IMO, Charlie Crist would be a superb choice. Like McCain, he's a moderate Republican and has had high approval ratings while serving as governor of Florida, and his inclusion would almost certainly mean Florida's 25 electoral votes would be red ones. The only real problem is, like McCain himself, Crist might not be "right" enough for the neo-cons. If McCain wants to pull in social conservatives, Huckabee would be an excellent choice (though he's probably too fiscally liberal for the right-wing's hardliners). I doubt McCain would like Steve King of Iowa, but he'd probably be the best choice in terms of pleasing the conservative voters that McCain himself risks alienating.

Soooo.....?

The other problem with Crist is that he's sexually attracted to men.

The other problem with Crist is that he's sexually attracted to men.

That would come out the day after he was picked.

He needs Huckabee.

he must lose
or usa will be a 100 years in iraq

he must lose
or usa will be a 100 years in iraq
Ok this is obviously a troll

Ok this is obviously a troll

he insists that courtney murdered kurt too

Tom Ridge.

he insists that courtney murdered kurt too

that's plausible, it's not like there wasn't any testimony to support that

Huckabee on the ticket would convert the entire mountain west region into swing states.

That's pretty absurd. The social conservatives that don't trust McCain love Huckabee. Him being on the ticket wouldn't be a horrid move on McCain's part, but regardless he wouldn't be the best choice for McCain due to his fiscal policies being fairly liberal, which makes the neo-cons none too excited about Huckabee.

The thing about Huckabee is that for whatever portion of social conservatives he brings along, McCain will likely lose the same in moderate independents.

Hillary Clinton

Ok this is obviously a troll

your mama is a troll asshole
vote mcain is like voting for bush again ....
and americans are stupid enough to do that for the third time in
a row

That's pretty absurd. The social conservatives that don't trust McCain love Huckabee. Him being on the ticket wouldn't be a horrid move on McCain's part, but regardless he wouldn't be the best choice for McCain due to his fiscal policies being fairly liberal, which makes the neo-cons none too excited about Huckabee.

Except Mormons. If there's anyone more anti-mormon than McCain's mother, it's Huckabee. And like it or not, that's your conservative base in the Mountain West. Every mormon republican I've talked to will vote Democratic. If Huck's on the ticket in November.

Tom Ridge.

:rofl:

Bobby Jindal.

Except Mormons. If there's anyone more anti-mormon than McCain's mother, it's Huckabee. And like it or not, that's your conservative base in the Mountain West. Every mormon republican I've talked to will vote Democratic. If Huck's on the ticket in November.

Yeah, he wouldn't want to lose the influential Mormon vote :rolleyes:.

Romney or the Huckster. Or that Hutchinson lady. At least I think thats her name.

Rudy is still a possibility, regardless of how poorly he fared in the elections

your mama is a troll asshole
vote mcain is like voting for bush again ....
and americans are stupid enough to do that for the third time in
a row
I'm no McCain fan and I'm certainly no Bush fan, but don't buy into the propaganda that they're at all "the same."

http://www.gambling911.com/Condoleezza%20Rice.jpg
http://www.peteykins.com/sparklepics3/Condi011707a.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/179/432216445_d00a381121_o.jpg

Yeah, he wouldn't want to lose the influential Mormon vote :rolleyes:.

*ahem* Huckabee on the ticket would turn the entire Mountain West region into swing states.

Pay attention, dumbass.

Oh i'm sorry, i thought i quoted the post were you agreed with someone refuting you original claims and then said that he'd lose the Mormon vote (oh noes).

Oh i'm sorry, i thought i quoted the post were you agreed with someone refuting you original claims and then said that he'd lose the Mormon vote (oh noes).

Also, I'm not sure you should be in this conversation if you can't speak English.

Bobby Jindal.
Fuck this guy.

Fuck this guy.

The social conservatives would love having Jindal on the ticket.

Sam Brownback is another option for McCain...though I think he's a bit too much of a McCain clone for the neo-cons.

The social conservatives would love having Jindal on the ticket.

Sam Brownback is another option for McCain...though I think he's a bit too much of a McCain clone for the neo-cons.
His last name is Jindal. The Republican party is filled with racists, bigots and rednecks. Jindal on the ticket would probably hurt McCain.

His last name is Jindal. The Republican party is filled with racists, bigots and rednecks. Jindal on the ticket would probably hurt McCain.

And I'm sure that those same said racists, bigots and rednecks would rather have a white guy as president than some liberal nigger, dude.

I'm sure the social conservatives would love Jindal. He's 100% pro-life, anti-embryonic stem cell research, and I think he's anti-gay marriage.

So it basically contradicts McCain's "maverick" stance which would excite much of the GOP, but lose many independent and even some moderate Republican voters. He would scare the crap out of those people.

So it basically contradicts McCain's "maverick" stance which would excite much of the GOP, but lose many independent and even some moderate Republican voters. He would scare the crap out of those people.

So in other words, McCain should all but completely abandon the core of his party in favor of a few independents and swing voters, at least half of whom will probably wind up voting for Obama?

If McCain is going to win this election, he needs at least most of the social conservatives and the neo-cons on board. That's why he needs a VP that is a bit more hawkish than he is. I'm not saying it's going to be easy for him. Teeter too far right and he'll appear to be little more than a Bush redux. Teeter too far to center and he risks alienating the core of his potential voter base. He's an established moderate. That should be enough to scare up some independents and swing voters. A guy like Jindal would give him a boost at least among social conservatives that currently don't trust McCain. Remember, the social conservatives re-elected Bush in 2004.

Like it or not, McCain needs at least part of the social and far-right on board for his campaign to be a success. And he can't appeal to them alone.

Jindal will not energize social conservatives (fundamentalists and the like) in the same way that Bush did. No way. Extremely religious far-right Christians are not going to fall in love with a guy that has the last name of Jindal regardless of how conservative he really is. And a McCain/Jindal ticket will be laughed at by everyone else as a total rip on Obama's success. If it's one thing McCain has been good at, its stealing Obama's ideas and slogans. Obama is the one leading the way, clearly. It shows in McCain ripping on Obama's "change" message while simultaneously stealing and then rewording it to "a leader we can believe in" or whatever. Jindal will just be the icing on the "I'm old and have no creativity" cake.

What I mean about McCain ripping him off:

Obama likes change? I AM change! Even though Hillary tried this, too, I'll do it as well!

Change we can believe in? No no no, that [policy stance] my friends is not change we can believe in! eh heh heh I'm such a trickster huh

Obama wants us out of Iraq? Fine! I'll assure nothing less than VICTORY by 2013 in one of the most violent regions in the world, therefore exiting Iraq by the end of my first term! I too can stop the war but only when we succeed, my friends! Nevermind that though, I'll never speak of this idea again because it didn't poll well, just like my current stance. Oh, darn. Perhaps I will in the fall as a last ditch effort.

Obama's black? Fine! Here's an Indian VP!
-or-
Obama's black? Fine! Here's a female VP! I can be diverse too, even though I'm the one calling the shots 99% of the time! BELIEVE IN ME PLEASE!!!!


He has a serious problem.

Jindal will not energize social conservatives (fundamentalists and the like) in the same way that Bush did. No way. Extremely religious far-right Christians are not going to fall in love with a guy that has the last name of Jindal regardless of how conservative he really is. And a McCain/Jindal ticket will be laughed at by everyone else as a total rip on Obama's success. If it's one thing McCain has been good at, its stealing Obama's ideas and slogans. Obama is the one leading the way, clearly. It shows in McCain ripping on Obama's "change" message while simultaneously stealing and then rewording it to "a leader we can believe in" or whatever. Jindal will just be the icing on the "I'm old and have no creativity" cake.

And I keep telling you, this strategy will not get him the White House. Imitating Obama's campaign will only get him so far. He cannot win this election solely by appealing to the dead center. With a rift forming in the Democratic party between Obama's supporters and Clinton's supporters, McCain cannot risk creating a similar divide in the Republican party. He needs the far-right, plain and simple.

Once the social conservatives learn more about Jindal, the more they'll like him. I'm not saying he'll have a HUGE impact on the election, but it'll be enough to possibly push McCain over the top.

Remember, too, that Obama has had the most trouble in this election connecting with middle-America. Yes, Jindal is Indian, but who do you think Middle-Americans would rather vote for? A liberal nigger who called them bitter and that they cling to religion and guns, or a well-known white moderate who happens to have a right-wing Indian running mate who shares many of Middle-America's social values?

Obama's black? Fine! Here's an Indian VP!
-or-
Obama's black? Fine! Here's a female VP! I can be diverse too, even though I'm the one calling the shots 99% of the time! BELIEVE IN ME PLEASE!!!!


McCain isn't going to pick a female VP.

So it basically contradicts McCain's "maverick" stance which would excite much of the GOP, but lose many independent and even some moderate Republican voters. He would scare the crap out of those people.

It's pretty much proven that the choice of VP has little to no bearing on who a person will vote for in the general election.

I did say Crist would be a good choice for McCain in the first post in this thread, but only because having him on the ticket would almost assuredly deliver the biggest swing state in the country. The neo-con base like Crist even less than they do McCain.

I don't know a whole lot about Jindal, but from what I've seen of him I think McCain could do a lot worse. I think it's incredibly cynical to assume that McCain would pick him based on skin color alone just to somehow one up the Dems. I could see the cynicism being justified if we were talking Colin Powell or Condi Rice, but not Jindal. His youth and the appearance that he has true conservative cred are the things that make him an attractive choice for McCain, because it shores up McCain's weakest areas. I don't think that the GOP would pass that up just because it might look like they're vaguely following the Dems lead on racial trailblazing.

But part of me tends to think that if the GOP really thinks that Jindal is going to be the great hope of the party's future, then maybe it'd be a good idea to hold him off the ticket this year and instead start priming him for 2012. Set him up with a prime speaking spot at the convention this fall and hope that maybe he can generate some Obama-esque buzz. Having him go out as VP on a failed McCain ticket might kill his prospects dead before he ever gets out of the gate.

Romney. He's not too crazy right religious, but just enough. And he's good with the economy too.

Hillary Clinton

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00347/Peter_Brookes_Carto_347886a.jpg

It's pretty much proven that the choice of VP has little to no bearing on who a person will vote for in the general election.
b-b-b-but Jindal will send chills down the spine of core GOP voters and vote en masse for the McCain ticket!

If he picks Huckabee, I will vote for Obama. I want that man's political career ended ASAP.

Is there anyone that would make you vote for him?

I would only vote for McCain if he picked Ron Paul.

Of course, he would never pick Ron Paul.

Ron Paul.

I want THIS guy's political career to end. He lost me at the We The People Act and the fact that he thinks America can return to the gold standard.

b-b-b-but Jindal will send chills down the spine of core GOP voters and vote en masse for the McCain ticket!

:rolleyes: That's not what I said, dude. I said his presence would be enough to push McCain over the top, not that him being on the ticket would drive the GOP into a feeding frenzy.

You still haven't successfully countered my argument that McCain can't win by appealing only to the dead-center.

Romney. He's not too crazy right religious, but just enough. And he's good with the economy too.

He's a bigger flip-flopper than John Kerry, and he's a Mormon. Not a chance.

:rolleyes: That's not what I said, dude. I said his presence would be enough to push McCain over the top, not that him being on the ticket would drive the GOP into a feeding frenzy.

You still haven't successfully countered my argument that McCain can't win by appealing only to the dead-center.
He can't. Much of the dead center is irate because of the war and the economy. McCain is a mirror image of Bush on these things. With a disappointed GOP base and angry moderate voter outcry he's going to have a really hard time

Nimrod's Son: Voting for Obama, then? :D Even Ron Paul said he's the best of all three!

Iraq wont be as big a knock on McCain as you keep thinking it will be.

Uhh, yes it will. Combined with the shitty economy McCain is in trouble.

I was really pessimistic about the Dems before (see: Dems fucked thread) but now I've begun to think otherwise.

Uhh, yes it will. Combined with the shitty economy McCain is in trouble.

I was really pessimistic about the Dems before (see: Dems fucked thread) but now I've begun to think otherwise.

This is starting to sound like Netphoria, 2004 all over again when people based their "Bush has no shot" posts off of the fact that none of their friends would vote for him

This is starting to sound like Netphoria, 2004 all over again when people based their "Bush has no shot" posts off of the fact that none of their friends would vote for him
smh

Governor Charlie Crist (Florida)
Google Meter: 90,300
Age: 51
Religion: Methodist
Education: B.A., Florida State; J.D., Cumberland School of Law
Pros: Popular, tax-cutting governor of the biggest swing state; gave McCain a huge boost in the critical Florida primary; probably will have strong loyalty among 800,000 non-violent felons whose voting rights Crist has restored; in sync with McCain on the need to address climate change; extremely charming; only 51 and perpetually tanned, but silver hair reduces how different he and McCain appear in age.
Cons: His changing stance on abortion (from pro-choice to pro-life) and aversion to picking fights on social issues make some conservatives suspicious; has denied an allegation that he fathered a daughter in a one-night stand in 1988 and rumors that he is gay.
Bottom Line: If he’s not at the top of list, he should be.

Governor Tim Pawlenty (Minnesota)
Google Meter: 58,300
Age: 47
Religion: Baptist
Education: B.A., University of Minnesota; J.D., University of Minnesota Law School
Pros: One of very few Republicans to win in a blue state in 2006; has built a record of holding the line on taxes and strongly opposing illegal immigration.
Cons: Unknown nationally; Minnesota may already be out of reach for McCain.
Bottom Line: Not hugely compelling, but he has a serious chance because he would satisfy social conservatives on a number of fronts without offending other blocs.

Governor Sarah Palin (Alaska)
Google meter: 25,000
Age: 44
Religion: Protestant
Education: B.A. (Journalism), University of Idaho
Pros: Shares with McCain a hatred for the corruption personified by Senator Ted Stevens, the longtime king of Alaska politics and Senate pork; has a son in the Army; former Miss Alaska contestant; lifetime member of the NRA; eats moose burgers; rides snowmobiles.
Cons: Just 44 years old; has just two years of experience as governor of one of the nation’s least populous states.
Bottom Line: A dark horse for the moment, but keep an eye on this coming superstar. She could help in the Mountain West, and she’s someone around whom right-wingers may soon realize they would be happy to coalesce around.

Senator Lindsey Graham (South Carolina)
Google Meter: 83,300
Age: 52
Religion: Southern Baptist
Education: B.A. (Psychology), University of South Carolina; J.D., University of South Carolina
Pros: From endorsing McCain in 2000 to joining the anti-filibuster “Gang of 14” senators to supporting the immigration-reform bill sponsored by McCain and Ted Kennedy, he is a definitive McCain Republican; former military prosecutor in the Air Force JAG Corps.
Cons: Right-wingers dislike his occasional independence; lifelong bachelorhood has triggered gay-baiting rumors.
Bottom Line: He would have made a great running mate for McCain eight years ago; this time around, the ticket will need a broader boost to McCain’s appeal than a white southern male can provide.

Governor Bobby Jindal (Louisiana)
Google Meter: 124,000
Age: 37
Religion: Roman Catholic
Education: B.A. (Biology and Public Policy), Brown; M.A. (Political Science), Oxford
Pros: Wunderkind who turned Louisiana’s Medicaid program from bankruptcy to surpluses in the nineties; right-wing darling; Indian-American son of Punjabi immigrants; winning smile and personality; actual name is “Piyush,” but he took the nickname “Bobby” after watching The Brady Bunch as a 4-year-old.
Cons: Only 37; uncomfortably extreme social conservative; wrote an article in 1994 detailing his participation in an exorcism.
Bottom Line: He’s a collection of Heritage Foundation policy papers with a human face, which would put meat on McCain’s policy bones, and he’s a great story, but he’s probably too young to put on the ticket in a year when the Republicans want to blast Obama as inexperienced. Expect, however, an Obama-like shot at introducing himself to the nation at the GOP convention.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (Washington, D.C.)
Google Meter: 315,000
Age: 53
Religion: Presbyterian
Education: B.A. (Political Science), University of Denver; M.A. (Political Science), Notre Dame; Ph.D. (Political Science), University of Denver
Pros: Megawattage celebrity stardom; as an African-American woman, would radically balance the ticket.
Cons: Has presided over one of the most disastrous foreign policies in American history; has never run for public office; unknown views on domestic issues.
Bottom Line: A wild card; McCain is running as fast as he can away from everyone associated with the Bush administration, but if he needs a home run by convention time, who knows?

Former Governor Mitt Romney (Massachusetts)
Google Meter: 225,000
Age: 61
Religion: Mormon
Education: B.A., Brigham Young University; J.D./M.B.A., Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School
Pros: Still a favorite among the socially conservative chattering classes who populate Websites like the Corner; could help carry states in the Mountain West.
Cons: McCain loathes him and has openly laughed at his vice-presidential pretensions; many Evangelicals distrust his Mormonism; lengthy record of flip-flops; ran astoundingly poor presidential campaign.
Bottom Line: It’s hard to imagine McCain spending the next five months in close quarters with someone for whom he has so little respect, much less putting him a heartbeat away from the presidency.

Former Representative Rob Portman (Ohio)
Google Meter: 20,500
Age: 52
Religion: Methodist
Education: B.A. (Anthropology), Dartmouth; J.D., University of Michigan Law School
Pros: A rare Bush-administration policy wonk, has displayed sanity and smarts as U.S. trade representative and OMB chief, as he did as Bush 41’s director of legislative affairs.
Cons: A consummate insider in a year of change; endorsed by David Brooks.
Bottom Line: The kind of guy McCain will need to help run the government if he wins, but not likely to win him many votes before November.

Senator Joe Lieberman (Connecticut)
Google Meter: 293,000
Age: 66
Religion: Orthodox Judaism
Education: B.A. (Politics and Economics), Yale; L.L.B., Yale Law School
Pros: War hawk; gets along well with McCain; has already assumed, and seems to relish, traditional veep role of attack dog; status as turncoat Democrat would generate dramatic sizzle.
Cons: Has a decades-long voting record supporting Democratic positions on non-Iraq issues, from abortion to tax cuts; could actually hurt McCain in Connecticut, where Lieberman’s approval rating among Independents is under 50 percent; sanctimoniousness wears awfully thin.
Bottom Line: As an echo where McCain is already loud and a lifelong Democrat where McCain is already having problems with the GOP base, he is more likely to end up secretary of Defense than vice-president.

Former Governor Mike Huckabee (Arkansas)
Google Meter: 610,000
Age: 52
Religion: Southern Baptist
Education: B.A. (Religion), Quachita Baptist University
Pros: Could help McCain among Evangelicals; terrific retail campaigner; he and McCain remained friendly even while campaigning against each other in the spring; populist in a year of economic turmoil; knows how to fry squirrel.
Cons: Economic conservatives don’t like his anti-corporate shtick; mixing Baptist theology and politics as thoroughly as he does doesn’t play well outside the Republican primary electorate; while speaking at an NRA meeting in May, cracked a joke about someone aiming a gun at Barack Obama.
Bottom Line: Won’t happen. Many Evangelicals are wary of McCain, but Republican fund-raisers don’t take Huckabee seriously. And McCain isn’t planning on aiming his campaign at the Bible Belt, anyway.

Former Governor Tom Ridge (Pennsylvania)
Google Meter: 48,300
Age: 62
Religion: Roman Catholic
Education: B.A., Harvard; J.D., Dickinson School of Law
Pros: Was a popular governor of a state McCain would love to compete in; decorated Vietnam veteran.
Cons: Difficult tenure as secretary of Homeland Security; somnolent public speaker; pro-choice.
Bottom Line: Anyone who thinks McCain is ambivalent about abortion is in for a rude awakening — he’s already said that “respect and cherishing of the right of the unborn” essentially eliminates Ridge’s chance to be on the ticket.


Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani (New York)
Who?

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/06/mccains_potential_running_mate.html

I hope it will be Giuliani.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=27630

Novak is saying that McCain may pick his VP this week, which would be another fine strategic blunder by his campaign. This will give Obama a huge advantage.

How would that give either of them a huge advantage? I dont see Obama or McCain picking their VP based on who the other guy picked.

I want THIS guy's political career to end. He lost me at the We The People Act and the fact that he thinks America can return to the gold standard.


http://www.ridelust.com/wp-content/uploads/oilgoldsm.jpg

FYI: McCain is rumored to be announcing his VP the morning after Obama's convention speech. We all know what happened the last time McCain tried to ride Obama's hype wave... hehe.

"That's not change we can believe in my friends! Eh heh heh."

If the ideal political philosophy is represented by the speed of light, then John McCain is the speed of a turtle while Obama is closer to, say, the speed of a jet. Point being: THEY'RE ALL SO FUCKING FAR OFF IT DOESN'T MATTER WHICH ONE YOU CHOOSE

Nice wavy lines, dude.

Some cranks (such as Republican Presidential contender Ron Paul) continue to preach that without a gold standard, money is "objectively worthless"; these people are sometimes known as "gold bugs". This ignores the fact that gold is intrinsically worthless, as any object's value is only assigned by the collective value put on something by its consumers (otherwise known as "the market"), and that the use of gold as reserve currency is more a tradition than anything else. This is why most developed countries have similar "floating" currencies, and it is only in the developing world that "fixed currencies" still exist, though most of those are fixed to the dollar, not to gold. (Even so, in many of those, such as Zimbabwe and North Korea as well as the former governments of the old Soviet bloc, there are official exchange rates and black market exchange rates.)

Survivalists often like the gold standard because it holds out the promise of a stable currency in a governmental vacuum; the idea that the standard response in a barter economy to a handful of American Eagles or Krugerrands is likely to be "sorry, can't eat gold" never seems to come up.

Another problem in returning to the gold standard is that there is simply not enough gold in the world to cover the quantity of currency currently in existence. To put it another way, even if the US were somehow able to purchase the world's entire gold stocks (in itself an impossible proposition) there would still be nowhere near enough gold to cover the total value of dollars in existence.

Sorry, Ron Paul is still an idiot. And the above doesn't even cover the abomination that is the We The People Act.

Ron Paul sucks and would be a horrible President and Vice Presicent. Anyone who actually thinks this guy would turn this country around is mentally challenged.

He was only popular at first because he was the only hardcore anti-war Republican who took the stage during the primaries. Once people learned how crazy he was when it came to mostly all of the other issues, the hype died real fast.

Who gives a shit about gold? The point is that money is nothing more than paper printed on a whim and this system cannot last forever. In fact, it's starting to implode.

And what's wrong with the We The People Act? Besides sounding corny, do you honestly care that much about gay marriage or abortion? Why not let state and local courts make those decisions while we debate relevant topics like foreign policy?

Who gives a shit about gold? The point is that money is nothing more than paper printed on a whim and this system cannot last forever. In fact, it's starting to implode.


Uh, your hero Ron Paul certainly gives a shit about gold, dude. That's his magical elixir for fixing the economy; abolishing the IRS and the Federal Reserve and making the U.S. return to the gold standard. While the way things are isn't great by any means, thinking that the U.S. can return to an antiquated economic system that stopped being practical decades ago is foolish and shortsighted.


And what's wrong with the We The People Act? Besides sounding corny, do you honestly care that much about gay marriage or abortion? Why not let state and local courts make those decisions while we debate relevant topics like foreign policy?


I don't, but a lot of other people do...and I don't think they'll appreciate leaving things like abortion, same-sex marriage and Establishment Clause issues solely up to the states...that is exactly what the fundamentalist right wants to happen, and I for one don't want their prejudices to become the law of the majority of the U.S.

Nice wavy lines, dude.



Sorry, Ron Paul is still an idiot. And the above doesn't even cover the abomination that is the We The People Act.

My guess is you've never even read the act. yes, how horrible it would be to take some power from the feds and give it back to the states.

I'm not sure which is more of your troll, Tchocky or Cup.

Ron Paul sucks and would be a horrible President and Vice Presicent. Anyone who actually thinks this guy would turn this country around is mentally challenged.

He was only popular at first because he was the only hardcore anti-war Republican who took the stage during the primaries. Once people learned how crazy he was when it came to mostly all of the other issues, the hype died real fast.

Please explain what you mean by "the hype died" because Paul got a significant amount of primary votes towards the end of the period and has a very vocal following.

Uh, your hero Ron Paul certainly gives a shit about gold, dude. That's his magical elixir for fixing the economy; abolishing the IRS and the Federal Reserve and making the U.S. return to the gold standard. While the way things are isn't great by any means, thinking that the U.S. can return to an antiquated economic system that stopped being practical decades ago is foolish and shortsighted.





I don't, but a lot of other people do...and I don't think they'll appreciate leaving things like abortion, same-sex marriage and Establishment Clause issues solely up to the states...that is exactly what the fundamentalist right wants to happen, and I for one don't want their prejudices to become the law of the majority of the U.S.
I really laugh at the fact that you're comparing Paul to the "fundamentalist right."

Anyway, it's nice to see you're coming off like a communist and a statist again.

If made law, the Act would forbid federal courts (up to and including the U.S. Supreme Court) from hearing cases on subjects such as the display of religious text and imagery on government property, abortion, sexual practices, and same-sex unions, unless such a case were a challenge to the Constitutionality of federal law.

time magazine is saying Romney

http://thepage.time.com/2008/08/21/2-gop-sources-its-romney/

NY Times: “People close to the [McCain] campaign also floated a wild-card choice, Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top American commander in Iraq.”


uhhhhhh what

romney seems like the smartest choice at this point, doesn't he?

romney seems like the smartest choice at this point, doesn't he?

A flip-flopper who in his heart of hearts is pro-choice? No VP pick, imo, is going to help the old fart get elected.

I really laugh at the fact that you're comparing Paul to the "fundamentalist right."

Anyway, it's nice to see you're coming off like a communist and a statist again.

If made law, the Act would forbid federal courts (up to and including the U.S. Supreme Court) from hearing cases on subjects such as the display of religious text and imagery on government property, abortion, sexual practices, and same-sex unions, unless such a case were a challenge to the Constitutionality of federal law.

I never said Ron Paul was a fundy (though this article (http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2007/10/is_ron_paul_a_dominionist.php) makes the claim that he is in fact a Dominionist). I’m saying that the problem is his "leave cases such as etc...to the states" mantra plays right into the hands of the fundys.

For example, not too long ago I remember seeing a map of the U.S. that showed how many states would immediately instigate and likely pass anti-abortion laws if Roe v. Wade was overtured, and it was a sizeable chunk of it. What Ron Paul is proposing would effectively make Roe v. Wade worthless. Like I said earlier in this thread, I do not want to see the prejudices of the Christian Right to become the law of the majority of the U.S., and I'm sure many other Americans out there do not as well. Therefore, the We The People Act must not be passed. And yes, I am aware that not all anti-abortion advocates are from the fundamentalist right, but the fact is, they are the driving force behind the movement.

Paul also claims that separation of church and state was not the intention of any of the Founding Fathers:

From Christmas in Secular America:
The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers.

HOWEVER...

In 1785, James Madison listed 15 reasons why he was in favor of separation. Among them were that faith must come from reason, not coercion; that it is wrong to make someone pay to support a sect he is not a member of; that civil officials are not competent to handle religious matters; that Christianity flourishes in opposition to, not collaboration with, civil authority; that official status corrupts religion; that it would discourage immigration; and that it would create conflict.

http://www.au.org/site/DocServer/James_Madisons_Memorial_and_Remonstrance.pdf?docID =144


The moral of the story: Ron Paul is a paleoconservative bonehead who is woefully out of touch with America, and the only people who like him are libertarians who want a spineless national government and people who think that that godawful Zeitgeist movie is Scripture.

Anyhoo, considering the top choices of McCain seem to be Romney, Pawlenty or Ridge, I'd go with Pawlenty if I were McCain.

I never said Ron Paul was a fundy (though this article (http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2007/10/is_ron_paul_a_dominionist.php) makes the claim that he is in fact a Dominionist). I’m saying that the problem is his "leave cases such as etc...to the states" mantra plays right into the hands of the fundys.

For example, not too long ago I remember seeing a map of the U.S. that showed how many states would immediately instigate and likely pass anti-abortion laws if Roe v. Wade was overtured, and it was a sizeable chunk of it. What Ron Paul is proposing would effectively make Roe v. Wade worthless. Like I said earlier in this thread, I do not want to see the prejudices of the Christian Right to become the law of the majority of the U.S., and I'm sure many other Americans out there do not as well. Therefore, the We The People Act must not be passed. And yes, I am aware that not all anti-abortion advocates are from the fundamentalist right, but the fact is, they are the driving force behind the movement.

Basically your argument boils down to "we can't let people vote on these issues, because the side I support might not win." It may be a shocker to you, but the votes of the fundamentalist right count just as much as yours. Or at least they would if the Supreme Court didn't hand down poorly reasoned, legally bankrupt edicts from on high that shift the balance of power inordinately towards the secularist left. All Paul's act is meant to do is even the playing field back to where it's supposed to be. Sure, sometimes what the majority wants isn't going to be the right thing legally, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the federal courts should used preemptively to try and thwart any majority decision that you don't like.

Basically your argument boils down to "we can't let people vote on these issues, because the side I support might not win."

Yes. Exactly. This is the only way to overcome the stupidity and bigotry of the American People.

The Emancipation Proclamation wasn't put to vote before the general populace.

It also wuldnt have done jack shit if the North lost, thats a stupid point. Oh look, its turylyon.

Basically your argument boils down to "we can't let people vote on these issues, because the side I support might not win." It may be a shocker to you, but the votes of the fundamentalist right count just as much as yours. Or at least they would if the Supreme Court didn't hand down poorly reasoned, legally bankrupt edicts from on high that shift the balance of power inordinately towards the secularist left. All Paul's act is meant to do is even the playing field back to where it's supposed to be. Sure, sometimes what the majority wants isn't going to be the right thing legally, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the federal courts should used preemptively to try and thwart any majority decision that you don't like.

If by 'evening the playing field', you mean 'deepening the fissures in an already divided nation.'

All the We The People Act does is bring the U.S. one step closer to making this

http://web.knoxnews.com/silence/archives/jesusland.jpg

a reality. And I don't think most Americans want to see this happen.

I believe that people should be able to vote for or against things like abortion, gay marriage, etc, but on a national level, not at a state level. The result won't always be what myself or someone else wants, but in the end I think it's for the best.

It also wuldnt have done jack shit if the North lost, thats a stupid point. Oh look, its turylyon.

oh shut up, insert your favorite federal mandate

The Emancipation Proclamation wasn't put to vote before the general populace.

You're probably confusing the E.P. with the Thirteenth Amendment...which wasn't put to vote before the general populace either, but whatever.

"When my eyes shall be turned to behold for the last time the sun in heaven, may I not see him shining on the broken and dishonored fragments of a once glorious Union; on States dissevered, discordant, belligerent; on a land rent with civil feuds, or drenched, it may be, in fraternal blood! Let their last feeble and lingering glance rather behold the gorgeous ensign of the republic... not a stripe erased or polluted, nor a single star obscured, bearing for its motto, no such miserable interrogatory as "What is all this worth?" nor those other words of delusion and folly, "Liberty first and Union afterwards"; but everywhere, spread all over in characters of living light, blazing on all its ample folds, as they float over the sea and over the land, and in every wind under the whole heavens, that other sentiment, dear to every true American heart,— Liberty and Union, now and for ever, one and inseparable!"

~Daniel Webster, 1828

Basically your argument boils down to "we can't let people vote on these issues, because the side I support might not win." It may be a shocker to you, but the votes of the fundamentalist right count just as much as yours. Or at least they would if the Supreme Court didn't hand down poorly reasoned, legally bankrupt edicts from on high that shift the balance of power inordinately towards the secularist left. All Paul's act is meant to do is even the playing field back to where it's supposed to be. Sure, sometimes what the majority wants isn't going to be the right thing legally, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the federal courts should used preemptively to try and thwart any majority decision that you don't like.

so anything that the majority says should go? or just within reason? where does that line get drawn?

Huckabee is easily the best choice

Kay Bailey Hutchison would be a big gamble, but it could also pay-off bigtime

Apparently the final four was Romney, Pawlenty, Ridge, and Lieberman. McCain already picked though.

I expect him to announce right after Obama gives his speech. Be it immediately after he gives it or tomorrow.

I hope he picks Lieberman. Democrats hate him, moderates hate him, Republicans hate him, Jews hate him, his own state hates him, NOBODY likes him. He's one of the biggest tools in Washington and everyone knows it.

Kay Bailey Hutchison would be a big gamble, but it could also pay-off bigtime

Agreed. I don't think they've got the balls to pick her though.

I love me some Kay Bailey. She's one of the few republicans I've voted for on more than a local level.

from wikipedia:

Hutchison is against outlawing abortion.[5] She also believes that the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade was appropriate and secures a constitutional right, and that it should not be overturned.[6]

so uh. i dunno if that'd be his wisest choice. isn't that a big deal to a ton of people? the party's official stance is that abortion should be illegal and roe v. wade should be overturned. according to this, anyway: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hJFLBN-4pLdqpkKOK0_c7PnQ6VSQD92QBA0G2

uh, del

um, also this:

In 2006, Hutchison received more campaign contributions from large oil and gas corporations than any other member of Congress.[7] In 2005, Hutchison voted against prohibiting oil leasing in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and has supported legislation promoting drilling in the refuge in 2002 and 2003. In 2005 she also voted against including oil and gas smokestacks in the Environmental Protection Agency's mercury regulations.[8][9] In 1999, she voted to remove funding for renewable and solar energy, although she has more recently stated she supports the development of alternative energy sources.[10] According to the League of Conservation Voters environmental scorecard, Hutchison received a rating of zero — the lowest possible score — in the 104th Congress.[11]


you guys don't think this woman would get a new asshole torn?

It's Pawlenty.

Edit: Or not, apparently - multiple confusion from the GOP to throw up false alarms.

um, also this:

In 2006, Hutchison received more campaign contributions from large oil and gas corporations than any other member of Congress.[7] In 2005, Hutchison voted against prohibiting oil leasing in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and has supported legislation promoting drilling in the refuge in 2002 and 2003. In 2005 she also voted against including oil and gas smokestacks in the Environmental Protection Agency's mercury regulations.[8][9] In 1999, she voted to remove funding for renewable and solar energy, although she has more recently stated she supports the development of alternative energy sources.[10] According to the League of Conservation Voters environmental scorecard, Hutchison received a rating of zero — the lowest possible score — in the 104th Congress.[11]


you guys don't think this woman would get a new asshole torn?

She represents the most oil-dominated region in the continental United States, you must take some things in context of her constitutes.

She represents the most oil-dominated region in the continental United States, you must take some things in context of her constitutes.

is texas one of the most abortion rich states too or what.

i can understand what you're saying to a point, but that doesn't mean that the dems wouldn't hammer the shit out of her for it. and "she's from texas!" doesn't seem like a rebuttal that many voters would accept. edit: even if they should. which is debatable anyway.

She would be hammered, of course. But being from Texas - where they don't want alternative fuels and the like - is the driving force behind her votes.

She would be hammered, of course.

then we agree. i wasn't saying anything about her, really. just that she'd be a crappy choice.

don't know much detail about KBH, but from the handful of times I've seen her on Sunday morning political talk shows, she seems pretty vile.

Romney's sister gets a visit from the Secret Service:

http://www.rollcall.com/news/27733-1.html

probably a good choice, he's quick on his feet and relatively young

It's not Romney.

Probably Palin.

not Pawlenty either.

Palin will get owned.

It's actually scary to ponder how the angry Hillary holdouts will react to Palin...

http://www.drudgereport.com/mpb.jpg



keep the "obama bayh" bumber stickers in mind...

Palin would be a perfect choice ... she'd take a good bit of Clinton followers I imagine.

On Friday, August 29, Fox & Friends reported that Palin's family departed hastily from Anchorage, Alaska aboard a Gulfstream jet that landed near Dayton, Ohio, site of McCain's planned vice presidential announcement. They cited the website Change&Experience.com, which also had correctly leaked travel details for Sen. Joseph Biden to Springfield, Illinois for Barack Obama's announcement.

Ugh, bribe the ignorant public with a pretty face.

News just confirmed that Palin is still in Alaska.

Oh god I hope they pick Lieberman, that'd be great.

palin is pretty hot.

so she is still in alaska. cnn keeps saying she is in ohio, as of like 2 seconds ago, but it is cnn...

she's a super-far-right cunt with a history of scandal and her husband works for and oil company

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-sarah-palin-vice-president-john-mccain,0,4320091.story

chicago tribune confirms palin

chuck todd says msnbc has a good source that says palin, and are wainting for a 2nd source to confirm.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/26454655

cnbc confirms palin

foxnews says backstage sources in dayton say it's palin

Great choice for McCain. She's such a MAVERICK, just like him!

McCain said the most important qualification in a VP is someone who could immediately take over and run the county if they had to. Riiiiiight.....

This has GOT to be the most politically inspired VP pick in history.

And the McCain Campaign just confirmed.

wtf. who is this bitch?

A two-year governor of Alaska.

wtf. who is this bitch?

the most desperate VP pick of all time. but it could pay off

well.

i'm interested to see how this turns out.

McCain said the most important qualification in a VP is someone who could immediately take over and run the county if they had to. Riiiiiight.....

This has GOT to be the most politically inspired VP pick in history.

She's the only person on either ticket with executive experience, so she's better prepared on that level than anyone.

now, i obviously have no idea what i'm talking about with this, but i've always thought that i'd rather have my president have experience in washington than, oh, say, experience in the executive branch of a state like alaska. is that totally off base?

but then again clinton came from arkansas. so what the fuck do i know. hm.

i am thoroughly confused by this.

:nooooo:

this is sad. picking a virtually unknown for the vp. what guts and lack of brains

awwwwwwwwwwww Monte wanted Romney! :p

bahahahahahahahahah

awwwwwwwwwwww Monte wanted Romney! :p

:erm:

i live in California, there is no way McCain would win here no matter who he chose.

She's the only person on either ticket with executive experience, so she's better prepared on that level than anyone.

:banging:

:nooooo:

this is sad. picking a virtually unknown for the vp. what guts and lack of brains

She's not unknown in conservative circles... blogs/talk radio has been talking about her as a possibility for weeks.

Seriously, McCain nailed this pick I believe.

I'm playing devil's advocate here, as I would never ever vote for that clown, but he just deflected a ton of attention from Obama here.

i know this has little to do with her ability to, achem, lead, but she's one of those fucking idiots who gave her kids ridiculously stupid names:

direct from FOX: boys Track, 19, and Trig, 4 months, and daughters Bristol, 17, Willow, 13, and Piper, 7.

Seriously, McCain nailed this pick I believe.

I'm playing devil's advocate here, as I would never ever vote for that clown, but he just deflected a ton of attention from Obama here.

boy, he sure did.

nailed her? I bet.

the most desperate VP pick of all time. but it could pay off

This pick will backfire on McCain. Women aren't going to vote for him.

She's the only person on either ticket with executive experience, so she's better prepared on that level than anyone.

:banging:

Two years ago she was mayor of Wasilla Alaska, a town with less than 10,000 people. Don't be stupid.

Hahahahahaha McCain is the biggest fucking joke in the world. I can't believe this shit. Like said earlier, this has got to be the most politically driven VP pick of all time.

But, see, that's two more years of executive experience than anyone else on either ticket has.

Does it matter? Probably not, but it is executive experience.

Imagine this broad in a debate with Biden. It's going to be funny stuff. :rofl:

he just deflected a ton of attention from Obama here.

that's the biggest victory here, taking all the hype away from last night's speech, which was getting rave reviews.

that's the biggest victory here, taking all the hype away from last night's speech, which was getting rave reviews.

Biden needs to get on the fucking attack like RIGHT NOW, and be like hey, what the fuck John McCain, I thought you were all about experience, who the FUCK IS THIS BITCH?

LOL She's a creationist!!!!

http://scienceblogs.com/afarensis/2006/10/27/intelligent_design_and_the_ala/

I expected a woman...Carly Fiorina or maybe the former eBay CEO. This choice is kind of random. I bet Biden will come out on top during the debates.

She graduated from Wasilla High School in 1982 and received a bachelor of science degree in communications-journalism from the University of Idaho in 1987.

Congressional Quarterly notes Sarah Palin's other past occupations, including commercial fishing company owner, outdoor recreational equipment company owner and sports reporter.

:rofl:

lol, I feel like I am dreaming, what the fuck is with this?

Geraldine Ferarro is jizzing all over the pick on Foxnews. She really turned into a cunt since the racists comments didn't she?

A beauty contestant pageant and a TV sportscaster.

Geraldine Ferarro is jizzing all over the pick on Foxnews. She really turned into a cunt since the racists comments didn't she?

she made similar racist comments about Jesse Jackson way back when, so I think it's been a while

Imagine this broad in a debate with Biden. It's going to be funny stuff. :rofl:

Forget the debates, just picture what he says to the first reporter who tracks him down today.

According to the TV pundits, her qualification is being a mom.

Ugh, bribe the ignorant public with a pretty face.

And you support Obama.

i know this has little to do with her ability to, achem, lead, but she's one of those fucking idiots who gave her kids ridiculously stupid names:

direct from FOX: boys Track, 19, and Trig, 4 months, and daughters Bristol, 17, Willow, 13, and Piper, 7.

Would you have preferred more "Christian" names?

According to the TV pundits, her qualification is being a mom.

well someone has to change mccain's diapers

Imagine this broad in a debate with Biden. It's going to be funny stuff. :rofl:
She's actually debated for an executive position before. He hasn't.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: AlaskanBastard

Tell us what you think, bastard.

And you support Obama.

I'm supporting Obama because he happens to be the only one at the moment who can beat John McCain. The selection of Palin is desperately calculated political bait. But you know this.

Anyone who ever said Obama is a bad choice because he has no experience can just shut the hell up RIGHT NOW.

She doesn't even have TWO FULL YEARS of experience as a Governor, and before that she barely did anything. Even Obama has more experience. If McCain dies or something else happens, he's going to be replaced by someone with verrrrrrry little experience. The Obama campaign better be citing the times McCain said his veep needs to echo the experience he has and hammer the fact that Palin has very little.

Palin pick is a desperation move.

Yeah. sppunk always comes to these thread with absolutely no idea what to say or what opinion to have. McCain picking Palin essentially eliminates his criticism of Barrack having no experience, which was a major talking point of his campaign. I'd understand this move if McCain was down 15 points, but it's a close race and I'm not sure what he was thinking. Siphoning Clinton supporters? Does he really think those people are that stupid?

So I guess women are interchangable. So things you considered as a person who would be commander in chief...

Mayor of a small town

Lives in an isolated state

Has been governor of said isolated and barely populated state

Comes from oil money

No foreign relations experience

Has breasts


...wise calculation Johnny. She's HRC's twin practically...

Siphoning Clinton supporters? Does he really think those people are that stupid?

I'm guessing at least a decent handfull actually will be. It will be very interesting to watch the polls the next two weeks though.

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



Awesome.

maoi: They are, but I don't think there will be enough of them to give McCain the election. They are a rabid few spread out across the country making themselves look more important than they really are by sticking together on random blogs and forums, probably under various aliases.

Thanks for making a whole new thread about it. We needed another one.

Palin pick is a desperation move.

Exactly. Though all the pundits only seem capable of calling McCain a "maverick" for the choice. She's such a hard-line Conservative (anti-abortion, creationist) that the only thing that makes her a bold choice is her sex. And considering the tone of this election and the nature of McCain's opponent, such a move strikes me as blatantly reactionary and isn't something that makes me see McCain as open-minded.

But backing away from the slippery slope of gender/race politics, she just doesn't seem qualified to take over the presidency in the (likely enough) event McCain should kick the bucket. I realize people say Obama is inexperienced, though, personally, because I'm an Illinois citizen he's been on my radar for quite some time. But as people have said before me, this really does neutralize the whole experience debate, which seemed like a decent angle for the McCain camp.

Anyway, I think this VP pick will backfire.

her voice gets annoying pretty quick.

she's towing the party line in her speech, repping McCain's war hero stuff and all that.

Too bad her and McCain completely disagree on Alaskan drilling.

Would you have preferred more "Christian" names?

if "christian" names means "not fucking stupid idiot names that 40somethings think are cute", then yes.

it bugs the shit out of me when people name their kids things like, "dakota", "tucker", "spencer", "madison", "mckenzie", etc. there's one that i can't remember that REALLY fucking bothers me...

Is anybody watching this McCain event in Ohio? Is it typical for the crowds at these types of events to randomly break into chants of "USA! USA! USA! USA!" Weird.

haha, she says "hillary put 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling, but it turns out the women aren't done yet, and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all!!"

i'm serious.

She's also a creationist.

uuggggghhhhhh.

this is delicious. Whatever. you know, I hope McCain wins. Fuck this county.

close

...wise calculation Johnny. She's HRC's twin practically...

i can't tell if you're being facetious or stupid.

they look absolutely ridiculous together.

mccain looks like her fucking grandpa.

Romney, Pawlenty, Lieberman, or Ridge would have been ten times better than Palin. This is why:

Romney would have provided a real backbone for an economic plan, since McCain himself admits he is clueless, and would have put Michigan in play.

Pawlenty would have attracted evangelicals who are pretty conflicted right now, and would have put Minnesota in play.

Lieberman would have legitimized the argument that McCain is willing to reach across party lines, since Lieberman, despite being a gigantic tool, is pretty liberal when it comes to just about everything BUT the war.

Ridge would have attracted a lot of moderate Republicans and most importantly put Pennsylvania in play, a state Republicans always fall short of winning. In fact, I think this would have been his best choice. Ridge has experience as Governor (economics) AND was the first to represent Homeland Security (terrorism/national security). Not to mention, he could very well carry Pennsylvania for McCain. It would have been a formidable ticket, and I'm so glad this did not happen.

Palin's experience is less than even Obama's, and, like Hillary Clinton, she has a vagina. Once women learn that she's pro-life, likely won't speak out against McCain voting against equal pay for women in the workplace, and that just a month ago she dissed her possible new job (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12969.html), I don't think McCain will get as many left-leaning independents as he thought. She's from Alaska, which really doesn't represent any particlular region Republicans were looking to make serious progress in -- west, midwest, "rust belt", northeast -- and that is pretty dumb. Alaska is going Republican anyway.

There is the slight possibility that she could mobilize the few angry Hillary supporters left just enough to make things go in McCain's favor, but that is stretching it. Biden will destroy Palin in debates (even if gracefully, not so aggressively since it would be viewed as disrespectful to women), and I expect Hillary to run a few ads highlighting why Obama is better than Palin.

this thread is a real sausagefest!!!

hey sarah that Ted Stevens endorsement was pretty helpful in 06 huh? How's his corruption trial going?

i'm going to be corrupting your thoughts when i send you some of the sexy pictures my husband has taken of me!!!

This is a pretty crass move on the part of the McCain campaign to snatch women voters, no doubt. That said, I'd put Sarah Palin on MY ticket, YOU KNOW!?!?!?!?!

no. please explain.

snatch women voters

you sexist bastard

I wonder if Obama's like oh snap I shoulda picked hillz

Oh LOOK AT THIS!

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/08/29/1304936.aspx

PALIN PRAISED OBAMA'S ENERGY PLAN


Posted: Friday, August 29, 2008 12:27 PM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: 2008, McCain

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro

Earlier this month, Gov. Palin praised parts of Obama's energy plan. The link to the press release was not working as of 12:30 p.m. ET. But Google saves everything.

Palin Pleased with Obama's Energy Plan
Includes Alaska's Natural Gas Reserves Print Now Printer Friendly

No. 08-135

August 4, 2008, Fairbanks, Alaska - Governor Sarah Palin today responded to the energy plan put forward by the presumptive Democratic nominee for President, Illinois Senator Barack Obama.

"I am pleased to see Senator Obama acknowledge the huge potential Alaska's natural gas reserves represent in terms of clean energy and sound jobs," Governor Palin said. "The steps taken by the Alaska State Legislature this past week demonstrate that we are ready, willing and able to supply the energy our nation needs."

In a speech given in Lansing, Michigan, Senator Obama called for the completion of the Alaska natural gas pipeline, stating, "Over the next five years, we should also lease more of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska for oil and gas production. And we should also tap more of our substantial natural gas reserves and work with the Canadian government to finally build the Alaska natural gas pipeline, delivering clean natural gas and creating good jobs in the process."

Governor Palin also acknowledged the Senator's proposal to offer $1,000 rebates to those struggling with the high cost of energy.

"We in Alaska feel that crunch and are taking steps to address it right here at home," Governor Palin said. "This is a tool that must be on the table to buy us time until our long-term energy plans can be put into place. We have already enjoyed the support of Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, and it is gratifying to see Senator Obama get on board."

The Governor did question the means to pay for Obama's proposed rebate - a windfall profits tax on oil companies. In Alaska, the state's resource valuation system, ACES, provides strong incentives for companies to re-invest their profits in new production.

"Windfall profits taxes alone prevent additional investment in domestic production. Without new supplies from American reserves, our dependency and addiction to foreign sources of oil will continue," Governor Palin said.
:rofl:

Thanks Palin, you just made the Obama campaign's job 100 times easier!

It's funny how the people saying this backfires against McCain cause she lacks so little experience said nothing of Obama picking a 35yr washington insider as backfiring on his message.

I forgot, he rides the train, he's working class.

Palin would've never been picked if she was a male. That tells you all you need to know about her credentials and the political calculating of the McCain campaign. This was not a decision based on who would be best for governing, but who would be best at grabbing the media cycle and pull at hillary voters.

This should backfire.

It's funny how the people saying this backfires against McCain cause she lacks so little experience said nothing of Obama picking a 35yr washington insider as backfiring on his message.

^

it cuts both ways.

It's funny how the people saying that this backfires against Obama cause he's a washington insider say nothing of McCain picking a 1-1/2 year governor as backfiring on his message of experience.

Well that proves...something I'm sure.

It's funny how the people saying this backfires against McCain cause she lacks so little experience said nothing of Obama picking a 35yr washington insider as backfiring on his message.

It's really not the same thing at all.

Palin would've never been picked if she was a male. That tells you all you need to know about her credentials and the political calculating of the McCain campaign. This was not a decision based on who would be best for governing, but who would be best at grabbing the media cycle and pull at hillary voters.

This should backfire.
What sucks is that McCain had it good. He always had the opportunity to say "if Obama picks x, I pick y" because his convention is last. If McCain had to pick first I think it would have been someone totally different.

I agree though, he's playing all of his cards in the angry Hillary camp. Quite frankly that does not sound good for his campaign if you think about it.

How is it ok to say that Palin doesn't have the experience necessary to be VP, and write off Obama's lack of experience?

He just did a world tour and got experience, please try and keep up Jokey.

Why is this a good pick for him FB?

It's really not the same thing at all.

No, of course not. I dont know what I was thinking there.

How is it ok to say that Palin doesn't have the experience necessary to be VP, and write off Obama's lack of experience?
It's not the fact that people are writing it off, it's the fact that she has even less.

He just did a world tour and got experience, please try and keep up Jokey.
This post makes absolutely no sense and you are a complete retard.

"tucker", "spencer", "madison"

those are odd names?

Why is this a good pick for him FB?

I never said it was. One thing, as BLoser just pointed out, how is the Obama campaign going to attack her inexperience without opening up that attack on themselves. She's meat for the base, that's another. I just don't see how it hurts. As if VP picks arent politically motivated, of all the stupid things to say.

those are odd names?no, those are stupid names.

It's not the fact that people are writing it off, it's the fact that she has even less.

Not by much...

As if VP picks arent politically motivated, of all the stupid things to say.

Exactly. Complaining about a politically motivated VP pick is like complaining that the grass is green or the sky is blue.

Exactly. Complaining about a politically motivated VP pick is like complaining that the grass is green or the sky is blue.

Or that you're a stupid fuck. I stopped bitching about that a lot time ago.

I never said it was. One thing, as BLoser just pointed out, how is the Obama campaign going to attack her inexperience without opening up that attack on themselves. She's meat for the base, that's another. I just don't see how it hurts. As if VP picks arent politically motivated, of all the stupid things to say.

I was curious how you saw the pick choice, and you weren't saying that in this thread, just messing around with others.

On that note, I'll bitch slap your ass later. Tell Sharon I said "hi".

you guys are ridiculous. the obama campaign won't "go after" her "inexperience." if anything, they'll just try to use it as a balancing point.

jesus.

Not by much...
Obama has well over ten years. First he represented one of the biggest states in the country as a state senator and then he became a US senator. He also has a solid law background.

Palin was a mayor of a couple dinky towns before she got voted into the Governor's seat. Big deal. You want to talk about lack of experience?

And even if I'd instead agree with you and say it isn't by much overall, it COMPLETELY nullifies McCain's "Obama has no experience" argument. Not too long ago McCain was saying his ticket would represent just that, but he picked someone totally opposite, whereas Dems were always open to outsiders.

So now basically McCain has these two major arguments:

-Hillary lost, and my running mate has a vagina;
and
-Drill more and drill now, even though my running mate agreed with Obama on many things pertaining to energy at the beginning of August.

Good luck with that. I think this will eventually backfire.

No, of course not. I dont know what I was thinking there.

An experienced VP like Biden compliments a so-called inexperienced candidate with the pedigree of an Obama. And at the same time, it doesn't compromise his message of change because final decisions will be Obama's alone. Biden will effectively advise him on foreign policy and provide insight into Washington bureaucracy.

McCain/Palin is the inverse of that. Of course, that poses a real problem if the 72 year old McCain were to "bite the big one" and she'd have to step into office.

Like I said, it's not at all the same.

Or that you're a stupid fuck. I stopped bitching about that a lot time ago.

You're not the only person bitching about it...

I'm glad Palin supports drilling in ANWR though, because an overwhelming majority of Alaskans themselves want ANWR drilled.

How is it ok to say that Palin doesn't have the experience necessary to be VP, and write off Obama's lack of experience?

It's not an argument that I'm making.

The real argument is to point out the disingenuousness of McCain for all this time criticizing Obama for lack of experience and unreadiness and then to pick Palin.

Palin would've never been picked if she was a male. That tells you all you need to know about her credentials and the political calculating of the McCain campaign. Would Obama have been picked if he were white?

Yes.

-Drill more and drill now, even though my running mate agreed with Obama on many things pertaining to energy at the beginning of August.

Good luck with that. I think this will eventually backfire.
Look at the things she agreed with - she was happy to have him "on board" with certain issues which she always supported. Which, by the way, the McCain campaign also supports.

Yes.

I disagree. I think his race set him apart from the white men.

Yeah the democrats were so desperate to lock up that black vote that they didn't have locked up anyways.

http://www.grizzlybay.org/SarahPalinVikings.jpg

So McCain has the Viking vote now?

oh boy. these next couple months are going to be fun.

FB, you're kinda grasping at straws here, aren't you? McCain's main criticism of Obama, which seemed to be working, was that he was inexperienced. So then he picks a running mate who clearly could not be president (if he wins and dies, we're fucked, eh?). He took that criticism off the table. If the "experience" argument is gone, Obama benefits.

It is not as though Obama's #1 criticism of McCain was that he had too much experience. come on now.

Yea baby if you've got it, flaunt it.

http://nicedeb.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/wwp-photo2.jpg

Classy!

http://www.grizzlybay.org/PalinBear.jpg

I think he very much had his own death in mind when picking Palin. Unfortunately, I think he had also just watched Battlestar Galactica.

Yea baby if you've got it, flaunt it.

http://nicedeb.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/wwp-photo2.jpg

Classy!

http://www.grizzlybay.org/PalinBear.jpg



VROOM VROOM!!! and in all fairness that animal was a liberal, i simply put it out of it's misery.

Hey Sarah, have you ever plastered on your makeup like a trollop?

<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080829/pl_afp/usvotemccainobamavp">Obama campaign highlights Palin's 'zero' experience </a>

LOL

FB, you're kinda grasping at straws here, aren't you? McCain's main criticism of Obama, which seemed to be working, was that he was inexperienced. So then he picks a running mate who clearly could not be president (if he wins and dies, we're fucked, eh?). He took that criticism off the table. If the "experience" argument is gone, Obama benefits.

It is not as though Obama's #1 criticism of McCain was that he had too much experience. come on now.

Not really. Biden as VP hasnt taken criticizing washington politics off the table, has it? Thats if they try and criticize her experience. If they avoid it she's still meat for the base.

Hey Sarah, have you ever plastered on your makeup like a trollop?

yes but if anyone referred to me as a cunt i would release them into the vast Alaskan wild and hunt them down like an animal

Biden will effectively advise him on foreign policy and provide insight into Washington bureaucracy..

But but washington judgment got us into Iraq, why would Obama want or need to listen to that? He's made that pretty clear for some time now.

how many delegates does Alaska have?

edit: 60.

i can't tell if you're being facetious or stupid.


I am stupid, but I was in fact being facetious.


As I recall, the last time we elected a relatively inexperienced governor who had never traveled outside of this country, and who had a big oil connection, we got F*****.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: AlaskanBastard

Tell us what you think, bastard.

I was really surprised by this pick. I've probably had guys pump my gas who have more reason to be a VP than this lady. I've been to Wasilla, where she was a mayor, and I'd hardly call it a town, it's more like a village. I'm sure everyone in the Alaska is shitting themselves over this, one of there politicians makes the front page for something other than corruption.

At first I thought this was a good pick for McCain, but now that I think about it, it's horrible. He didn't just choose someone from a podunk state like Alaska, but one with no experience either. But I'll be interested in seeing how this pans out.

At least we could have the best looking VP ever:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7a/Sarah-Palin-Miss-Wasilla-1984.jpg/180px-Sarah-Palin-Miss-Wasilla-1984.jpg

"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.

<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080829/pl_afp/usvotemccainobamavp">Obama campaign highlights Palin's 'zero' experience </a>

LOL

I love Obama's tactics though - play the "i won't insult anyone" game by issuing statements and then have his campaign issue statements that attack his opponents. And the media eats it up.

I do find it hilarious that people from Illinois are attacking someone from Alaska for wanting to drill.... in Alaska and for not "protecting" the Alaskan Wilderness, even though it's something Alaskans overwhelmingly support.

my only argument of alaskan drilling and offshore drilling is: why do we need to drill when we arent pumping all of the wells we have already? why drill for something we already have access to but arent utilizing

my only argument of alaskan drilling and offshore drilling is: why do we need to drill when we arent pumping all of the wells we have already? why drill for something we already have access to but arent utilizing

because the oil in Alaska is eaiser and cheaper to bring to ground surface.

what incentive is there to drill more and fuck with the supply when oil companies are making the biggest profits in history right now.

I never said it was. One thing, as BLoser just pointed out, how is the Obama campaign going to attack her inexperience without opening up that attack on themselves. She's meat for the base, that's another. I just don't see how it hurts. As if VP picks arent politically motivated, of all the stupid things to say.

do i even need to point out that its a question of to what degree? theres no comparison here between biden and palin.

chosing palin was a brazen ploy to grab hillary voters (i guess they get your vote now, you fanatic) and to appease social conservative neanderthals. biden is, by any definition, a highly capable statesman and policy expert, someone who can actually contribute something meaningful to, uh, you know, everything that happens after the election is over.

because the oil in Alaska is eaiser and cheaper to bring to ground surface.

there are wells that have already been dug with pumps already installed, they just arent on.


my friends dad owns a drilling company and owns several wells in oklahoma and NW texas. he says the "shortage" is caused because assholes like him (he called himself an asshole) know they can make more with a higher cost and lower output

what incentive is there to drill more and fuck with the supply when oil companies are making the biggest profits in history right now.


exactly. People act like the oil drilled is gonna go straight to the public. Unless I'm missing something, Conoco Phillips will drill and sell to wherever they please. Drilling more oil isn't gonna solve a thing.

in any case, i lost $30 on this bitch. i bet on romney thinking mccain had some sense in him

ughhhh they keep showing pictures of her meeting with the troops like it gives her foreign policy/war cred.

in any case, i lost $30 on this bitch. i bet on romney thinking mccain had some sense in him

never bet on a mormon

lol, a Republican advisor just said her son being in Iraq gives her foreign policy a great start. Why?

This is going to be hilarious.

never bet on a mormon



theyre a wily lot, agreed

Yeah the democrats were so desperate to lock up that black vote that they didn't have locked up anyways.

No, but there were huge get out the vote in the primary campaigns for black voters. Plus I think a lot of the liberal elite felt good voting for a black man "ooh, look at how progressive I am!!!"

now only if he was queer...

whoever said she'll get trounced in a debate with biden is right. if biden handles it right he can practically suffocate her to within an inch of her life in his knowledge and competence.

and i REALLY hope her creationist views become a campaign issue. i hope her views get publicized to the point that people are forced to seriously consider whether or not they trust the judgment of a person who probably believes the earth is 6000 years old. normally people have the luxury of ignoring/downplaying this stuff. overall, this is a great opportunity to drag these beliefs through the mud and further discredit them.

good thing he didnt pick condoleezza, though, that wouldve instantly doubled the vulgarity of this choice -- black AND woman!

do i even need to point out that its a question of to what degree? theres no comparison here between biden and palin.



I agree. But Biden isnt the nominee.


(i guess they get your vote now, you fanatic).

Dont look at me, Im voting Nader.

whoever said she'll get trounced in a debate with biden is right. if biden handles it right he can practically suffocate her to within an inch of her life in his knowledge and competance.

Ain't gonna happen. If anything, the one advantage to having a woman go up against Biden in the debate is that when (not if) he starts to pull some of the smarmy bullying bullshit he's shown so often on the Judiciary committee, he'll look all the worse for it. Biden is Biden's worst enemy, and I don't think any amount of *cough*plagiarized*cough* knowledge is gonna help him with that.

and i REALLY hope her creationist views become a campaign issue. i hope her views get publicized to the point that people are forced to seriously consider whether or not they trust the judgment of a person who probably believes the earth is 6000 years old. normally people have the luxury of downplaying this stuff. overall, this is a great opportunity to drag these beliefs through the mud and further discredit them.

Are you joking? The GOP would LOVE for this election to turn into a referendum on Christianity and creationism. I couldn't think of a bigger gift for the GOP than for the Dems to fire a few shots across the bow of Christianity. The religious right don't have much of a dog in this fight right now. They don't have much reason to go to much effort to support McCain right now...but you can guarantee they'll turn out like gangbusters if the question of religion becomes an issue in the campaign. The Dems do NOT want to go there.

whoever said she'll get trounced in a debate with biden is right. if biden handles it right he can practically suffocate her to within an inch of her life in his knowledge and competence.

and i REALLY hope her creationist views become a campaign issue. i hope her views get publicized to the point that people are forced to seriously consider whether or not they trust the judgment of a person who probably believes the earth is 6000 years old. normally people have the luxury of ignoring/downplaying this stuff. overall, this is a great opportunity to drag these beliefs through the mud and further discredit them.

I'm drooling at this possibility

sleeper thinks if Obama pisses on a crucifix that this will somehow accelerate Obama's chances

how can this broad believe in Creationism, Alaska is one of the best places in the world to see the earth and evolution in action.

Well to any sane person with an IQ over 65 Creationism is pretty foolish.

I know nothing about politics but I guarantee that I could govern Alaska

ok I'm done here

I know nothing about politics but I guarantee that I could govern Alaska

post/av

Ain't gonna happen. If anything, the one advantage to having a woman go up against Biden in the debate is that when (not if) he starts to pull some of the smarmy bullying bullshit he's shown so often on the Judiciary committee, he'll look all the worse for it. Biden is Biden's worst enemy, and I don't think any amount of *cough*plagiarized*cough* knowledge is gonna help him with that.

pffff



Are you joking? The GOP would LOVE for this election to turn into a referendum on Christianity and creationism. I couldn't think of a bigger gift for the GOP than for the Dems to fire a few shots across the bow of Christianity. The religious right don't have much of a dog in this fight right now. They don't have much reason to go to much effort to support McCain right now...but you can guarantee they'll turn out like gangbusters if the question of religion becomes an issue in the campaign. The Dems do NOT want to go there.

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.

maybe im too optimisitic though. you should be crediting me for having so charitable a view of the voting public, though. in canada, there was a creationist candidate (stockwell day) for a major national party and he was ridiculed and lampooned into early retirement.

ill also say that im starting to realize that this supposed lock the christian right has on elections in the US is a myth. conventional wisdom says that being anything but grovelling to religious mania is political suicide but i dont really see it anymore. i think the christian right took hold of the republican party with reagan and its been overstaying its welcome ever since, a flash of hysteria with bush notwithstanding. i see their trajectory as towards the door, mainly because theyre a client that is impossible to satisfy. nobody can afford to be on their payroll anymore.

sleeper, you do realize that most people who believe in a creator don't subscribe to the 6,000 year theories, right?

this wasnt about "people who believe in a creator," this was about "creationists." creationists believe in a creator, but they also believe the account of creation in the bible.

besides, the belief that the earth is 6000 years old is just a sample creationist belief, many others would do for what im saying

a candidate believes the earth is 6000 years old (if she in fact does, im just assuming based on her creationism)


http://scienceblogs.com/afarensis/2006/10/27/intelligent_design_and_the_ala/

The volatile issue of teaching creation science in public schools popped up in the Alaska governor's race this week when Republican Sarah Palin said she thinks creationism should be taught alongside evolution in the state's public classrooms.

Palin was answering a question from the moderator near the conclusion of Wednesday night's televised debate on KAKM Channel 7 when she said, 'Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both.'


The Anchorage Daily News has more:

In an interview Thursday, Palin said she meant only to say that discussion of alternative views should be allowed to arise in Alaska classrooms:
"I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."

She added that, if elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add such creation-based alternatives to the state's required curriculum.

Members of the state school board, which sets minimum requirements, are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Legislature.

"I won't have religion as a litmus test, or anybody's personal opinion on evolution or creationism," Palin said.


*snip*

Palin said she thought there was value in discussing alternatives.

"It's OK to let kids know that there are theories out there," she said in the interview. "They gain information just by being in a discussion."

That was how she was brought up, she said. Her father was a public school science teacher.

"My dad did talk a lot about his theories of evolution," she said. "He would show us fossils and say, 'How old do you think these are?' "

Asked for her personal views on evolution, Palin said, "I believe we have a creator."

She would not say whether her belief also allowed her to accept the theory of evolution as fact.

"I'm not going to pretend I know how all this came to be," she said.

----


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