<embed FlashVars='videoId=183521' src='http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/video_player/view/default/swf.jhtml' quality='high' bgcolor='#cccccc' width='332' height='316' name='comedy_central_player' align='middle' allowScriptAccess='always' allownetworking='external' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' pluginspage='http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer'></embed>
I knew who she was months ago. Fred Barnes was throwing her name out back in May so I did some research. Just like I read up on Obama to find out more about him since "hope" and "change" are meaningless words that give no indication on how someone will lead this country. And after what I read about her, I've been hoping McCain would select Palin all along(provided Obama passed over Hillary as everyone expected). That's why I was so excited when she turned out to be the VP pick, because I knew she was a great choice and could clinch the election for the GOP. The over-the-top reaction by the Dems, media, and Obama supporters only reaffirms this belief. They're not scared about Palin ascending to the Presidency should something happen to McCain. They're scared because they know Obama f'ed up bigtime when he went with Biden.
I would like to know what countries you think those are? From the reception that he got overseas, I would say more countries prefer him to be President that Bush or McCain. Heck, even Georgia who was mislead by McCain now would prefer Obama. I do think that stopping nuclear poliferation is a part of foreign policy, maybe you don't. Horrific instints? Do you mean that instincts that said not to INVADE Iraq because there were no WMD's there, they did not attack us on 911, and that this would divert us from the real war on terror with Al Qaida in Afganistan/Pakistan? Let's not lie to make insane points. He never said he would invade Pakistan unilaterally. What he said was that if they had credible evidence of where Bin Ladin was, and Pakistan wouldn't act although he was in Pakistan, that he would give the go ahead to still take Bin Laden out. That may be trouncing upon Pakistan's sovereignty a bit, but it is not equal to unilaterally invading the country. Would you quote your source for him saying that he would shut down trade completely with China? Or is that another of your lies to mislead the gullible? If you call renegotiating NAFTA so that Americans stop losing jobs and get a fair trade agreement instead of one that benefits those in high places that made them while the middle class suffers, then I guess you would be right then. But even that you still misquoted...renegotiating is NOT cancelling. I doubt that you could go on and on without citing more lies. You have not said one truth yet. Just distortions and rhetoric that is typical of people with failed policies for America. Connections with Indonesia? Are you a racist or Islamaphob? You mean that he went to school there as a KID while his mother lived there? And when did Indonesia become an international threat to national security? You mean principles like you are exhibiting here of lying and distorting the truth? Or do you mean your old fear tactics politics that you hope will work once more? Not enough people are falling for that shet anymore dude. Really? Sources please. Of course Bush and McCain have really supported our troops huh? How about old Bushy sending them to Iraq without proper armour while the militias had all the best equipment? Remember that support? Remember their families sending them help for armour? How about McCain's insistence that he supports the troops but voted against the veteran bill to give them more benefits or college tuition because he said it would encourage them to leave the army sooner. Now that's the kind of support Im sure every soldier in Iraq loves. Maybe that why more than four times of them have sent money to support Obama than have McCain. Go figure. Let me guess, you must have a picture of him in bed with Farrakan and are not gonna tell us that Obama is anti-Jewish and gay right? It's funny how more Jewish voters are supporting Obama than McCain in all the polls. Why is it that Jewish voters don't agree with you? NO, what is scary are people that think like you my friend. Truth has no place in warped minds like yours. You just live in neverever land. But this is America...the land of the free and home of the brave...so enjoy your wonderland.
I don't doubt that some people like you exist that researched her before and knows who she is, but you don't really expect me to believe that the majority of people who are supporting this pick did as you did do you? I don't think anyone is scared of the Palin pick because of Obama not picking Hillary, I think they are elated and deciding their best form of attack to not come off as sexiest, but consider it a much easier job now. She will now be FULLY VETTED.
Ha! So when the GOP went nuts about Biden (he should have picked Hillary! that's not change! etc), it was perfectly rational. But when the Dems went nuts about Palin, it's fear. Good, sound analysis there. Either you're just repeating GOP talking points or you really need to learn politics 101.
This is the height of stupidity. Surrounding oneself with smart people is an admission of weakness? I've heard it all now. The country would be so much better off if our current catastrophic disaster of a president had listened to smart people. Even for you TJ, this post was more idiotic than normal. Beyond satire. You are 100% troll.
Governing a state with the population of the Galleria for a year and a half doesn't do much to prepare you for the US Presidency.
You are spinning my answer. How's this for you: give a detailed world history and current world affairs test to McCain and Obama -- who wins? I would bet on Obama. My point about advisors is he likes data, and he'll continue to get lots of it, to study whatever he may not already know. I note of course that you ignored my list of his already strikingly prescient positions on foreign affairs that distinguish him from both the current administration (until they adopted his position on timetables) and McCain. Obama has shown a mind better prepared for the nuanced shades of gray that necessarily appear in foreign affairs. We have witness the no-nuance, "with us or against us" policies, the impulsive white hats / black hats fantasy world of the cowboy, and it has failed miserably. I want someone to draw a distinction for me between "f* Saddam. We're taking him out" (GWB, responding to worries from Condi Rice and others about an invasion) & "F* it. Let's roll the dice and make this woman I don't know my 2nd in command." (the apparent bottom line for your would-be president.) edit: Major, I agree and will try to stick to that. However, his softball questions and spin, in this case, provided a platform for me making more detailed points about my views on foreign policy, and my concerns with McCain.
Clinton was the Attorney General of Arkansas as well as Governor for 10 years. He was a Rhodes Scholar and a Yale grad. Palin was mayor of a town of 9,000 people and Governor of Alaska for a year and a half. She has a journalism degree from the University of Idaho. There's really no comparison.
First of all, McCain wins. Obama didn't know how to even pronounce South Ossetia when that conflict arose -- go back and review the tapes. Second, are you so naive as to believe foreign policy expertise is measured by a freaking test? That's absurd. It's about one's ability to manage conflict, to negotiate, to understand people, to marshal resources, to generate consensus, and to motivate others. You've condensed that all down to a pen and paper test? How utterly naive and ignorant. Typical Obama supporter...
I couldn't resist: Ability to manage conflict: See defeating one of the most powerful families in history called the Clintons. To negotiate: See getting your defeated opponent to support you more than any other previously defeated opponent in history, even though you had one of the toughest battles. To understand people: See the largest loyal following of campaign volunteers in US history. To martial resources: See how Obama raised the largest amount of money in US campaign history and managed to defeat the toughest opponent in history and to do it all with a surplus in the budget left over. To generate consesus: See last weeks Democratic convention. To motivate others: see 85,000 at Mile High Stadium and 38,000,000 viewers watching the message of change and hope on tv this past Thursday. Of course you don't count any of this executive experience. It's all just about being a celebrity right? I could give you other things, but I wanted to give you simple things to help you understand better.
Interesting early numbers from Rasmussen: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/women-more-skeptical-of-palin-than-men.html Men like the pick much more than women - +12 for Men on whether it was the right pick, +3 for women. More/Less Likely to vote for McCain is +6 for men, -1 for women. Ready to be President is -6 for men, -23 for women. Favorable is +35 for men, +18 for women. On a separate note, both tracking polls held steady yesterday, meaning that the Obama speech effect was cancelled out by the Palin pick - probably as good a result as McCain could ask for.
You are missing the whole point..You do understand that your canidate is 73 and has had mutiple skind cancers right?That's not putting your country first that's called putting your country in danger.
This is probably a stupid question, since it appears most of you are on the left, but why do I continue to see posts putting down Fox News and not the same for MSNBC. Fox may have more conservative hosts than any of the other news station, but MSNBC is moved completely to the one side. Saw a news clip today, where it showed MSNBC's coverage of the Palin selection and had the headline during her introduction: "Breaking News: How many houses does Palin add to the Republican tally/ticket?" Now I have never seen stations like CNN, Fox News, and others do something as blatantly political as that under a major tag line, like Breaking News......because that should be followed by news, not ideology. So it should be stations like MSNBC and NBC people hear should be discrediting, but I assume it will be defended by someone.
He just turned 72 actually, but yes I do concede that point. Of course his age is a concern. Do I think he'll become incapacitated or die of natural causes in his first term? I doubt it(all bets are off in a 2nd term however). But obviously voters have every right to weigh that in their decision without being labeled as discriminatory or ageist. I think this experience argument against Palin is absurd however. Is she qualified to be President at this moment? No. But neither is Obama. And he has to run the show starting January 20, 2009. Unless McCain keels over and croaks in the first few months, Palin will have time to learn "on the job" as Obama's own running mate put it. And there are more reasons than just Palin's gender that will make this race tougher for Obama. She brings two issues to the forefront that he wants nothing to do with: abortion and energy. First, she's an expert on the energy crisis and will be a huge asset for McCain in that regard. It's a winning issue for the GOP and will bring more attention to Pelosi and Reid's complete failure to deal with it in Congress. As for abortion, Obama's record on it is a problem. Yes he's pro-choice which is good with Democrat voters. But his opposition to Illinois' version of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act which passed in the Senate 98-0 is something he doesn't want to discuss. Couple that with his "above my pay grade" answer at Saddleback and Pelosi's pathetic display last week on Meet the Press and it could cost him big time with independents, especially Catholics.
