a much more credible candidate on religion, hes comfortable talking about christianity in ways kerry or gore werent, and mccain has never been much of a friend of the religious right. palin maybe changes that equation, but i dont see the logic of the 2004 election with religion, which youre kinda citing, as being so applicable here.

Not all creationists think that Earth is only 6000 years old :P

right, they only believe n - 1 ludicrous things. congratulations to them! earth being 6000 years old? HA, thats ridiculous, of course not... but it was created in seven literal days, dinosaurs shared the earth with makind, and evolution is a myth.


youre a creationist, right?

i dont know, it seems like mccain cant really claim the religious the way bush could, where any threat to religious sensibilities translated into direct support for bush. obama is a much more credible candidate on religion, hes comfortable talking about christianity in ways kerry or gore werent, and mccain has never been much of a friend of the religious right. palin maybe changes that equation, but i dont see the logic of the 2004 election with religion, which youre kinda citing, as being so applicable here.

I don't really think it's applicable right now. My point is that if Dems make Palin's creationism a big issue that it could become applicable. Right now the fundamentalist right is not gonna go to bat for McCain the same way they did for Bush in 2004, pretty much for the reasons you mentioned. Adding Palin to the ticket doesn't change that much, if at all. But if Palin is somehow made into some kind of proxy for attacks on creationism just because Dems see it as an opportunity to run fundamentalism through the mud a bit, then the fundies will turn out big again in turn.

I'm just saying that the Dems shouldn't stir up the hornet's nest if they don't want to get stung. Right now the religious right are not a factor, because a lot of them are likely staying home. The Democrats need to do what they can to keep them there.

right, they only believe n - 1 ludicrous things. congratulations to them! earth being 6000 years old? HA, thats ridiculous, of course not... but it was created in seven literal days, dinosaurs shared the earth with makind, and evolution is a myth.

I'm a modified creationist and don't believe any of those things whatsoever. I believe in creation aided by evolution, heavy on the evolution.

Creationist don't necessarily (although most do) take the Bible literally. No idea if Palin does, of course.

That said, I haven't seen any polls detailing the belief in creationist but I'd think an overwhelming majority of the voting public believe in one form or another of creation.

I'm a modified creationist and don't believe any of those things whatsoever. I believe in creation aided by evolution, heavy on the evolution.

Creationist don't necessarily (although most do) take the Bible literally. No idea if Palin does, of course.

That said, I haven't seen any polls detailing the belief in creationist but I'd think an overwhelming majority of the voting public believe in one form or another of creation.

Yeah, what sppunk said.

Wow, check out the Hilary boards...

http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/showthread.php?t=26179
http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/forumdisplay.php?f=84

I have a bad feeling people are greatly underestimating the number of women who might vote for Palin just because she has a shriveled-up vag.

Then again, people are ignoring the fact something like 98 percent of Hillary supporters back her because she's pro-choice. Palin's anything but.

you can believe in God and evolution... evolution can be the mechanics behind a divine power.

you can believe in God and evolution... evolution can be the mechanics behind a divine power.

Yup.

I'm a modified creationist and don't believe any of those things whatsoever. I believe in creation aided by evolution, heavy on the evolution.

Creationist don't necessarily (although most do) take the Bible literally. No idea if Palin does, of course.

That said, I haven't seen any polls detailing the belief in creationist but I'd think an overwhelming majority of the voting public believe in one form or another of creation.

creationists are not just people who think god created life or whatever, theye people who believe in a literal reading of the creation story in the bible. you guys are using this word way too elastically.

in any case, you cannot both be a creationist in the above sense and accept evolution, the two are mutually exclusive. you can only accept evolution and then concoct some wishful, ad hoc, "creative" interpretation of the book of genesis that superficially coexists with evolution.
typically youll hear something along the lines of god "providing the initial spark and blueprint!" which is pretty in and of itself, but completely at odds with any reasonable interpretation of what the bible says. call that what you will, but its not really christianity anymore, its practically new age garbage

Wow, check out the Hilary boards...

http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/showthread.php?t=26179
http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/forumdisplay.php?f=84


wow that forum is something. i feel like saving it or something, this will be an amazing time capsule in a few years.

but, jesus, those people are off the fucking chains. what a bunch of lunatics. i wonder which one is futureboy, the kind of token representative of hillary's storied hispanic demographic

creationists are not just people who think god created life or whatever, theye people who believe in a literal reading of the creation story in the bible. you guys are using this word way too elastically.

in any case, you cannot both be a creationist in the above sense and accept evolution, the two are mutually exclusive. you can only accept evolution and then concoct some wishful, ad hoc, "creative" interpretation of the book of genesis that superficially coexists with evolution.
typically youll hear something along the lines of god "providing the initial spark and blueprint!" which is pretty in and of itself, but completely at odds with any reasonable interpretation of what the bible says. call that what you will, but its not really christianity anymore, its practically new age

If you are using creationists as someone who believes the Genesis story literally, then I'm far from one.

I don't believe hardly any of the Old Testament and believe it's mostly fables and sometimes-good storytelling.

I do believe God created the earth and don't believe humans came from tadpoles. I don't believe this all was created in six days or Eve ate a bad apple or anything of the sort.

wow that forum is something. i feel like saving it or something, this will be an amazing time capsule in a few years.

but, jesus, those people are off the fucking chains. what a bunch of lunatics. i wonder which one is futureboy, the kind of token representative of hillary's storied hispanic demographic

I doubt many of those are actually HRC supporters, and are instead playing them on the Internet.

Wow, check out the Hilary boards...

http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/showthread.php?t=26179
http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/forumdisplay.php?f=84

oh dear jesus those ladies are so obnoxious (for the most part)

I would imagine only the fanatics post at messageboards though...

I'm not voting FOR McCain, I'm voting AGAINST Obama.

LOL, are there no third parties anymore?

anyway I can't imagine a runner up miss alaska (or whatever)-turned-politician who didn't have some skeletons in her closet.

I hope she doesn't win any votes because she has a young child with downs syndrome. I doubt she spends much time with her children anyway.

God the beauty pagent crap just rubs me the wrong way. It screams IIIII NEEEED POOOWER AND ATTENTTIOOON

creationists are not just people who think god created life or whatever, theye people who believe in a literal reading of the creation story in the bible. you guys are using this word way too elastically.

in any case, you cannot both be a creationist in the above sense and accept evolution, the two are mutually exclusive. you can only accept evolution and then concoct some wishful, ad hoc, "creative" interpretation of the book of genesis that superficially coexists with evolution.
typically youll hear something along the lines of god "providing the initial spark and blueprint!" which is pretty in and of itself, but completely at odds with any reasonable interpretation of what the bible says. call that what you will, but its not really christianity anymore, its practically new age garbage
actually it's the "creationists" who have the "creative" interpretation of genesis, as they base the dates on "this guy begat that guy who begat that guy" etc. there are no dates or anything provided. people in the old testament sometimes lived 800 years and crazy shit like that.

it's the creationists who are drawing conclusions that aren't in print, but i know you hate religion so much you'd rather all of that stuff were literally in there

I do believe God created the earth and don't believe humans came from tadpoles. .

so then here it is, cut and dry: you dont accept evolution.

sppunk, do you think humans were created in more or less their present form?

I think physically we've always been fairly close (monkey type perhaps); I think the biggest change has been understanding and reasoning.

sleeper, make a new thread for this playa

yeah someone tell me the rest of the hillary camp isnt like those wacko feminists

I doubt many of those are actually HRC supporters, and are instead playing them on the Internet.

Half of those were mine!

so is what i'm hearing true? that msnbc put up this headline on the bottom of their screen when palin was annonced?
"How many houses does Palin bring to the Republican ticket?"

man i hope there's a screenshot of this so i can show it every time sleeper says fox news is biased.

actually it's the "creationists" who have the "creative" interpretation of genesis, as they base the dates on "this guy begat that guy who begat that guy" etc. there are no dates or anything provided. people in the old testament sometimes lived 800 years and crazy shit like that.

it's the creationists who are drawing conclusions that aren't in print, but i know you hate religion so much you'd rather all of that stuff were literally in there

there are no explicit dates, yes. if you take the bible at its word on ages and do the math, the world was created in 6004 BC.

so why do you say the 800 years stuff (noah lived 950, a record) is crazy shit? i mean, in one sense it obviously is (its at odds with everything we know about human life and there is no evidence for this). but this strikes me as a problem with the bible, not necessarily a problem with interpretation.

i think the fundamentalist view of the bible is more or less the correct one, they just commit the error of actually believing it. i think the first five books of old testament are written to be taken at face value, they mean what they say. the global flood and noahs ark, for instance, are not allegory, theyre record.

sleeper shut up or make a new thread

I think physically we've always been fairly close (monkey type perhaps); I think the biggest change has been understanding and reasoning.

dont ever say you accept evolution again, then, because clearly you dont. you cant pick and choose like this, to accept evolution in any meaningful sense means you accept the basic principles and ideas here (that all life evolved from a common ancestor through natual selection). what you believe is not evolution, its some bastardized form of evolution that youre hiding behind because i think youre ashamed to say aloud that you dont accept evolution.

so is what i'm hearing true? that msnbc put up this headline on the bottom of their screen when palin was annonced?
"How many houses does Palin bring to the Republican ticket?"

man i hope there's a screenshot of this so i can show it every time sleeper says fox news is biased.

In msnbc's defense though, it's difficult to find things that she brings to the ticket. Maybe they were trying to be nice?

sleeper shut up or make a new thread

youll have to pry the keyboard from my cold, dead hands

so is what i'm hearing true? that msnbc put up this headline on the bottom of their screen when palin was annonced?
"How many houses does Palin bring to the Republican ticket?"

man i hope there's a screenshot of this so i can show it every time sleeper says fox news is biased.

Wow, nice.

sleeper, jesus loves you even though you deny him

In msnbc's defense though, it's difficult to find things that she brings to the ticket. Maybe they were trying to be nice?

there's my new fox news defense. they were being nice.

pointing out the bias on another network is not a defense of fox news. its a deflection.

sleeper, jesus loves you even though you deny him

ah, the moral blackmail argument, my favourite.

Why is Dan Quayle wearing a dress and calling himself "Sarah?"

GOP pandering at its finest. And the sad thing is, I think McCain might have just won the election with this tactic.

In msnbc's defense though, it's difficult to find things that she brings to the ticket. Maybe they were trying to be nice?

She brings her vagina to the ticket, if she had a penis she wouldn't have been chosen.

Some evidence that Palin doesn't know how to spell potato, please.

yeah someone tell me the rest of the hillary camp isnt like those wacko feminists


NObama - No Way - KNOW McCAIN!

Q. Obama agrees with Sen. Clinton on most issues. Why not vote for him?
A. If agreeing with Sen. Clinton is all that is required then there would be 18 million of us running for president.

Q. What about Roe v. Wade?
A. The DNC backhands women and then dangles Roe v. Wade over their head... not working!

Q. Don't TRUE Dems vote Dem ?
A. TRUE Americans don't belong to racist churches for 20 years. I will not reward this!

Some evidence that Palin doesn't know how to spell potato, please.

She can't pronounce "nuclear", that's for sure. :p

NObama - No Way - KNOW McCAIN!

Q. Obama agrees with Sen. Clinton on most issues. Why not vote for him?
A. If agreeing with Sen. Clinton is all that is required then there would be 18 million of us running for president.

Q. What about Roe v. Wade?
A. The DNC backhands women and then dangles Roe v. Wade over their head... not working!

Q. Don't TRUE Dems vote Dem ?
A. TRUE Americans don't belong to racist churches for 20 years. I will not reward this!

Retarded.

Voting for McCain simply to vote against Obama is stupid. I'd rather have the candidate that agreed with my preferred candidate on the issues I care about as opposed to voting for a guy that agrees with virtually nothing I stand for and his only qualification for office (as far as the voters I'm talking about) is the fact that he's not the guy that just beat their candidate in the primaries.

I'll bet those disgruntled pro-choice Hillary supporters that vote for McCain because he's not Obama in November will be kicking themselves after McCain gets the chance to appoint more conservative justices to the Supreme Court that will continue to chip away at their right to choose, if he's elected that is.

TRUE Democrats don't want to cast a vote for four more years of Bush's policies simply because their beloved Hillary lost. Get over it you morons. At least vote for a third-party candidate if you don't want to vote for Obama...you'll look less stupid that way.

Some evidence that Palin doesn't know how to spell potato, please.

If she supports the teaching of creationism/intelligent design in schools, that's quite enough for me to consider her an intellectual lightweight.

If she supports the teaching of creationism/intelligent design in schools, that's quite enough for me to consider her an intellectual lightweight.

So there are prominent scientists that you consider intellectual lightweights?

Edit: Creationists in the broad sense that sppunk described, my apologies

three things.

1. Palin is the perfect counter balance to Obama from a purely strategic standpoint. Appealing to novelty, a pretty face, etc... Romney would've been the perfect choice for the previous two elections, however -

2. It's now clearer than ever this election is nothing more than a circus. Both tickets are effectively indistinguishable. Both candidates will bring the economy to hell, Obama doing so through internal spending, McCain tossing money away overseas. Both support nation-building and expansion of government.

3. Whether there is a God and he created us in his image over many thousands of years through evolution, or there is no God and evolution occurred as a natural outcome of cause and effect, anyone who fails to acknowledge evolution as a viable possibility suffers from a rationality deficiency.

I agree. But Biden isnt the nominee.



Dont look at me, Im voting Nader.

I sure as fuck hope you don't live in a battleground state

NObama - No Way - KNOW McCAIN!

Q. Obama agrees with Sen. Clinton on most issues. Why not vote for him?
A. If agreeing with Sen. Clinton is all that is required then there would be 18 million of us running for president.

Q. What about Roe v. Wade?
A. The DNC backhands women and then dangles Roe v. Wade over their head... not working!

Q. Don't TRUE Dems vote Dem ?
A. TRUE Americans don't belong to racist churches for 20 years. I will not reward this!

I am very very afraid for Roe vs Wade and I hope those awful women would shrivel up and die realizing what they've done if this all comes to pass

So there are prominent scientists that you consider intellectual lightweights?

Edit: Creationists in the broad sense that sppunk described, my apologies

No, I'm accusing Palin of being an intellectual lightweight.

If you want to bring scientists into this, then I would like to narrow the issue down to specifically the theory of evolution by natural selection. If you show me a "prominent" scientist that doesn't subscribe to this then I'll show you a scientist that, at best, is fooling themselves or at worst, intellectually dishonest.

"In a CNBC interview about her ongoing ethics investigation, Palin stated that she was unsure about what a Vice President does every day."



Awesome.

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/bk20IySDwhw&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed>



So... can you tell me exactly what a VP does every day? When they're not waiting for Presidents to die or voting along party lines to break Senate ties, what exactly do they do on a daily basis? Edumacate me.



Anyone?

Eh, kinda in her defense...the actual "job" of the VP is pretty shiity. Before Cheney got in there and set up his own shadow government, the VP basically just sat around waiting for the President to die an untimely death. The list of actual responsibilities for the VP in the constitution is laughably small.

but yeah Palin is a reckless pick, regardless. I think the video or audio a couple weeks ago of her where she doesn't really pay attention or know what the actual plan is in Iraq is more damning. Seriously, I'm confident that I know more about foreign affairs than Sarah Palin, and she is going to be a heartbeat away from the president if elected? holy shit.

yglesias fun fact:

Sarah Palin wasn't yet governor of Alaska when McCain began his 2008 presidential campaign.

John McCain is 23 years older than the state of Alaska.

The following cities have larger populations than the state of Alaska:

– New York, NY

– Los Angeles, CA

– Chicago, IL

– Houston, TX

– Phoenix, AZ

– Philadelphia, PA

– San Antonio, TX

– San Diego, CA

– Dallas, TX

– San Jose, CA

– Detroit, MI

– Jacksonville, FL

– Indianapolis, IN

– San Francisco, CA

– Columbus, OH

– Austin, TX

If this doesn't blow up in McCain's face I am seriously moving out of this country, I am tired of living in a nation hijacked by bullshit.

How many days per year is the Alaska State Legislature in session? 90 days.

Eh, kinda in her defense...the actual "job" of the VP is pretty shiity. Before Cheney got in there and set up his own shadow government, the VP basically just sat around waiting for the President to die an untimely death. The list of actual responsibilities for the VP in the constitution is laughably small.

but yeah Palin is a reckless pick, regardless. I think the video or audio a couple weeks ago of her where she doesn't really pay attention or know what the actual plan is in Iraq is more damning. Seriously, I'm confident that I know more about foreign affairs than Sarah Palin, and she is going to be a heartbeat away from the president if elected? holy shit.

The VP doesn't really *need* foreign affairs skills... we're used to Bill Clinton/GW using their Veeps as sort of foreign dignitaries. The VP can be whatever the President wants them to be. McCain is solid in foreign affairs, he doesn't need Palin to help him out with that, like Obama needs Biden for that.

Blah blah blah, McCain could croak, yada yada... he's a healthy guy. Even if that did happen, it'd be a few years, long enough for her to get some OJT. VP is the ultimate in Presidential OJT.

As far as debate, when Biden brags about his years in the Senate and his foreign policy cred, Palin can turn it against him by pointing the Republicans have the foreign policy experience where it really counts... at the top of the ticket.

As long as Biden remains composed, graceful, and respectful, I do not see this woman besting him.

I am very very afraid for Roe vs Wade and I hope those awful women would shrivel up and die realizing what they've done if this all comes to pass

Exactly.

oh dear jesus those ladies are so obnoxious (for the most part)

I would imagine only the fanatics post at messageboards though...
They are a small voice, looking larger than they really are by going on a bunch of boards and blogs.

I don't even think the pissed off Hillary protestors were able to manage more than fifty or so people at the convention.

Also to those of you who keep on talking about how the VP role isn't as important and blah blah. WE KNOW. But it is the fact that McCain always hammered the talking point that he is more experienced, and will bring even more experience with the people he surrounds himself with. He then ripped on Obama for having none. He now picked someone who has less experience than Obama (she considers PTA part of her 13 years of elected office). He completely contradicted his message -- yet AGAIN -- and in the worst way.

This will backfire. Rabid Hillary fans on the Internet with nothing else better to do are in their own little world. Hillary supporters ready to vote for Obama continue to increase.

The VP doesn't really *need* foreign affairs skills... we're used to Bill Clinton/GW using their Veeps as sort of foreign dignitaries. The VP can be whatever the President wants them to be. McCain is solid in foreign affairs, he doesn't need Palin to help him out with that, like Obama needs Biden for that.

Blah blah blah, McCain could croak, yada yada... he's a healthy guy. Even if that did happen, it'd be a few years, long enough for her to get some OJT. VP is the ultimate in Presidential OJT.

Do you realize you're just making excuses for this pick because you're so in the tank for republicans?

I could be wrong, but I don't really remember Al Gore or Dick Cheney doing much foreign dignitary work....there's already a position specifically for that: it's called Secretary of State.

Look. The number one job of VP is simply to takeover in case the president dies. That's it. Doesn't McCain tout that he's ready to lead on day one? You just conceded that Sarah Palin isn't ready.


As far as debate, when Biden brags about his years in the Senate and his foreign policy cred, Palin can turn it against him by pointing the Republicans have the foreign policy experience where it really counts... at the top of the ticket.

And then Biden can point to the foreign policy of the last eight years.

Blah blah blah, McCain could croak, yada yada... he's a healthy guy. Even if that did happen, it'd be a few years, long enough for her to get some OJT..

“She’s going to learn national security at the foot of the master for the next four years, and most doctors think that he’ll be around at least that long,” said Charlie Black, one of Mr. McCain’s top advisers.

most doctors :erm:

Do you realize you're just making excuses for this pick because you're so in the tank for republicans?

In all honesty, I don't care about the VP pick, and neither do voters. It's just irritating to me that folks are jumping on this like it's a huge deal, when it's not really, so I feel the need to rebutt the comments being made.

I like her, I identify with her more than any other person in the race so far, and I was going to vote for McCain anyway, so there ya go.

“She’s going to learn national security at the foot of the master for the next four years, and most doctors think that he’ll be around at least that long,” said Charlie Black, one of Mr. McCain’s top advisers.

most doctors :erm:

I'm sure that the adviser was being literal there. I'm sure.

If I were a woman I would be offended at this move. I mean, fuck, I'm not a woman and I'm still offended that McCain would try to play the demographics like this.

In all honesty, I don't care about the VP pick, and neither do voters. It's just irritating to me that folks are jumping on this like it's a huge deal, when it's not really, so I feel the need to rebutt the comments being made.

I like her, I identify with her more than any other person in the race so far, and I was going to vote for McCain anyway, so there ya go.

can I ask what don't you like about obama? or better yet, what specific policies you don't like.

Eh, kinda in her defense...the actual "job" of the VP is pretty shiity.

It wasn't clear since no one responded, but the spirit of my posts was in her defense. NOBODY knows what the VP does on a daily basis. Only one person mocked it here, but on other boards and news blogs people got a good chuckle out of that soundbite until it was pointed out that none of them had any fucking clue, either.

I like her, I identify with her more than any other person in the race so far, and I was going to vote for McCain anyway, so there ya go.

<img src=http://forums.netphoria.org/customavatars/avatar11563_1.gif>

It wasn't clear since no one responded, but the spirit of my posts was in her defense. NOBODY knows what the VP does on a daily basis. Only one person mocked it here, but on other boards and news blogs people got a good chuckle out of that soundbite until it was pointed out that none of them had any fucking clue, either.

ah, i finally see that now. i was just reflexively answering that video as if I read it from those other boards and news blogs.

I guarantee that clip is going to be played ad nauseum from here to November, though.

can I ask what don't you like about obama? or better yet, what specific policies you don't like.

Big one is his pro-abortion stance. I mean, being pro-abortion is one thing, but he's very, very far left about it. Too far left for me. See the Born Alive Bill...

Taxing big corporations: Yeah, that'll get companies to stay in the US.

Taxing oil companies: That'll make the price of gas go down.

Etc. etc... I pretty much don't agree with him on anything.

Except that we need to start looking at alternative energy. But I think we can do that without sending gas prices through the roof.

i guarantee you'll hear the phrase "heartbeat away from presidency" spoken ad nauseum...

It's time for McCain to break out the Phil Collins

Two hearts, believing in just one mind
Beating together till the end of time
You know we're two hearts believing in just one mind
Together forever till the end of time

Big one is his pro-abortion stance. I mean, being pro-abortion is one thing, but he's very, very far left about it. Too far left for me. See the Born Alive Bill...

Taxing big corporations: Yeah, that'll get companies to stay in the US.

Taxing oil companies: That'll make the price of gas go down.

Etc. etc... I pretty much don't agree with him on anything.

Except that we need to start looking at alternative energy. But I think we can do that without sending gas prices through the roof.

I guess I can accept your beef about his pro-choice stance.

The rest of those are invalid/misinformed (i.e., he's not doing those things for the reason you imply he is).

Gas prices will surely be going up no matter what. And certainly McCain's proposal will not bring gas prices down, as all experts say, even ones in the bush admin.

Man the dems are fucked. I don't think they have an answer for the massive number of housewives in bumfuck Ohio and Florida who are going to vote McCain just because he has a skirt on the ticket regardless of her evolution/abortion stances. BRILLIANT tactical move.

that's right ^ seriously that is the worst name ever. i might actually soften my stance on abortion if your mom promissed to suck the brain out of your stupidly tattood head!

Wow pretty lame.

your face!!!

your face!!!

Sarah Palin is my booty cal

NObama - No Way - KNOW McCAIN!

Q. Obama agrees with Sen. Clinton on most issues. Why not vote for him?
A. If agreeing with Sen. Clinton is all that is required then there would be 18 million of us running for president.

Q. What about Roe v. Wade?
A. The DNC backhands women and then dangles Roe v. Wade over their head... not working!

Q. Don't TRUE Dems vote Dem ?
A. TRUE Americans don't belong to racist churches for 20 years. I will not reward this!

i read that too and gagged. a catalogue of horrendous arguments. really, this should be put in some textbook on logic as a study exercise on spotting fallacies

So there are prominent scientists that you consider intellectual lightweights?

Edit: Creationists in the broad sense that sppunk described, my apologies

"creationist" has never meant "believer in a creator" or just a fact of "creation." either stop using it in this sense of pick a different word. its ludicrous that you guys are defending actual creationism by using some fake creationism

The VP doesn't really *need* foreign affairs skills... we're used to Bill Clinton/GW using their Veeps as sort of foreign dignitaries. The VP can be whatever the President wants them to be. McCain is solid in foreign affairs, he doesn't need Palin to help him out with that, like Obama needs Biden for that.

Blah blah blah, McCain could croak, yada yada... he's a healthy guy. Even if that did happen, it'd be a few years, long enough for her to get some OJT. VP is the ultimate in Presidential OJT.

As far as debate, when Biden brags about his years in the Senate and his foreign policy cred, Palin can turn it against him by pointing the Republicans have the foreign policy experience where it really counts... at the top of the ticket.


a VP needs every set of skills a president would possibly need, including foreign policy. this has never been more true with john mccain, a 72 year old who could keel over/have dementia set in at any moment

It wasn't clear since no one responded, but the spirit of my posts was in her defense. NOBODY knows what the VP does on a daily basis. Only one person mocked it here, but on other boards and news blogs people got a good chuckle out of that soundbite until it was pointed out that none of them had any fucking clue, either.

pffft. as if all things are equal -- they dont know, she doesnt know, its all the same! but, uh, theyre not running for the position of VP. it means something more for someone running for the position to not know what it is than for some TV pundit to not know.

I sure as fuck hope you don't live in a battleground state

I dont. It's very liberating being in a state that doesnt matter.

Just watch. Biden's been cut off at the knees now. If he goes negative (as he's so apt to do), then don't think for a second that the GOP won't pull out the "way to pick on a girl, asshole" card. And it'll probably work, since Biden has such a tendency to get nasty and let his mouth get ahead of his brain. It's gonna be hard for Biden to find the right balance I think.

If she can't handle Biden being tough on her, how the hell is she going to handle an international crisis?

Putin: "We're going to bomb your country"

Palin's husband: "Stop picking on my wife, she's only a girl!"

Fuck, this is presidential politics, not freeze tag.

Well after reading that Hilary Clinton message board it's clear that rationalism doesn't count for shit in this race.

has it ever?

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/bfhzZvkAo-U&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/bfhzZvkAo-U&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

From: http://www.electoral-vote.com/

The Veep: A Short Play in One Act

Sometimes fiction is a better vehicle for getting inside someone's mind. Besides, it's all we have. Here is a short play for two actors. Let's call them Schmidt, a tough, savvy consultant, and McCain, a candidate. All names have been changed to protect the innocent.

Schmidt: McCain, Get your ass over here and look at this map.

McCain: It's the U.S. with the states red and blue. Seen it before. What's your point?

Schmidt: Obama's gonna win all the Kerry States. You have a small chance to pick off New Hampshire but 60% of the people think you're pro choice. When they find out you've been pro life for 25 years, forget New Hampshire.

McCain: Where does that leave me?

Schmidt: Bush won 286 to 252.

McCain: Fine with me.

Schmidt: But wait a minute. Obama campaigned like crazy in Iowa. Won the caucuses big time. You barely set foot in the state. The people of Iowa take their caucuses very, very seriously. You insulted them. Make that 279 to 259.

McCain: I still win.

Schmidt: We're not done yet. Obama has been leading in New Mexico all year. State's full of Latinos. They preferred Clinton but they're still Democrats at heart. I think we're toast there. Now its 274 to 264.

McCain: A win is a win. Still better than Florida was.

Schmidt: Yeah, but now Obama is just 5 EVs short of a tie (which means it goes to the House and he'll win there) and 6 EVs short of a clean win. Look, there are six swing states this time: Florida, Virginia, Ohio, Missouri, Colorado, and Nevada. We have to win all six of them. Can't lose a single state or we're dead meat.

McCain: I'm a fighter. You know that. The gooks couldn't break me. I'll campaign like hell in all six. Don't worry.

Schmidt: I'm worried. We're 50-50 on all six. It's like flipping a coin six times and getting six heads. One chance in 64, roughly 2%. We have to do something dramatic. Something that will throw all calculations out the window. Something that completely shakes up everything. Something that gives us a fresh start. Gotta hit the RESET button.

McCain: Have something in mind?

Schmidt: Yeah. Pick a black or a woman for Veep.

McCain: You mean I can't pick Joe? He's my friend and a great guy.

Schmidt: Half the convention would walk out. Besides, Jews aren't a novelty any more. Thank Gore for that.

McCain:. Shit. But blacks are fine with me. Colin Powell is a great American and one of the most respected people in the country.

Schmidt: He doesn't want the job

McCain: No sweat. Condi's the smartest woman I know. Mind like a bear trap. She'll run rings around Biden at the debate. She'll say: "I've been there. I talk to Putin every week. You're just an old windbag"

Schmidt: She's got "BUSH III" emblazoned on her forehead. And Obama is a happily married man with two adorable little girls, Condi's a single black woman who is apparently not much into families. Won't work. What about Kay [Bailey Hutchison (R-TX)]?

McCain: She's tired of the Washington rat race. She wants to go back to Texas. Be governor or something, you know like Ma Ferguson.

Schmidt: Ma's husband, the governor, was impeached and convicted. Ann Richards would be a better role model. What other women do we have?

McCain: Jodi [Rell] and Olympia [Snowe] are smart and popular but pro choice. The Base distrusts me already. They'd mutiny.

Schmidt: Elizabeth Dole? Susan Collins?

McCain: With either of those we lose a Senate seat. I don't want to have 60 Democrats to deal with over there. Reid might grow a spine. Can't encourage that.

Schmidt: Lisa Murkowski?

McCain: Her dad appointed her. She won on her own later, but I don't need to deal with nepotism and cronyism. Smells like Bush. I'm a maverick, remember?

Schmidt: Got it. Some businesswomen? Sarah Palin?

McCain: Carly [Fiorina] is great on economics, but she nearly she ran her company into the ground so the board fired her and then gave her $40 million so she wouldn't feel bad. The 20,000 people she fired aren't too keen on her. Meg Whitman did a fantastic job at eBay but nobody's ever heard of her.

Schmidt: So Palin's the only one left? What about her?

McCain: I met her once, at a governors meeting. Cute as a button. She ran for Miss Alaska. Came in second. I woulda voted for her. But it's a real Hail Mary pass. She's popular up north there where the sun never shines (except for some minor problems when she tried to fire her state trooper brother-in-law). She was pregnant with a Down syndrome baby and didn't abort him. The Base will love that. Her hobbies are riding her motorcycle and hunting moose. The coal miners in Appalachia will go wild over her. How fast can we print a million 8x10 color photos of her for their lockers?

Schmidt: Fast. But what about her experience. I mean, she's only been governor a year and a half. What did she do before that?

McCain: I think she was mayor of some village with six igloos. Who cares? I think you're right we have to shake things up completely. Change the game. The Base will eat her up on abortion, the Hillary fans will see that we respect women (unlike their guy). We grab the mantle of reformers. The white guys will be transfixed by this hot chick who hunts moose. I get to be Maverick-in-chief. Sounds like a winner.

Schmidt: What about the debate with Biden? What if the moderator says: "What would you do if Russia invaded Georgia again?" and she says: "I'll get on Air Force One and fly to Atlanta immediately."

McCain: Most Americans can't find Georgia the state on a map, let alone Georgia the country. I'll get Lugar to tutor her on foreign policy. He knows everything about it. I'm sold. Let's go for it.

Man the dems are fucked. I don't think they have an answer for the massive number of housewives in bumfuck Ohio and Florida who are going to vote McCain just because he has a skirt on the ticket regardless of her evolution/abortion stances. BRILLIANT tactical move.

Kinda like all the black voters who will vote for Obama just because he's black?

Pretty irritating, isn't it?

has it ever?

Nope, but that's why "don't pick on her" shit will definitely be in play. The way elections are done in the US seams to completely pander to it. I'm not saying it's particularly better over here, but there's much more of "lets get this shit over with" attitude towards the whole process.

Kinda like all the black voters who will vote for Obama just because he's black?

Pretty irritating, isn't it?

Do you know what percentage of the U.S. population is black?

Do you know what percentage of the U.S. population is black?

Thank you.

If she can't handle Biden being tough on her, how the hell is she going to handle an international crisis?

Putin: "We're going to bomb your country"

Palin's husband: "Stop picking on my wife, she's only a girl!"

Fuck, this is presidential politics, not freeze tag.

I'm not saying she won't be able to handle Biden being tough on her. I'm just saying that if Biden attacks her then it could be to the GOP's advantage to play the "he's picking on a girl!" card, especially if Biden is his usual smug and bullying self. It's more about playing up how big an asshole Biden is than it is about how well she handles him. I'm sure she can take whatever Biden (or Putin, for that matter) can dish out...but the voters don't necessarily have to know that.

corgy, youre voting republican this fall, yeah? does palin make you more or less enthusiastic about voting republican? which republican candidate do you wish won the primaries?

is sarah palin related to mike palin from monthy pyton?

corgy, youre voting republican this fall, yeah? does palin make you more or less enthusiastic about voting republican?

There were some names floating around there that could have spelled total disaster if McCain had picked them, and I wasn't confident that McCain had enough sense in his head to not pick them anyway. The fact that he avoided the pitfalls and didn't shoot himself in the foot is probably the most encouraging thing to me. There were a lot of picks that would have made me less enthusiastic about voting GOP this fall, and a couple that I would have been okay with, but only in a "least of all evils" sort of way. Palin doesn't really fit either of those categories (mainly because she wasn't really on my radar), so I guess all in all I'd consider the pick a net positive in my mind.

It's also a bonus that people seem to be excited about the pick. When you compare the reaction to this pick to the "ho-hum" reaction that came on the heels of Obama picking Biden, it seems like you've gotta say the GOP has done something right for once. I dare say the buzz surrounding this pick has made people already forget about the "greatest speech ever given" (#12948934859) by Obama Thursday night.

which republican candidate do you wish won the primaries?

Of the ones that ran? That's like asking which venereal disease I'd prefer. I think Romney and then Huckabee were probably the two I'd have voted for if I had a gun to my head. But I pretty much abstained during the primaries rather than vote for any of those guys (plus McCain had already sewn it up by the time my state's primaries came around). I wanted a do-over with some real Republicans.

I'm sure she can take whatever Biden (or Putin, for that matter) can dish out...but the voters don't necessarily have to know that.

Hmmm, I wonder what you might be basing that on considering her weak political background and that fact that she, of your own admission, was not on your radar.

But the Republicans have been busy the last 24 hours trying to convince voters that she'll be a "quick study" and has great foreign policy experience because Alaska is right next to Russia and her son is going to Iraq. I'm sure she's qualified to be president, as all mothers are. :erm:

Do you know what percentage of the U.S. population is black?

Well to be fair the population of housewives in bumfuck Ohio and Florida cant be much bigger.

Kinda like all the black voters who will vote for Obama just because he's black?

Pretty irritating, isn't it?

do you realize that around 90% of blacks voted for Gore and Kerry?

<a href="http://s304.photobucket.com/albums/nn176/euronomus/?action=view&current=mcainsvagina.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn176/euronomus/mcainsvagina.jpg" border="0" alt="mcains vagina"></a>

McCain is going to be pissed that there is a photo of his vagina floating around on the internet!

Kinda like all the black voters who will vote for Obama just because he's black?

Pretty irritating, isn't it?

Ignorant statement. How many blacks do you think would vote for a Republican ticket after Katrina, no matter who the democrat candidate was? And in a broader note, the Republican party has been completey disconnected from, and frequently straight up racist to, the black population for years. That builds up a valid mistrust. Look at this disgusting worldnetdaily article:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=73276

Palin:

* She was elected Alaska's governor a little over a year and a half ago. Her previous office was mayor of Wasilla, a small town outside Anchorage. She has no foreign policy experience.
* Palin is strongly anti-choice, opposing abortion even in the case of rape or incest.
* She supported right-wing extremist Pat Buchanan for president in 2000.
* Palin thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.
* She's doesn't think humans are the cause of climate change.
* She's solidly in line with John McCain's "Big Oil first" energy policy. She's pushed hard for more oil drilling and says renewables won't be ready for years. She also sued the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered species—she was worried it would interfere with more oil drilling in Alaska.
* How closely did John McCain vet this choice? He met Sarah Palin once at a meeting. They spoke a second time, last Sunday, when he called her about being vice-president. Then he offered her the position.



Alaskans on Palin:

She is really just a mayor from a small town outside Anchorage who has been a governor for only 1.5 years, and has ZERO national and international experience. I shudder to think that she could be the person taking that 3AM call on the White House hotline, and the one who could potentially be charged with leading the US in the volatile international scene that exists today. —Rose M., Fairbanks, AK

She is VERY, VERY conservative, and far from perfect. She's a hunter and fisherwoman, but votes against the environment again and again. She ran on ethics reform, but is currently under investigation for several charges involving hiring and firing of state officials. She has NO experience beyond Alaska. —Christine B., Denali Park, AK

As an Alaskan and a feminist, I am beyond words at this announcement. Palin is not a feminist, and she is not the reformer she claims to be. —Karen L., Anchorage, AK

Alaskans, collectively, are just as stunned as the rest of the nation. She is doing well running our State, but is totally inexperienced on the national level, and very much unequipped to run the nation, if it came to that. She is as far right as one can get, which has already been communicated on the news. In our office of thirty employees (dems, republicans, and nonpartisans), not one person feels she is ready for the V.P. position.—Sherry C., Anchorage, AK

She's vehemently anti-choice and doesn't care about protecting our natural resources, even though she has worked as a fisherman. McCain chose her to pick up the Hillary voters, but Palin is no Hillary. —Marina L., Juneau, AK

I think she's far too inexperienced to be in this position. I'm all for a woman in the White House, but not one who hasn't done anything to deserve it. There are far many other women who have worked their way up and have much more experience that would have been better choices. This is a patronizing decision on John McCain's part- and insulting to females everywhere that he would assume he'll get our vote by putting "A Woman" in that position.—Jennifer M., Anchorage, AK

Palin:

* She was elected Alaska's governor a little over a year and a half ago. Her previous office was mayor of Wasilla, a small town outside Anchorage. She has no foreign policy experience.
* Palin is strongly anti-choice, opposing abortion even in the case of rape or incest.
* She supported right-wing extremist Pat Buchanan for president in 2000.
* Palin thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.
* She's doesn't think humans are the cause of climate change.
* She's solidly in line with John McCain's "Big Oil first" energy policy. She's pushed hard for more oil drilling and says renewables won't be ready for years. She also sued the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered species—she was worried it would interfere with more oil drilling in Alaska.
* How closely did John McCain vet this choice? He met Sarah Palin once at a meeting. They spoke a second time, last Sunday, when he called her about being vice-president. Then he offered her the position.



Alaskans on Palin:

She is really just a mayor from a small town outside Anchorage who has been a governor for only 1.5 years, and has ZERO national and international experience. I shudder to think that she could be the person taking that 3AM call on the White House hotline, and the one who could potentially be charged with leading the US in the volatile international scene that exists today. —Rose M., Fairbanks, AK

She is VERY, VERY conservative, and far from perfect. She's a hunter and fisherwoman, but votes against the environment again and again. She ran on ethics reform, but is currently under investigation for several charges involving hiring and firing of state officials. She has NO experience beyond Alaska. —Christine B., Denali Park, AK

As an Alaskan and a feminist, I am beyond words at this announcement. Palin is not a feminist, and she is not the reformer she claims to be. —Karen L., Anchorage, AK

Alaskans, collectively, are just as stunned as the rest of the nation. She is doing well running our State, but is totally inexperienced on the national level, and very much unequipped to run the nation, if it came to that. She is as far right as one can get, which has already been communicated on the news. In our office of thirty employees (dems, republicans, and nonpartisans), not one person feels she is ready for the V.P. position.—Sherry C., Anchorage, AK

She's vehemently anti-choice and doesn't care about protecting our natural resources, even though she has worked as a fisherman. McCain chose her to pick up the Hillary voters, but Palin is no Hillary. —Marina L., Juneau, AK

I think she's far too inexperienced to be in this position. I'm all for a woman in the White House, but not one who hasn't done anything to deserve it. There are far many other women who have worked their way up and have much more experience that would have been better choices. This is a patronizing decision on John McCain's part- and insulting to females everywhere that he would assume he'll get our vote by putting "A Woman" in that position.—Jennifer M., Anchorage, AK


Looks like someone got the moveon.org talking points e-mail lol.

Looks like someone got the moveon.org talking points e-mail lol.

I try to get a few different ones from both sides, it's interesting to see the different perspectives. MoveOn.org is pretty rabidly left and silly sometimes.

Maybe she'll be a better veep than she was a sportscaster? I doubt it.

http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/9514/lotsofdogsbr6.jpg

Link. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26461777#26461777)

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/AKkydrUnBZE&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AKkydrUnBZE&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

From the Anchorage Daily News: Palin's responses on radio talk show very unbecoming (http://www.adn.com/opinion/comment/story/295464.html)

Maybe she'll be a better veep than she was a sportscaster? I doubt it.

http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/9514/lotsofdogsbr6.jpg

Link. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26461777#26461777)

coincidence that i had to sit through 39 seconds of genital herpes medication first?

This just goes to show how the progressive, minority pandering Democratic party lost the best opportunity to nominate the first woman President.

This just goes to show how the progressive, minority pandering Democratic party lost the best opportunity to nominate the first woman President.

because women are minorities?? :think:

<a href="http://s304.photobucket.com/albums/nn176/euronomus/?action=view&current=mcainsvagina.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn176/euronomus/mcainsvagina.jpg" border="0" alt="mcains vagina"></a>

yeah he picked her because of the fact she has a vagina

This just goes to show how the progressive, minority pandering Democratic party lost the best opportunity to nominate the first woman President.

Did I miss something? When did the Republicans nominate a woman to be president, and who exactly did the Democrats lose the opportunity to?

I also find it amusing how shit heads like yourself use "progressive" as if it were a bad word.

yeah he picked her because of the fact she has a vagina

Well it does have more experience than she does.

This just goes to show how the progressive, minority pandering Democratic party lost the best opportunity to nominate the first woman President.

Because pandering to the minority is such great strategy to win elections huh?

Because mccains VP pick isn't a bald face pander to women voters?

holy shit you're dumb.

She has a Communications degree from University of Idaho. What the fuck? I'm sure half the football team has the same major. The other half would have the same major but can't because they can't keep keep Undecided as a major past their sophomore year.

i hope american women are smart enough to see what mccain is realy doing ...

hey guys you know that sly stallone supports mccain?
yeah baby

i hope american women are smart enough to see what mccain is realy doing ...

Not only women but all of America. This is very reminiscent of the Bush administration and Karl Rove in that they are playing with America's emotions to get their way. The selection of this broad was blatantly made only to attract votes and we all should be outraged. More of the same shit :(

Like you guys said, a male with her credentials would have NEVER been selected and for some reason I thought McCain was above this shit but I was wrong.

It's upsetting and I get sick when I think of these too idiots in the White House. I hope Obama can sell to America what McCain is doing.

and what goes on up in Alaska is not even related to any of the 48 original states. Selecting a VP from Alaska is like selecting a VP from Guam, Alaska is little more than a territory. Alaska does not have the same problems as my state of NJ does (i.e. overcrowded schools, violence, crime, record taxes and a state budget in the red, etc.). What does this broad know about anything?


And just because McCain was a shitty pilot doesn't mean he can lead the military

too much coffee this morning

i have confidence that women will see through it. its not just a crass and obvious play for their vote, its also extremely patronizing, assuming that women vote solely on the basis of sex, not on issues.

the irony, of course, is that shes anti-abortion and less progressive on womens issues than her male rival, obama. the mccain campaign is shitting in peoples mouths and telling them its chocolate, so to speak.

the obama campaign is playing their hand right and is now running ads talking about mccains opposition to equal pay legislation and the like. women voters, hillary fanatics or not, cant be so dumb to vote against their own interests by voting mccain

he shouldn't get any religious backing either...he left his wife for a billionaire whore which isn't very Christian of him.

he shouldn't any religious backing either...he left his wife for a billionaire whore which isn't very Christian of him.

billionaire whore who stole pills to feed her painkiller addiction

She has a Communications degree from University of Idaho. What the fuck? I'm sure half the football team has the same major. The other half would have the same major but can't because they can't keep keep Undecided as a major past their sophomore year.

I lived 8 miles away from U of I and its a big fucking joke. The fact that she was a part time sportscaster in some small town pretty much was the most she could ever hope for with that "educational plan"


the irony, of course, is that shes anti-abortion and less progressive on womens issues than her male rival, obama. the mccain campaign is shitting in peoples mouths and telling them its chocolate, so to speak.



the only problem is that a lot of women don't mind these sorts of things. I'm sure they still see her as a "hero"

too much coffee this morning


Halfway through my first cup and I don't think you're overreacting. Its day 3 since the announcement and I swear I wake up angrier every morning.

I don't know why the media isn't calling this out for what it is

Because she's a woman?

I'm all against post-modern misogyny, but this is just weak.

billionaire whore who stole pills to feed her painkiller addiction

god that's my american dream :banging:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9qUVQDmLf7s&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9qUVQDmLf7s&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9qUVQDmLf7s&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9qUVQDmLf7s&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

holy crap that is one of the funniest things ive seen on youtube in a while.


'woop, camera man noticed me...'

Its day 3 since the announcement and I swear I wake up angrier every morning.

This is how I feel too, it's driving me crazy.

• Women overall have a slightly less favorable view of Palin than men, but they also are a bit more likely more likely to say her choice would prompt them to vote for McCain. Among women, 20% say her pick makes them more likely to vote for McCain, 11% less likely. That compares with 16%-12% among men.

Among Democratic women — including those who may be disappointed that New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton did not win the Democratic nomination — 9% say Palin makes them more likely to support McCain, 15% less likely.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-08-30-palin-poll_N.htm


You guys want to stop freaking out now?

When's her debate versus Biden?

• Women overall have a slightly less favorable view of Palin than men, but they also are a bit more likely more likely to say her choice would prompt them to vote for McCain. Among women, 20% say her pick makes them more likely to vote for McCain, 11% less likely. That compares with 16%-12% among men.

Among Democratic women — including those who may be disappointed that New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton did not win the Democratic nomination — 9% say Palin makes them more likely to support McCain, 15% less likely.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-08-30-palin-poll_N.htm


You guys want to stop freaking out now?



the polls change from day to day and mean shit

All the hand wringing is getting a little ridiculous here.

Sure, the pick does come off as more pandering than anything else. But that being the case, shouldn't Republicans be the ones getting their panties in a bunch over it? What do Democrats have to be angry about if her being on the GOP ticket is a transparent political ploy? Is it because you're afraid it just might work? That hardly seems a legitimate reason to be outraged. What I'm seeing is jealousy, nothing more.

Plus, in case anyone has forgotten, Barack Obama is the Democrat nominee for PRESIDENT. It's amazing to me that anyone voting for Obama can throw stones at McCain for putting Palin on the ticket because of her inexperience. If Palin's inexperience is truly a problem, it'd only manifest itself in the unlikely event that something would happen to McCain in the next four years. If Barack Obama is elected President, his inexperience is going to be plaguing us in 4-5 months. If lack of experience is such a killer, then why not go with the option that delays the inexperienced person from taking office as long as possible?

lets say you have a retarded sister

lets say i sprinkle some sugar on my dick and tell her its a lolipop

are you jealous or outraged?

actually dont answer that

lets say you have a retarded sister

lets say i sprinkle some sugar on my dick and tell her its a lolipop

are you jealous or outraged?

actually dont answer that

So women voters are the "retarded sister" of the Democratic Party? Wow.

A damn good whack of them yeah.

the polls change from day to day and mean shit

True, but if our options are a poll, or hillary supporters on a website. I'l take a poll.

Plus, in case anyone has forgotten, Barack Obama is the Democrat nominee for PRESIDENT. It's amazing to me that anyone voting for Obama can throw stones at McCain for putting Palin on the ticket because of her inexperience
You conservatives just don't get it. I'm fairly confident it's because you just don't want to.

McCain's message was that he is a man of experience and would surround himself with people who also offer much experience. Palin completely invalidates this claim. Why is this so hard for you people to understand? See, the question is ultimately not if Palin has experience; the question is why did McCain brag about bringing real experience to Washington, but then pick a #2 with even less than Obama? Romney, Ridge, Lieberman, Pawlenty, or even Jindal would have fallen in line with his experience message. Instead, once again, the straight talk express made a u-turn. And you guys called out John Kerry in 2004 for being inconsistent... McCain has seriously flipped on issues and positions more times than perhaps any other Presidential candidate in recent history.

McCain just enjoyed sneaking up on Obama in polls while he was on vacation, largely in part because his experience message was starting to stick; then he turned his back on it and went with someone who hasn't even been a governor for two years, and before that, was a mayor for an extremely small town and worked for the PTA. Obama on the other hand has a solid law background, was a community organizer, a member of the Illinois state senate from 1997-2004 (Republicans ALWAYS skip the state senate experience when they compare him to Palin, it's funny), and then went on to the US Senate.

And McCain dying while in office is NOT unlikely. The man has all kinds of problems, and initially said he wouldn't even run for President in 2008 because he'd be too old.

Found this to be pretty funny:

She's back there with the flat-earth caucus.
Haha.

What's most interesting about Palin is that it seems like the possibility of her winning over a significant amount of Hillary fans is not as good as many thought; her real strength is starting to show with evangelicals according to today's polling, a key part of the Republican party McCain has been having some trouble with.

It's too bad he didn't pick Lieberman like he wanted to. Election day would have been over before it even started. Obama would have won in a landslide.

All the hand wringing is getting a little ridiculous here.

Sure, the pick does come off as more pandering than anything else. But that being the case, shouldn't Republicans be the ones getting their panties in a bunch over it? What do Democrats have to be angry about if her being on the GOP ticket is a transparent political ploy? Is it because you're afraid it just might work? That hardly seems a legitimate reason to be outraged. What I'm seeing is jealousy, nothing more.

Plus, in case anyone has forgotten, Barack Obama is the Democrat nominee for PRESIDENT. It's amazing to me that anyone voting for Obama can throw stones at McCain for putting Palin on the ticket because of her inexperience. If Palin's inexperience is truly a problem, it'd only manifest itself in the unlikely event that something would happen to McCain in the next four years. If Barack Obama is elected President, his inexperience is going to be plaguing us in 4-5 months. If lack of experience is such a killer, then why not go with the option that delays the inexperienced person from taking office as long as possible?

Dems seem to be thrilled about the pick. I for one am excited that republicans blown up their only credible argument against obama.

What's most interesting about Palin is that it seems like the possibility of her winning over a significant amount of Hillary fans was not as good as many thought; her real strength is starting to show with evangelicals according to today's polling, a key part of the Republican party McCain has been having serious problems with.


What is there to assume that wasnt the main intent to begin with? I've mainly seen the notion of winning over Hillary people presented by Obama supporters. Makes more sense than them thinking woman = locks up womens vote. Any defectors are just a plus.

You conservatives just don't get it.

McCain's message was the he is a man of experience and would surround himself with people that are also experienced. Palin completely invalidates this claim. Why is this so hard for you people to understand?

I think most conservatives understand that this VP pick makes it harder for the McCain campaign to put as big a premium on experience as they could before. And I think most of us are willing to deal with the good and the bad of that. What I don't understand is why it matters so much to Democrats all the sudden.

I'd understand it if it was an "Aha, John McCain really doesn't care about experience afterall!" kind of thing...even though that really does the Dems no favors because it still doesn't negate his massive experience advantage over Obama. It's just another flip-flop to add to McCain's pile. But that hasn't really been the main criticism that I've been seeing. What I've been seeing is "OMG, how can the GOP put someone that inexperienced 'one heartbeat away' from the Presidency?" It's one thing to point out that McCain might have gone back on some promise of surrounding himself with experience, but it's quite another thing for someone supporting Barack Obama to call anyone out for lack of qualification...and the latter is what I've seen more of.

And McCain dying while in office is NOT unlikely. The man has all kinds of problems, and initially said he wouldn't even run for President in 2008 because he'd be too old.

The guy could live to be 90 or 100 for all anyone knows. Regardless, my point stands. Even if McCain is as frail as you want to believe, the choice is between putting an inexperienced person in the office in January or putting in a slightly less inexperienced person (by virtue of serving as VP) at some undetermined time in the next four years. If experience is THAT big of an issue, then I don't see how you can advocate for the former.

What is there to assume that wasnt the main intent to begin with? I've mainly seen the notion of winning over Hillary people presented by Obama supporters. Makes more sense than them thinking woman = locks up womens vote. Any defectors are just a plus.

Exactly. I think that the pick was made more to appeal to the base (which it has done) than some kind of Hail Mary to bring Hillary voters over en masse. There aren't enough girl-power, hear-me-roar, Hillary voters who just want to vote for a woman to base a major campaign decision like that around. Any Hillary voters that vote for McCain because he has a woman on the ticket are just a bonus on top of what gains have been made in solidifying the base.

Palin's experience is so miniscule that it's completely valid for dems to pick on it. Sure, Obama doesn't have as much "experience" as McCain, but Palin is even less. You can nitpick or brush away the years he spent on the state legislature, but at least Obama, for over the last year and a half, has successfully run a national, multi-million dollar campaign, organizing hundreds if not thousands of workers, and beaten very "experienced" opponents. Sarah Palin has not done anything remotely like that on a grand national scale.

The guy could live to be 90 or 100 for all anyone knows. Regardless, my point stands. Even if McCain is as frail as you want to believe, the choice is between putting an inexperienced person in the office in January or putting in a slightly less inexperienced person (by virtue of serving as VP) at some undetermined time in the next four years. If experience is THAT big of an issue, then I don't see how you can advocate for the former.



The difference is people got a CHOICE to put Obama in the position of president. Repubs chose McCain, and here he makes this completely fucked up choice for VP and it wasn't a choice given to the people. He was voted in for his long term record of good decisions, people expected the VP decision to fall in a similar line. We're 65 days away from the election and there's some stranger on the ticket. Whether or not Repubs / Independents actually WANT Palin as president, they may feel cornered into voting for McCain anyways still. Biden's choice only strengthens Obama's experience, he was a man who had supporters for the Presidential slot on his own and has a history.

Would you have voted for Palin in the primaries? Would you have thought her a credible ready choice? Would millions of other people have agreed? To ask someone with no experience or previous thought of doing something like this just seems so un thought out.

Palin's experience is so miniscule that it's completely valid for dems to pick on it. Sure, Obama doesn't have as much "experience" as McCain, but Palin is even less. You can nitpick or brush away the years he spent on the state legislature, but at least Obama, for over the last year and a half, has successfully run a national, multi-million dollar campaign, organizing hundreds if not thousands of workers, and beaten very "experienced" opponents. Sarah Palin has not done anything remotely like that on a grand national scale.


THIS

I think most conservatives understand that this VP pick makes it harder for the McCain campaign to put as big a premium on experience as they could before. And I think most of us are willing to deal with the good and the bad of that. What I don't understand is why it matters so much to Democrats all the sudden.
It matters so much since a huge part of the reason why McCain keeps sneaking up on Obama in polls is BECAUSE enough people bought his experience message. This pick makes him look like a complete moron to anyone who isn't a soccer mom who loves her guns and Jesus.

I'd understand it if it was an "Aha, John McCain really doesn't care about experience afterall!" kind of thing...
He surely must not. He's very old, and may not even live another four to eight years longer. I don't mean that as an insult.

Compare this to Obama (who has more than Palin) and Biden (who has just as much if not more than McCain), two people who I am sure will talk to one another on a daily basis about how to make decisions. If something, as awful as it would be, happened to Obama, Biden literally would be able to take over immediately.

And Obama doesn't get enough credit. He has experience, just not Washington insider experience. He's a well-educated man with a fantastic law background (and most importantly has a deep understanding of CONSTITUTIONAL law), who forms his opinions and policies carefully and has much previous political experience before his US Senate run. He can debate well, knows how to communicate to his audience and knows how to run a campaign. Sarah Palin quite frankly does not. She doesn't even have a degree in anything that really pertains to the meat and potatoes of what goes on in the White House (journalism -- come on, that's for the Press Secretary).

...even though that really does the Dems no favors because it still doesn't negate his massive experience advantage over Obama. It's just another flip-flop to add to McCain's pile.
And some of these flip-flops are going to catch up to him, especially in the fall if the Obama campaign finds that they need to be more aggressive. Obama's lack of experience, particularly foreign policy experience, is kind of hushed with Biden on the ticket. McCain on the other hand is taking away from his own experience message while Obama is strengthening his. I can easily see the Obama campaign putting emphasis on Barack dealing mostly with social issues, while Biden basically serves as a top advisor to foreign policy and military issues, and the two sharing responsibility when it comes to economics. I'm not saying this is how it will/should be, as many other people will be involved when it comes to those things -- but when you are trying to sell your message to voters, I think that will work very well.

What I've been seeing is "OMG, how can the GOP put someone that inexperienced 'one heartbeat away' from the Presidency?"
Well, in these times, it is pretty important to have a VP who really can take over if something bad happens. Palin on the other hand didn't even know what a VP does. And likely still doesn't.

It's one thing to point out that McCain might have gone back on some promise of surrounding himself with experience, but it's quite another thing for someone supporting Barack Obama to call anyone out for lack of qualification...and the latter is what I've seen more of.
You're looking into that way too much. We're just calling a spade a spade, man.

And, truthfully, McCain's age worries me should he be elected, especially since his VP is -- no offense to respectable women out there -- a complete airhead.

The guy could live to be 90 or 100 for all anyone knows. Regardless, my point stands. Even if McCain is as frail as you want to believe, the choice is between putting an inexperienced person in the office in January or putting in a slightly less inexperienced person (by virtue of serving as VP) at some undetermined time in the next four years. If experience is THAT big of an issue, then I don't see how you can advocate for the former.
It's only that big of an issue because McCain made it that big of an issue. Obama's surrogates are simply pointing that out, as they SHOULD be. Don't you see?

All the hand wringing is getting a little ridiculous here.

Sure, the pick does come off as more pandering than anything else. But that being the case, shouldn't Republicans be the ones getting their panties in a bunch over it? What do Democrats have to be angry about if her being on the GOP ticket is a transparent political ploy?

Because the shit the Republicans try to pull is outrageous and infuriates me

When asked a year ago if she thought the surge would work, Palin said she didn't know because she hadn't really been following the war.

Palin's experience is so miniscule that it's completely valid for dems to pick on it. Sure, Obama doesn't have as much "experience" as McCain, but Palin is even less. You can nitpick or brush away the years he spent on the state legislature, but at least Obama, for over the last year and a half, has successfully run a national, multi-million dollar campaign, organizing hundreds if not thousands of workers, and beaten very "experienced" opponents. Sarah Palin has not done anything remotely like that on a grand national scale.

Campaigning is not governing. Bush II disproves this argument. David Axelrod should really be president if that's the case.

When asked a year ago if she thought the surge would work, Palin said she didn't know because she hadn't really been following the war.

Well I don't think Bush or the maverick really do either so this quote probably won't matter much.

Just got back from a get together with some obnoxiously republican relatives. The general consensus amongst the females?

"Good for him for picking a woman."

The difference is people got a CHOICE to put Obama in the position of president. Repubs chose McCain, and here he makes this completely fucked up choice for VP and it wasn't a choice given to the people. He was voted in for his long term record of good decisions, people expected the VP decision to fall in a similar line. We're 65 days away from the election and there's some stranger on the ticket. Whether or not Repubs / Independents actually WANT Palin as president, they may feel cornered into voting for McCain anyways still.

Some might, but that's no different than any election. I doubt there's ever been a ticket where some people didn't have to hold their nose and vote for it despite who is on the ticket. But the main point is still that most people who value experience aren't going to put more focus on the inexperience of the VP candidate than they are on inexperience at the top of the ticket. There are all sorts of other reasons that having Palin on the ticket may not help McCain, but experience isn't gonna make or break things I don't think. Not with Obama vying to take office in 5 months.

Biden's choice only strengthens Obama's experience, he was a man who had supporters for the Presidential slot on his own and has a history.

If anything, you could make the argument you're making against the Palin pick even more soundly against Obama picking Biden. The people had a choice to express wide support for Biden being the President, and they overwhelmingly rejected it. So basically, Obama went expressly against the choice of the people. And I think the deafening silence and lack of fanfare behind the Biden pick backs this argument better than your argument against Palin, who GOP voters have reacted overwhelmingly positive to despite having no "choice" in the matter.

Would you have voted for Palin in the primaries? Would you have thought her a credible ready choice? Would millions of other people have agreed? To ask someone with no experience or previous thought of doing something like this just seems so un thought out.

Just on paper, I think Palin would have done well if she ran. In a primary season where conservatives were so disaffected and desperate that they were flocking to guys like Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney, someone with Palin's conservative credentials probably could have done some damage if she handled herself well enough, even with her lack of experience. And again, the positive reaction from the GOP base thus far seems to bear that out. It remains to be seen though how well she handles herself on the campaign trail. That'll be the big factor.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/thmueS0ngAs&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/thmueS0ngAs&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Campaigning is not governing.

This. ^

I saw once what the ratio of time Obama has spent either campaigning or preparing to campaign vs. time he's spent governing over the past 10 years. I'll have to see if I can find it again, but the gist of it was that he's spent much more time telling everyone what he's going to do than he has actually doing it when he's gotten the chance.

no black people in alaska, fyi

doubt she's seen many Mexican migrant workers either

she'd be a fine president

tell it to puffy!

he's so.... well-spoken :rofl:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/thmueS0ngAs&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/thmueS0ngAs&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Campaigning is not governing. Bush II disproves this argument. David Axelrod should really be president if that's the case.

Sorry, that may sound right at first blush, but it's bullshit.

Bush/Rove campaigned hard on ideological, divisive principles. Only going for their base, and fuck the rest. These same principles are the exact same way he governed and that's why the country has suffered.

Obama has built from the ground up a national network reaching out to voters on both sides. Though his rhetoric is liberal, his actions are pragmatic and compromising (much to your displeasure).

"campaigning" vs. "governing" or "executive experience" vs. "legislative experience" are just arbitrary labels, obfuscating the real argument.


publius (http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/08/more-on-executi.html):

One of the more frustrating arguments I’ve been hearing is that Palin has more experience than Obama — in particular, more “executive” experience. I’m sorry, but that argument is absurd — though it’s not immediately obvious why. After all, she was a mayor and governor, while Obama wasn’t. The problem then is with the whole idea of comparing Palin and Obama’s relative experience under these particular conceptual categories — e.g., “executive” vs. “legislative.” Those categories just aren’t very meaningful here.

In this debate, people have been focusing on the “type” of experience rather than on the nature of their relative experiences. In simpler terms, what matters is not so much the arbitrary label, but the size, scope, and stress of their relative experience.

For instance, let’s say Apple is deciding whether to hire me or Bill Clinton to be its CEO. And let’s say I was a manager at a Burger King, while Clinton never worked in business. In this respect, I have more “business experience” than Bill Clinton — in a world where arbitrary labels rule, I win. But I’m clearly less capable of running a major transnational corporation than he is. That’s because the nature of Clinton’s experience makes him a better fit — he’s led an executive branch and two presidential elections under extreme scrutiny and has become knowledgeable of, well, everything.

That’s sort of what’s going on with Palin and Obama. Yes, if you elevate the arbitrary category of “executive” above all else, then she has more experience. But if you look at the nature of that experience, this argument falls apart.

Palin was mayor of a town that has a fraction of the people present at an NFL game. She was also governor of a thinly-populated state — following an anti-incumbent reaction against corruption — that doesn’t have to struggle as much with limited budget revenues because of the state’s natural resources. She’s never been in the national spotlight, never operated under extreme stress, and just hasn’t had the type of responsibilities that even a governor of say Florida or California would have had.

Obama, by contrast, has had a much tougher time. He became a state legislator by navigating the local politics of a major urban center. He’s been a Senator. And most importantly, he’s been under unrelenting scrutiny for years — managing a presidential campaign masterfully and knocking off a Democratic President’s financial and political machine.

He’s also had to master the national spotlight, and respond to a million different type of questions. He’s also developed extensive policy positions and has defended them in debates and to the public for years. And he’s never lost his cool, showing calm judgment coupled with far-sighted strategic planning (e.g., early organizing, hesitancy to chase the news cycle).

In short, Palin’s “experience” trumps Obama’s only by elevating arbitrary categories over underlying factual realities. Now, it might be different if she had governed a state of many millions (like Reagan) and had won re-election. But she hasn’t — and the idea that calling everything “executive” trumps Obama’s accomplishments just doesn’t work.

UPDATE: In the comments, TP makes the astute point that Palin actually has more "executive" experience than McCain, under this line of thinking.

Bush/Rove campaigned hard on ideological, divisive principles. Only going for their base, and fuck the rest. These same principles are the exact same way he governed and that's why the country has suffered.



If memory serves in 2000 he ran on the whole compassionate conservative, uniter not a divider, bringing integrity back type of thing. Which is why the way he governed was such a joke in comparison. The republican party has used conservative issues on a state by state basis to drive out their base to vote. In '04 he ran on national security, not a rabid conservative. If he actually ran based on how he governed he wouldnt have won. If that were true then the country is far too conservative for any Dem to have a chance.

The notion that any major presidential candidate actually handles or is heavily involved in the day to day running of a campaign is a bit misguided. If so, the candidate which has won more campaigns for higher office has the most/best experience. It's a bad thing to point to for executive experience, regardless of candidate.


Though his rhetoric is liberal, his actions are pragmatic and compromising (much to your displeasure).


Actually my displeasure is in him not being liberal enough, but whatever, I'm not getting into that again.

Actually my displeasure is in him not being liberal enough, but whatever, I'm not getting into that again.

That's exactly what I meant.

If memory serves in 2000 he ran on the whole compassionate conservative, uniter not a divider, bringing integrity back type of thing. Which is why the way he governed was such a joke in comparison. The republican party has used conservative issues on a state by state basis to drive out their base to vote. In '04 he ran on national security, not a rabid conservative. If he actually ran based on how he governed he wouldnt have won. If that were true then the country is far too conservative for any Dem to have a chance.

The notion that any major presidential candidate actually handles or is heavily involved in the day to day running of a campaign is a bit misguided. If so, the candidate which has won more campaigns for higher office has the most/best experience. It's a bad thing to point to for executive experience, regardless of candidate.


2000 was a weird year when nobody fucking cared about the election. Plus, Bush didn't even get the most votes! Uniter, eh?

Your response seems to think that I'm trying to argue that Obama has a lot of great experience. I'm not. I'm only arguing Sarah Palin's experience pales in comparison to Obama's. So any hand-wringing of Obama's experience, should on the same basis, be many times worse on Palin. That is all when it comes to Palin. When it comes to McCain, it shows how bad his judgement is. It's clear that Palin wasn't even properly vetted. Which just highlights a reckless decision. Impulsive and decided last minute. These are not qualities I want in my president.

I dont disagree with that. I guess I misunderstood what you were saying with "Obama, for over the last year and a half, has successfully run a national, multi-million dollar campaign, organizing hundreds if not thousands of workers, and beaten very "experienced" opponents. Sarah Palin has not done anything remotely like that on a grand national scale."

As for vetting, I thought he offered it the sunday before the convention started, I wouldnt call that last minute. I think they got what they wanted out of the pick. Energize the base, take the focus off Obama's speech. What makes me question his judgment is that he wanted Joe Lieberman. He wouldn't even get him the base.

Hey, this Palin bitch is incredibly backwoods but she's at least a looker, right?

<img src=http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t278/immortal13_2007/palinqueen.jpg>

Hey man, nice shot.

Kind of the opposite of a post/av, too.

damn you pixels!!

Hey man, nice shop.
Fixed.

Of course it's Photoshopped, but she's still a looker.

They could have at least fixed the different skin tones...

Yeah, I'll go back and waste time fixing someone else's shitty photoshop. Jesus Christ.

sully (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/08/yglesias-awar-4.html):
"Palin will also be assigned to pacify conservatives. On the evidence of the numerous emails reprinted here, that will be easily done. Reader after reader said that the base was now energized. You would have thought the base was energized by being in a war. If not, perhaps we need a new base," - Rick Brookhiser (http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDQ5ZmE5NjU4MmRlOWUyZjM0MTBlYWY2NWEwZDczNjg=).

He's discovering that the actual people in the Republican base are much less interested in national security than in religious orthodoxy. Who knew? The only relevant criterion for the Christianists is that Palin is a pro-life evangelical. What other criterion should they have? This isn't about governing; it's about believing.

Yeah, I'll go back and waste time fixing someone else's shitty photoshop. Jesus Christ.

Not you, I meant the person that made it :p

sully (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/08/yglesias-awar-4.html):

I think being Pro-Life is more important than the religious issue. Being a "non-denominational Christian" isn't ideal for some people (fanatic Catholics/Anglicans/mainstream protestants), but being pro-life is.

I could give a crap about her religious preference.

wow:

http://img364.imageshack.us/img364/4628/sarahpalinla4.png

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/30/121350/137/486/580223

it's the fucking Maury show but entertaining

even if that's all total bullshit, she went from texas to alaska after her water broke, and then she drove an hour from anchorage to deliver her disabled baby in a sub-par hopsital?

what?

god i hope this moves into the mainstream media just for the entertainment value

She showed bad leadership/judgment by being a 44-year-old woman who got pregnant. What the fuck was she thinking, in the first place?

What the fuck was she thinking, in the first place?

"jesus loves his babies so i dont have to"

http://gawker.com/assets/images/gawker/2008/08/juneaujuno.png

Sarah Palin supposedly at 7 months pregnant with baby Trig.

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/9515/3073504041standaloneprovb5.jpg

Sarah Palin during a previous pregnancy.

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/5232/capt529a19dfc6774f30811bx4.jpg

HAHAH SHE HAS A RETARD BABY

HAHAH SHE HAS A RETARD GRANDBABY

Fixed.

I was just about to post this - hilarious.

yowza.

I'm sure it's not true, but it would be gold if the mainstream media picked it up anyway.

Yeah...if you want to rally public support around the woman. Is it even provable? Her views are plenty to attack her on, leave the kids out of it.

Is it even provable?

DNA test from Mr. Palin.

(yellow envelope)

And the father is....

Fuck it, Maury Povichs ratings are gonna go through the roof.

Hate to interrupt the soap opera but another poll that doesnt mean shit:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/31/cnn-poll-obama-49-mccain-48/

CNN Poll: Obama 49, McCain 48

ST. PAUL, Minnesota (CNN) — On the eve of the Republican convention, a new national poll suggests the race for the White House remains dead even.

A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll released Sunday night shows the Obama-Biden ticket leading the McCain-Palin ticket by one point, 49 percent to 48 percent, a statistical dead heat.

The survey was conducted Friday through Sunday, after both the conclusion of the Democratic convention and McCain’s selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate....


.....Americans seem evenly divided on whether McCain made a wise choice in selecting Alaska’s first term governor, who’s been in office for less than two years.

Fifty-two percent rate the selection of Palin as excellent or pretty good; 46 percent rate it as fair or poor.

Is Palin qualified to be president?

Fifty percent say she is unqualified to assume the presidency if that becomes necessary; 45 percent say she’s prepared for the White House.

In recent history, the only running mate to earn less confidence from the public was Vice President Dan Quayle in 1992.

Ultimately however, the Palin pick may have minimal effect on the race for the White House.

Almost six in 10 Americans say Palin’s selection as McCain’s running mate will have no effect on their vote. One in five say it makes them more likely to vote for McCain; one in five say it makes them less likely....

---
So as meaningless as most VP picks it seems.

last week they made a poll that showed obama was leading by 8%
and the week before that mccain was leading by 1%
and now that obama is leading by 1%

this is stupid

this is stupid

Actually if you bothered to read it their last poll had it tied at 47. I posted more for the Palin info actually. Polls are flawed but it's the best we've got.

Do you have a better way to gauge where the race is?

yay or nay: palin has the experience necessary to be VP and possibly president

state your reasons

Yeah...if you want to rally public support around the woman. Is it even provable? Her views are plenty to attack her on, leave the kids out of it.
dude, her retarded kid was the flagship of her inclusion in the campaign.

her first media interview as the the gop vp nominee was in people fucking magazine, which is a fact that's pathetic enough as it is.

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20222685,00.html

it's the fifth of like ten questions in the interview. she's schilling her downs syndrome child to get family values votes and people aree actually buying it. absurd.

yay or nay: palin has the experience necessary to be VP and possibly president

state your reasons

Im undecided.

yea:

- She knows how to use a computer and the internet. (Of course that's just an assumption on my part)
- Is a maverick.

nay

- Was never a prisoner of war. That I know of.
- Never single-handedly managed a nationwide campaign before.
- May have never seen a black person before in her life.

Tough call.

Actually if you bothered to read it their last poll had it tied at 47. I posted more for the Palin info actually. Polls are flawed but it's the best we've got.

Do you have a better way to gauge where the race is?

every tv station and every other university has their own poll
and it means jack shit
just wait untill the election
man ... when will this end???

dude, her retarded kid was the flagship of her inclusion in the campaign.

her first media interview as the the gop vp nominee was in people fucking magazine, which is a fact that's pathetic enough as it is.

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20222685,00.html

it's the fifth of like ten questions in the interview. she's schilling her downs syndrome child to get family values votes and people aree actually buying it. absurd.

Oh I'm all for dragging the family value hypocrites through the streets. But this involves kids, it might backlash is all. It seems to be a moot point anyway. Their damning evidence of a pregnant daughter seems to be a picture from 2006.

every tv station and every other university has their own poll
and it means jack shit
just wait untill the election
man ... when will this end???

So you dont. Ok, well thanks for helping out.

So you dont. Ok, well thanks for helping out.

just wait a month vote for obama and the world will be happy
if mccain wins i am not going to step on US soil again
that is a promise

Your response seems to think that I'm trying to argue that Obama has a lot of great experience. I'm not. I'm only arguing Sarah Palin's experience pales in comparison to Obama's. So any hand-wringing of Obama's experience, should on the same basis, be many times worse on Palin. That is all when it comes to Palin.

Except there's that pesky fact that it's not on the same basis. Again, Obama is running for President and Palin isn't. The election is about who is going to take office in January, and right now Obama's experience is the only thing that matters there. It doesn't mean Palin's resume is irrelevant or immune from criticism, but it certainly doesn't mean Obama suddenly gets a pass either.

When it comes to McCain, it shows how bad his judgement is. It's clear that Palin wasn't even properly vetted. Which just highlights a reckless decision. Impulsive and decided last minute. These are not qualities I want in my president.

I think it's been said by others, but I'll add to the chorus that I think that McCain got exactly what he was looking for out of this pick. I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that he just drew a random name out of a hat. Sure, it's given the Dems a couple of openings to attack...but I'm not so sure that's not by design. If some of the vile stuff that's starting to permeate this thread is any indication, then this pick has really seemed to bring out the nasty side (aka: the true nature) of the left in full force. How can it help the Dems to spew such venom at a woman for such horrible crimes as having kids, or being religious? That sort of crap is gonna backfire if they're not careful, and don't think that McCain doesn't know it and welcome it.

Like McCain or not, he has run a very good campaign so far. He was dead in the water less than a year ago, and now he's running neck and neck with a guy who by all rights should be trouncing him right now. That's not the kind of results someone who is reckless or impulsive gets.

damn. that hillary board is scary

Im undecided.

yea:

- She knows how to use a computer and the internet. (Of course that's just an assumption on my part)
- Is a maverick.

nay

- Was never a prisoner of war. That I know of.
- Never single-handedly managed a nationwide campaign before.
- May have never seen a black person before in her life.

Tough call.

Just take the highway to the danger zone fb

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v496/TwilightToStarlight/maverick_charlie1.jpg

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/31/174153/834/246/581480

11. Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?

SP: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance

To be fair, I couldn't instantly recall when pledge was written.

Then again, I won't be thrust into the post powerful position on the planet at a moments notice.

That "under God" part was added in the 50s, wasn't it?

How can it help the Dems to spew such venom at a woman for such horrible crimes as having kids, or being religious?


Barack Obama has kids and is religious. Don't oversimplify.

Hate to interrupt the soap opera but another poll that doesnt mean shit:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/31/cnn-poll-obama-49-mccain-48/

CNN Poll: Obama 49, McCain 48

ST. PAUL, Minnesota (CNN) — On the eve of the Republican convention, a new national poll suggests the race for the White House remains dead even.

A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll released Sunday night shows the Obama-Biden ticket leading the McCain-Palin ticket by one point, 49 percent to 48 percent, a statistical dead heat.

The survey was conducted Friday through Sunday, after both the conclusion of the Democratic convention and McCain’s selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate....


.....Americans seem evenly divided on whether McCain made a wise choice in selecting Alaska’s first term governor, who’s been in office for less than two years.

Fifty-two percent rate the selection of Palin as excellent or pretty good; 46 percent rate it as fair or poor.

Is Palin qualified to be president?

Fifty percent say she is unqualified to assume the presidency if that becomes necessary; 45 percent say she’s prepared for the White House.

In recent history, the only running mate to earn less confidence from the public was Vice President Dan Quayle in 1992.

Ultimately however, the Palin pick may have minimal effect on the race for the White House.

Almost six in 10 Americans say Palin’s selection as McCain’s running mate will have no effect on their vote. One in five say it makes them more likely to vote for McCain; one in five say it makes them less likely....

---
So as meaningless as most VP picks it seems.
Aren't these partially based on their shitty web polls?

Palin loves the KKK

I find this bitch to be repulsive. Her and her pro life stance.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/31/174153/834/246/581480

11. Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?

SP: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance

:erm:.

Corganist, GOP officials have been quoted as saying Palin was not vetted thoroughly, and they only spoke twice before he picked her.

My prediction? Palin isn't McCain's VP nominee come Nov. 4.

I think it's been said by others, but I'll add to the chorus that I think that McCain got exactly what he was looking for out of this pick.

Right. I agree. That's the problem! He picked her solely for political purposes - to grab the headlines, pull women voters, energize the base, shock the country. He apparently didn't give a shit about governing or consider whether this neophyte is plausible to be president if something bad happens. He didn't vet her. If we're in a "war on terror" and McCain sees himself as the only one tough enough to be commander in chief...and then he picks somebody with zero foreign policy to be next in line?

Arrogant. Cynical. Reckless.

Corganist, GOP officials have been quoted as saying Palin was not vetted thoroughly, and they only spoke twice before he picked her.

My prediction? Palin isn't McCain's VP nominee come Nov. 4.

Has that ever happened before?

Yes.

Sarah Palin Baby Story Ender
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b48/skater314159/palin_preggers_400.jpg

dailykos:
OK, there is a visibly-pregnant Sarah Palin talking with a CBS 11 (Juneau) reporter at the end of the Alaska legislative session. She clearly appears to be pregnant.

Unless someone has counter evidence, we can drop this crap now. Yes, there are still some interesting questions, such as why she flew to Dallas and back when she was this pregnant, and why the Alaska Airlines crewmembers insisted that she was not visibly pregnant on the flight. Nevertheless, until this photo is debunked, we look stupid pushing this rumor.

That is all.

My prediction? Palin isn't McCain's VP nominee come Nov. 4.

That is what I'm worried about.

Has that ever happened before?

tom eagleton

Aren't these partially based on their shitty web polls?

Not that I'm aware. Maybe I'm giving cnn more credit than they deserve though.



My prediction? Palin isn't McCain's VP nominee come Nov. 4.

Would this not cause a bigger clusterfuck than just riding it out? She seems to break about even with people on whether or not she's capable, and VP picks dont generally matter anyway.

Corganist, GOP officials have been quoted as saying Palin was not vetted thoroughly, and they only spoke twice before he picked her.

My prediction? Palin isn't McCain's VP nominee come Nov. 4.
It all comes down to Oct. 31st. If Palin is indicted or the networks don't drop the story, and her e-mails (which people DO have and seem to be willing to share) are all over the place, I do not expect McCain to keep her; if he does, he's an even BIGGER moron.

If he does end up dropping her, though, then it makes the first serious decision of his potential Presidential career look awful. Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.

Not vettting this bitch is causing pure comedy. Thank you, John McCain.

today has been unbelievable

this pick has really seemed to bring out the nasty side (aka: the true nature) of the left in full force.

:erm:

http://i.realone.com/assets/rn/img/4/3/9/4/12984934-12984946-slarge.jpg?
...
http://praxeology.net/palpatine-cranky.PNG
...?
http://cubblog.mlblogs.com/cubs20.jpg????

http://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x142/reilo/kfc.jpg

this is getting embarrassing.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/UYYiw_y2qDI&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/UYYiw_y2qDI&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

here's bristol palin's bf's blog.

http://levijohnston.com/Blog/

lol @ comment box

Awesome job slipping one past that ultimate goalie — the cervix!! LOL Broseph, you are made now, in like flynn with them rich peeps.

Did Sarah and Bristol ever tag team you? Come on home skilletz, I know you thought about that momma pootie. Sers tho, you gonna have to move on to Willow after da baby is born ’cause Bristol’s coochie ain’t ever gonna be the same.

Good luck, yo. Maybe you can sign with the Caps once you’re in DC and ball with Ovechkin! Make buckets, son!

this is getting embarrassing.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/UYYiw_y2qDI&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/UYYiw_y2qDI&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

This election is a fucking circus. What the fuck.

Tucker bounds and his jizz-lined larynx needs to get impaled up the ass on a monolithic steel-spiked phallus

here's bristol palin's bf's blog.

http://levijohnston.com/Blog/

lol @ comment box

Click on the Disclosure link, asshat.

"This site is a parody, and for entertainment purposes only."

Oooohh, whatch out for JokeyLoki's rabid defense of the Palin clan!

No, I'm reserving judgment for the moment, because of everything that's going on, but linking a parody blog as if it's the real deal when there's a big disclaimer on the page isn't cool.

48 percent of this country is going to collectively kill themselves when McCain/Palin win in November.

yeah, i don't doubt that majority of people will vote for the obama biden ticket but that doesn't change the fact that diebold is in the repugnican party's pocket.

I don't understand how conservatives are able to take Palin seriously - and with her the whole McCain campaign. Brr.

48 percent of this country is going to collectively kill themselves when McCain/Palin win in November.

you bite your tongue.

You guys need to realize it's going to happen - you need to realize a very small percentage of the country believes like you (and me, I know) do. Most of this country is so pro-family, pro-woman, pro-religion, pro-faith-teaching, pro-"average" person, it's going to happen and there's nothing anyone can do about it.

Well, except maybe Obama by picking Clinton but that didn't happen.

I don't understand how conservatives are able to take Palin seriously - and with her the whole McCain campaign. Brr.

a friend sent me reasons why she is the perfect choice.

Chief executive responsible for the management and administration of state government, responsible for an annual budget of $6.6 billion dollars and a population of nearly 700,000. As the governor, she is the Commander of the National Guard and is responsible for the safety and security of Alaska’s citizens. On a daily basis, she deals with issues relating to transportation, health care, cost of living, taxes and energy.

Prior to becoming Governor, she served as a City Council member in her home town for four years and a Mayor for three. She also served as the Ethics Commissioner for the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission.

Overall approval rating of more than 70%



yup

And, she's been in elected office much longer than Obama.

McCain is a genus picking her, really.

a friend sent me reasons why she is the perfect choice.




yup

Did you reply back to your friend that he/she is a fucking dumb shit?

Debaser, that's the problem: They don't see it that way, and see everyone else as people who just want government handouts.

It's retarded, but it's their mindset.

Did you reply back to your friend that he/she is a fucking dumb shit?

yup.

his only defense is that she has the executive experience that obama doesnt. i replied that if executive experience meant anything then bush/cheney should have been awesome. i asked him what qualities palin brought to the table that no other more experienced politician could not have. he hasnt responded yet.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/UYYiw_y2qDI&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/UYYiw_y2qDI&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

I have a legitimate question:
Are most of these people aware of their fallacies? Or are they clueless?

Either they're waging a war on logic and fully aware of it or they're deficient.

you need to realize a very small percentage of the country believes like you (and me, I know) do. Most of this country is so pro-family, pro-woman, pro-religion, pro-faith-teaching, pro-"average" person, it's going to happen and there's nothing anyone can do about it.


i'm pro-family.
i'm pro-woman.
i'm pro-average person.

i get what you're saying, but i still think there are enough people in this country who are fed up enough with the bullshit that's been going over for the last 8 years. at least i hope...

that said, if mccain <i>does</i> win, then i will seriously be rethinking what it means to be "american."

According to new polls by Gallup/USAToday.com "Obama leads 50%-43% among registered voters", and Rasmussen even sees him at 51%, the highest poll ever.

Why can't this whole deal be over already?

And why is no-one questioning the fact that she's abandoning her 5-month-old Down syndrome baby to campaign with McCain?
Not a thing a "good mother" would do, eh?