McCain Picks Sarah Palin as VP; Alaska Guv Has No Apparent Track Record with Video Game Issues
McCain Picks Sarah Palin as VP; Alaska Guv Has No Apparent Track Record with Video Game Issues
August 29, 2008
CNN is now reporting that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will be John McCain's running mate.
Palin, 44, who has been governor for only two years, appears to have little track record with video games - or much of anything else.
She was a city council person in Wasilla, Alaska from 1992-1996 and was later mayor of that town. She failed in an attempt to become Alaska's Lt. Gov. in 2002, and won the top seat in 2006.
Palin has two sons and three daughters. Her oldest son, age 18, is scheduled to be deployed to Iraq later this yer.
Comments
McCain probably just won. All Hilary supporters will definitely vote MCCain now.
My thoughts exactly. All the die hard feminist Hillary supporters are now McCain supporters. Well, actually Palin supporters hoping that McCain will die in office.
E. Zachary Knight
http://www.editorialgames.com
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
Which isn't too unlikely if he uses his new power to grab a chopper and go take on vietnam singlehandedly for round two.
True, but he'll also lose old balding white mysogonistic men.
Hillary musta shot someone when she heard about this.
agreed...
This is nothing but pandering to STUPID women -- don't confuse stupid women with feminists -- there is a huge difference.
Real feminists realize that a vote for McCain is a vote against their best interests -- he's against equal wages, hes against abortion rights... Hell, the story of his first wife shows how little he values women.
Stupid people might be swayed because this lady has a Vagina, but true feminists see it for what it is: pandering at it's worst.
I agree whole heartedly with the statement above.
As a male I can say wholeheartedly that feminism is awesome. Because of feminism, more emphasis is being placed on performance instead of gender/unrelated issues, which helps male workers as well. Equal rights has also been pushed to protect not only women, but men from sexual harrassment and false accusations as well. Furthermore, recent sexual psychological studies show that men who are married to feminists are happier, on average, with their marriage AND their sex life due to confidence and communication about likes, dislikes, and explicit instructions coming from both parties involved (if you doubt the power of communication, please try it out in the bedroom and be amazed)
Feminists, on average, are at least average to slightly above average intelligence. They really won't fall for this bs. You will find plenty of sheep that will follow the women vote, but there will hardly be enough to overcome America's disgust with the Republican Party.
All that being said, McCain should have picked JINDAL as a vp candidate. He'd have made an awesome running mate and IF they got the job, would probably be an awesome vp overall.
Also, I know this is kind of a nonissue, but for the sake of fairness do you think you could have picked a slightly more "flattering" photo of the vp candidate? Granted Republicans aren't exaclty popular around here, and i'm not voting elephant, but still.
"Because of feminism, more emphasis is being placed on performance instead of gender/unrelated issues"
Bullshit. Because of Feminism, more emphasis is being placed on hiring more women than hiring more qualified people.
Some more bullshit: 'recent sexual psychological studies show that men who are married to feminists are happier'. Now, I know that feminists try to claim that every woman who works outside the household is a feminist, but this is complete bullshit. Just because a woman works outside the household doesn't make them a feminist. Another interesting thing to note is that due to the tendency of people to lie about things (ESPECIALLY THEIR SEX LIVES) any such study conducted would be worthless.
Feminists, on average, are not a very intelligent group. They demand equality, but want special consideration (hint: when a woman can claim she was abused and, without any investigation, the man can be hauled off to jail, there's no equality). They demand special treatment and things that other groups don't get, but then they say that they only want to be treated equally.
Feminist also don't try to fix the following injustices:
Women get preferential treatment in child custody cases, despite available income and, in most cases, confirmed drug addiction (as long as she is seeking treatment for said addiction)
A woman can punch or slap a man for trivial reasons and no jail time results, reverse the tables and it's off to the clink. Why not force these assailaints to do their times, feminists?
They frequently argue about a pay-wage gap on a national standing, but refuse to acknowledge the amount of men that work higher paying jobs in construction and the like on the road away from their family result in a padding of the national average for men's wages and most women, while certainly able to perform this role, simply do not.
And the kicker:
Men are required to register for selective service for the U.S. military. Women are not allowed to. NOT ALLOWED! You ladies CANNOT register for selective service, the government won't let you. This is blatant sexual discrimination, but they remain absolutely silent on the issue often with the argument "I don't think anyone should have to register for selective service" which confirms many people's belief that feminists are just pushy people looking for a hand-out because they have two X chromosones.
Normal, decent, hard-working ladies. I love y'all to death. You do all you can to make the world a better place and get your respect from me and everyone else through sheer perserverance and by being a good example of human being. I love you ladies.
Feminists need to lose the ego and realize life sucks for everyone and if they want to fight for equal rights (like they don't exist in the US already, DUR HUR) need to load up and take a trip to Africa and the Middle East where such attention is actually needed and warranted.
Please, before you open your mouth do some actual research. There are countless studies that, once again, disprove your rhetoric. Believe it or not, there ARE people who willingly and openly talk about their sex lives. In fact, a good number of studies actually examine the participants WHILE they are having sex. It's called control settings, but you wouldn't know anything about that now would you?
By the way, when did I say that every woman who works outside the house is a feminist? Jesus H Christ. Go take a few psychology courses, or better yet, read a book written by a well renouned sexual psychologist before... bah what's the point. Some people are just happy living in ignorance.
I've never seen so many people scared of actual psychology. There IS a difference between crackpot studies and actual legitimate research. If you guys took a slight moment to learn the difference then you'd be better equiped to actually defend yourselves against the former.
Indeed, there is a difference between crackpot studies and legitimate research, and having been involved in the second for upwards of 20 years, I can tell you your mentioned studies reek of crackpot bullshit.
Oh, by the by, I never suggested you said women who work outside the house are feminists; that is the view of the feminist movement. I've actually probably taken far mor psychology courses than you ever will, so I would suggest if you can't discern between a good study and bullshit that you sit down and shut up while the big people talk.
You can say all you want, but by dismissing an entire area of psychology simply because you don't believe there are people secure enough in their sexuality to honestly comment proves something... There's no point in arguing with extreme ignorance as this website proves.
Furthermore, if you really were a member of a legitimate research team then you'd know about self correcting items such as those presented by the MMPI, and that correlations that are seemingly unrelated in any kind of study (to correct for such "lying") are just as important as the face validity of the study.
Also, bs studies tend to use an obscenely large sample size to correct for a neglicably small effect size to make a statistically significant result. Every study that i've mentioned on this website used an appropriate sample size for the relative importance of the study with substance effect size. Their hypothesis' did not hint at bias, nor did they scue the results, as most of them are pretty direct and self explanatory.
If you want more proof that I'm not pulling stuff out of my arse then do some RECENT research on social/romantic psychology as a science, more specifically work by Rowland Miller. If you want proof that people can answer willingly then there's a name you can start looking for.
Wow, lotta bile in that. You forget that politics IS pandering.
Yes, it is pandering, but in equal measure it's also historic. Mr. Obama had all the chances in the world to have a smart experienced woman vice president (heck he didn't even have to pick Hillary for this), he instead went with a very questionable "party-safe" choice that hopefully wouldn't steal his thunder. A very bad choice in this regard. Self-determining women saw a shot at a woman in the vice-presidency and watched the canidate of change pick the norm.
This gave McCain the chance to play rope-a-dope with Mr. Obama's team and tack on an attractive conservative lady governor. The fact that he was more than willing to do this is a good sign for women in America...they've graduated to being just as useful and (more importantly) safe a political tool as your average joe blow. Amazing ain't it? Progress can be flattering in cruel and unusual ways.
Personally I have no doubt she'll take the Vice-Presidency seriously, grow in experience by learning from McCain and be there if McCain dies in office.
I also have no doubt a good many self-determining women will indeed vote for a McCain/Palin ticket. Some because of Sarah Palin, others because they are indeed self-determining women.
Now...what the heck does she think about video games?
So Obama is pandering because he didn't take a woman? Yes. That makes total sense. And a doubt many women will vote for a pro choice candidate.
Apparently you haven't been into Hillary Clinton support forums. They are going nuts about McCain pick. Clinton supporters were volunteering for McCain phone bank before the announcement were made.
Now lets not be too hasty. We don't know anything about Palin. Personally, as long as she (or McCain for that matter) doesn't go trying to outlaw video games, they've got my vote. It could have been worse (Romney or Liberman came awfully close to winning the VP race). Even Obama's been putting in his two cents against games.
I can't say agree with feminism, especially how Clinton has been using "Women's Rights" for her own personally gain. While I know many feminist try to fight for equality, there's been too many who have been using that power to take away men's rights. They see men as an evil that must be abolished, and women are completely incapable of anything criminal.
I'm also against abortion, and McCain came close to picking a pro "Choice" running mate. I'm especially glad Palin doesn't see this as a Women's rights issue. A child's fate is in the hands of BOTH the parents, not just the mother.
Palin seems like a woman I would like to see as President.
Republicans tend to look at the bottom dollar of things and with the billions upon billions of taxable dollars that video games pour into the economy each year, they would be pretty stupid to try something as drastic as outlawing video games.
Besides, it is usually the Democratic party that introduces new forms of labeling and censorship for media.
"All the die hard feminist Hillary supporters are now McCain supporters."
I sincerely hope there's not enough of them to give McCain the win. As I've said before, if McCain should win because of Hillary supporters I will blame her for sowing the seeds of hatred and division during her contest against Obama.
Because she is pro-choice and supports other women's issues and has the same experience as her?
IDK, this is what they are thinking, and the PUMA retards who think with their vaginas will probably fall for this, but she is WAY less qualified than Clinton.
Right, because Hillary Clinton supporters will flock in droves to a socially conservative, anti-abortion candidate just because she's a woman. Dream on.
Last weekend's Gallup poll (granted, before the Palin announcement, but also before the Democratic convention) showed only 16% of self-identified Hillary supporters planning to vote for McCain. Hillary's big speech this week probably helped more than a few of her fans make their peace with Obama.
I can't fault McCain too much for the choice, though; it's an interesting one. It kind of undercuts all of his campaign's rhetoric about Obama lacking experience, but then that tactic wasn't working too well for them anyway. Kind of a shame that female VPs only get dragged out as a Hail Mary tactic for troubled campaigns, though. (Remember Geraldine Ferraro?)
Oh, and I shouldn't fail to mention that like any good Republican, she's anti-gay and supports teaching creationism in public schools. That should go over really well with Clinton supporters.
not at all true. There are , far ,far less ''diehard Hillary supporters'' than the media would have you think there were. I I was in denver , and the amount of people there waving ''hillary for president'' signs would have fit in a very small room. The media blow up there numbers because it makes for a good story. Not that this makes this blatant pander from Mr. ''Straight talk express'' any less disgusting.
I was going to say more, but... this article is why I hate GP.
The stupid ones were already threatening to vote for McCain in order to cut of their noses to spite their faces, but yeah that's what he's aiming at with this move. Somehow I don't think all of them are going to be very impressed by it.
Incorret. Partly.
I would not say all the Hilary supporters will vote for McCain now. You have to remember some people really wanted her. Some women really wanted a democratic woman. Those women really are democrats and while upset will not vote for McCain based on a female vp that is republican.
Now, you are right that the women voting solely on gender will switch, but do not assume all women (or people in general) are that stupid (to vote based on gender and not views). I mean, with Hilary and Obama it was based on gender to some of them because other than that, Obama and Hilary are VERY similar in views (except video games, so far at least).
right--because what woman would think for herself? much easier to just follow whatever vagina is put in front of us and make our decisions that way--come on!!!
As much as I hate to admit that so many people will vote for someone just because they lack a Y chromosome, I think you're right Anon. I know nothing about either VPs, but with the big deal McCain's been making about Obama not being old enough for the White House, this is a odd choise. I know that The VP has very little actuall power, but this, to my cynical nature, smacks of a ploy to get votes.
If you cannot best a man in argument, all is not lost. You can still call him vile names.
Though in this case it could very well work against McCain.
One of the challenges female canidates tend to have is that women are reluctant to vote for other women, esp when you get into socially concervative groups.
I can recall years ago getting to chat with someone involved in jury selection for a rape trial.. one of the things they commented was that for such trials, the absolute worse people to have on the jury (from the victim's perspective) were other women...... same tends to be true in politics. While female canidates need a good solid grass roots support from women, it is generally males voting for them (I would be curious to see a modern breakdown though) with females generally voting among male canidates.
Smart move to grab the agry Hilary people while still staying conservative.
First, people vote the top of the ticket. Second, if you are a pro-choice woman, you won't be voting for a pro-life woman VP candidate.
Furthermore, this undercuts McCain's argument that Obama isn't "experienced" enough to lead when he picks someone younger and even more inexperienced to be a heartbeat away from the presidency (considering also that McCain just turned 72 years old). Mostly, I want to see how she handles herself in a debate with Joe Biden as well.
Honestly, if you're cynical enough to say that women will just vote for the ticket with a woman on it, then you're also cynical enough to say Obama will lose because he's black (which if he loses, I still won't believe that as the top reason). You'll also be willing to say that every female in this country automatically voted for Mondale-Ferraro in 1984...which didn't happen.
Honestly, I think Romney would have been the better choice. Someone conservatives were comfortable with and someone that has enough noteworthy accomplishments to give him an edge as the next commander-in-chief.
She has more experience in running large organizations than Obama does.
Dark is right again, though I do enjoy the little partisan digs GP chips in here and there helps to let you know where he stands.
"What exactly is it a V.P. does every day?" - Sarah Palin. July 31, 2009 on CNBC.
Did her four years as a council member or two terms as mayor of a "large" organization (pop. est. 8,471) in Wasilla bring her such insight? Maybe her one term as governor?
The experience issue is not MY argument. It's from the McCain campaign. For the record, Obama's "inexperience" encompasses representing the South Side of Chicago for seven years in the Illinois state legislature which in itself has a larger and more diverse population than Wasilla. It encompasses working in Washington with a deeply divided legislature for the past four years. But again, experience is not the issue for Democrats, it's the issue for John McCain, and he just showed how disingenuous that stance was when he decided to "wow" his party.
"It encompasses working in Washington with a deeply divided legislature for the past four years"
lol try again, I'll wait also your news from the future is indeed most disconcerting :)
or rather
I'll take a two year executive as VP than a one year senator with no executive exp. with an insider VP. It is a funny situation to be sure and one that will have the dems flumexed for some time, regardless you can look at the issues and even then Obama/Biden do not stack up.
"one year senator"
Thats not right at all, Obama was elected in 2005, my mistake however his total working days in the senate is very low.
Again, experience is not my argument. It's McCain's argument. If experience is an issue for the Republicans, a one-term governor should be just as disconcerting as a one-term senator when that phone rings at "3 a.m."
I imagine though that Obama is familiar as to the duties of the President and Biden is familiar with the simple and the traditional duties of the Vice President. I hope she brushes up on her textbooks between now and the first debate.
A one year Governor has more experience at running the country then a 32 years old senator. Senators pass laws they don''t run the country.
Obama is 47 years old, as you can't even run for President until you are 35 anyway. A little civics lesson there.
Jack Cafferty had a nice point. Alaska has a population of about 670,000, roughly the size of Austin, TX. Wasilla is a town of 8,000 or so. So, she governed a largely homogenous state of few people where Republicans outnumber Democrats 3 to 1. How is this just like running the United States of America?
How much does she know about inner-city poverty, drug abuse issues, local homeland security and emergency services that cities like NY and Chicago and LA have to deal with, the loss of industrial jobs in the upper Midwest, etc.?
I love the hypocricy coming from those who are already McCain supporters. How does John McCain continue to say that Barack Obama is not ready to lead, but Sarah Palin, a 2 year governor of one of least populous states in the Union, is perfectly acceptable as insurance for a 72 year old man with a history of dealing with cancer.
Well i wouldn't really say that... the president needs to work on both a national and international level and thus must be able to consider and understand a world wide demographic. A senator, while they may not work an executive role do work on a national and international level... the laws they pass don't just account for their state but for the entire country and thus they need to understand a nation wide demographic; they also have to look over resolutions concerning dealings with other countries. They also have a lot of influence and are able to work overseas, travel the country and so forth all of which helps the building experience about the people and what the country needs; this varies from senator to senator. A governor may be an executive role but it covers a very small demographic, especially in the case of alaska which has a very small population and they don't have much time to work outside their own states like senators...
So when it comes to Palin, we know that she knows alaska damn well but what about the rest of the country? does she have any understanding of the various conditions states are in? Does she know what the desires, needs, struggles of the west coast, the east coast or way down south? Does she understand people who are from a demographic outside of her state? Does she know anything about our allies or our enemies in other countries? can we trust her to be able to deal with our enemies and allies if she were to become president? This is something she's gonna have to prove in the coming weeks
Overall, while being a governor and mayor gives you executive experience, being a senator puts you in a better position to understand how the entire country and the rest of the world works... having executive experience is meaningless if you have no idea how the rest of the country and world works; ya only need to look at george bush for that
... so far, her executive experience hasn't been enough to tell her what a vice president does from day to day (especially funny since a little google searching will get you most any answer you want now-a-days)
all of these comments assume that Obama does know what he is talking about on major issues, but he is wrong so much, he never talks about nuclear energy, wants to be rid of oil in ten years, raise the capital gains tax, and increase governemtn in business frankly his lack of experience is just the icing on the cake. The idea that he knows how the world works as a 1 term senator is insane, ya only need to look at his global poverty act for that.
Alot of people actually do back up the stances that Obama takes; not everyone is supporting him just because he's got charisma... Nuclear energy for one, i think his primary concern has been what to do with the waste. McCain is a big supporter of nuclear power but i don't think i've ever heard him give an answer to how he'll deal with the waste. And we do need to break our dependence on oil, not just the foreign stuff... I think mccain is trying to make energy his chief issue with Palin (even though we KNOW the real reason he picked her), but her answer to energy problems is to keep on drilling; that's the kind of mentality that got us into this mess in the first place. Mccain is probably gonna take a lot of heat from environmental groups; Palin seems to have a record of pursuing oil at the expense of the evironment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yucca_Mountain
Its wiki I know, but you'll get the idea
Drilling is part of the solution no matter how you slice it, of course more needs to be done and thank god for the most productive private sector in the world, but when Obama dismiss drilling and nuclear off-hand then you can see where problems arise. Keeping with energy, Obama wants to redistribute oil industry wealth (see socialism) ideas like this are simply anti-growth and frankly childish.
Also Obama still has not answered for his stances on infanticide or his relationship with Bill Ayers and all that stuff matters for the posistion of President of the United States of America. I really hope Obama gets some tough questions thrown his way because frankly he has a lot to answer for and the american people deserve that inforamtion.
As for Palin, which is the real issue, she does have executive experience, down play it all you want, and is a fine choice as VP, Obama himself would have made a good VP choice given his lack of experience, A Bill Richardson Obama ticket would have won handedly. Instead the Deomcarts picked a green, wet behind the ears leftist. Let the chips fall where they may.
Thank God you were all over YUCCA MOUNTAIN.
I'm sick and tired of people bitching about Nuclear Energy, and then complaining coal is too dirty and whatnot. The truth is, Nuclear Reactors are amazing. They work great, they work a lot cleaner than coal, and they're extremely safe.
For anyone who wants more insight into a nuclear reactor, go to youtube and type in Penn Teller Bullshit Nuclear. Find the video that's nine minutes long posted by Jal337 or something like that, and watch the whole three parts.
how can you say someone would may make a fine choice for VP but not a good choice for President. Considering the VP must be someone ready to serve at a moments notice the VP should be someone who themselves is ready to be president. Despite how unlikely it is the president dying while in office is a very real possibility; the VP is someone we need to be able to trust with running the country should it be needed otherwise we are rather screwed. McCain choose to pick a VP who will do nothing while in office, nothing but a mere trophy to bring him voters while Obama choose someone who would not only be active as a VP but has enough experience to serve should it come to that. not to mention it sounds like mccain was seriously considering others and changed his mind is just a few days; only thing more impulsive than his choice for VP was Palin's decision to except after only a month ago saying she had no idea what the day to day duties are. Considering what Clinton would have brought to the democratic ticket it's easy to see that Obama chose his VP on actual merits while McCain's is completely political.
First off do not kid yourself both choices were political, Obama pick of Biden is a clear omission of his lack of experience and knack for political calculation ie not a new type of politician at all, no change, yes we can? No.
It is amazing that peopel are worried about Palin as VP when Obama is less qualified and is running for president. Also look at who is third in line for the presidency and it makes Palin look better and better
That's because you're a truly ignorant and stupid human being.
She's a mayor from the far north. FROM THE FAR NORTH.
Have you ever BEEN to the far north? Do you have any idea what it's like up here?
Unless the United States of America is suddenly overrun by drunk natives, there is nothing in her executive experience which will help her in her post.
She got the job because she showed up, and nobody else applied. That's the way it is up here. She kept the job pretty much because no matter how badly she screws up, no matter how little she does, or how stupid the things she does are, nobody else wants to deal with that job, because the only other people are either industrial workers who won't take a massive pay cut to run some outpost in the boondocks, or lazy welfare bums who wouldn't get off their ass if their homes were on fire.
Considering their is actually a soundbite of her saying that not to long ago ago it sounds like the dems have the makings for their very first attack ad... Her inexperience is bad enough, but then you have to throw in that not to long ago she didn't even know one the second highest job in the country does; that's gonna sting, it really does scream that she is just a trophy VP to please former hillary supporters... atleast Biden could counter his quote from one year ago with "Obama proved me wrong"
A senator so out of touch he can't use acomputer and forgets haw many houses he has? A small town mayor with less esperience then the man the republicans themselves are accusing of being inexpirenced? I want to trust these people with the country! I can really identify with them!
Seriously ,this is a blatant attempt to pander to women and young people to offset McCain's pro-life stance, and ''computer illiteracy".
That is why I put the feminist part into my comment. Only die hard feminists will vote for someone because she is a woman. Die hard Democrats will vote for Obama, even if they originally supported Hillary.
E. Zachary Knight
http://www.editorialgames.com
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
Actually, my mother was considering voting for Hillary solely because she was a woman. She doesn't pay attention to the canditates, just votes for the one she thinks looks cool, and she thought that maybe having a woman president would be good.
Her ignorance must be bliss *sigh*
Oh, and my mom is almost the farthest one could get from feminist.
No, die hard feminist will vote against someone because they are a women (as they want the first female president to be a good one), stupid people are the ones who will vote for her because of her gender
Bullshit. Feminists will not vote for a anti choice candidate. Reproductive rights are a cornerstone of the feminist movement, and no femminist will vote for someone that will take them away. A few hillary diehards might change sides, but there are not many at all that thick. Especially after last night's great speeches by Obama and Clinton.
One interesting thing to note:
No matter who McCain would pick for VP, the conservatives would have still voted for him. He could have picked Hiliary and the conservatives would have voted for him, because in a Conservatives mind, McCain/X is better than Obama. He could declare himself a moderate, become Pro-Choice, and encourage a socialist government, and Conservatives would STILL vote for him, strictly because they are convinced Obama is the devil.
The point Im trying to make is that no matter what he does, his election is going to rely on the moderate, independant vote, more than anything else, and this VP pick was strictly to pick up independants and disillusioned Clinton Supporters.
I do have to admit, even being an Obama supporter, myself, it was a very smart move in the McCain Camp.
"40% of americans that vote will vote Democrat no matter what. Another 40% will vote Republican for the same reasons. The reason is because mommy or daddy, or their high school teacher did. Elections really only hinder on the 20% that are undecided."
-Tom Clancy, Executive Orders (Slight Paraphrasing)
I'm part of that 20%, and I'm not liking either candidates at this point in time. I'm waiting for some Independent candidate to come out of nowhere and blow them away, but I know it won't happen because that 80% will always vote the same.
Personally, I'm finding that Obama being black is one of the most logical explanations as to why he isn't doing better than he already is. I go out of my way to bring up the election in general discussions, and I keep finding these die hard white male democrats that are favoring McCain because Obama seems inexperienced, which seems to me more like they're not willing to admit they won't vote for black. Particularly, when I can go down a list of issues and demonstrate how their views match Obama's in every concievable way while they have nothing in common with McCain, yet they're content to keep the inexperience black man out of office. They either put way too much value on experience, or are racists, though I'd never rule out the possiblity of the being complete idiots. They do also come up with other reasons, like how they prefer Clinton, or Obama doesn't have a chance of winning; this adds more weight to the complete idiot argument.
On the other hand there are a lot of people I've spoken to that still for some reason support Clinton. Again, they point to issues and experience, to which I respond bull**** and bull****. I point them toward all the information they need to realize that Obama is essentially the same as Clinton, but they really want a woman. At best they're on the fence about voting for Obama, and I get the don't expect them to for the cantidate that shares their political views when they can vote for the one that has matching genitals or skin color. I'd hope there aren't enough people like this that it'd be a factor, but honestly it's going more and more down this road.
And sadly with more people having views like that in either direction, everybody will be accused of either being a sexist against women if they vote for Obama, or a racist if they vote for McCain. So it's a true no win situation. So I'm just going to say screw it and vote for who I believe in, regardless of what I am called. Couldn't care less what's between their legs or what color there skin is. I just don't want any more of Bush's politics.
Thank you.
Mitt Romney isn't a real conservative.
Romney isn't a real person. He's an artificial construct from the future.
Touche!
I'd do accented "e" but I'm too damn tired to and don't even remember the code for it. <_<
I knew this was going to happen. I was talking about this in the car with my family as we car pooled to work today and I had a feeling he'd pick a woman. It'd make common sense to get at Hillary voters.
"- or much of anything else."
What is your point Dennis?
He is saying that she is even less experienced than Obama. How can McCain claim to be against Obama's lack of experience and then choose as VP someone with even less experience.
E. Zachary Knight
http://www.editorialgames.com
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
I think the number you want is 143...that should clear up this little bit of confusion
Nevermind the fact that she is only the vice president, her EXTREMELY high approval rateing and has acctualy done something during her term in office (cleaning up corruption vs....... yeah) and she acctualy won the election for her job (go on, look up how Obama got his)
How Obama won his? You mean by election? It's called democracy, get it right. Wow, she has an extremely high approval rating in a state dominated by like-minded Republicans. That is shocking! I am shocked!
Oh wait...what's this? An ethics investigation? Hmmm. She's only been governor for a year and a half and is already under investigation? Looks like she's doing GREAT at cleaning up all that corruption!
Try thinking for yourself instead of following the other sheep.
No acctualy, considering he ran unopposed...
Yes. But do you know what the primary role of the VP is? It's to step in should the President become indisposed or incapable of performing his role. McCain just put a person with less that a single full guv term under her belt (oh, and mayor of a town with a population of less than 5,000 people) into that spot. And let's face it, McCain is old, and he has a history of health issues.
Not to mention her own corruption problems that have already been pointed out. She has used her own unethical tactics to get what she wants. In addition to the mess that she's under investigation for now, you should take a look at her role in a State owned dairy plant...
I am not at all comfortable with his choice of VP, and a lot of die hard republicans feel the same.
Her youngest child has Down syndrome. She is a brilliant choice, and she assures McCain's victory.
Jack Thompson
EZK: This seems to be a fake John Bruce. I will leave it here as he makes a fun little debate topic.
Well nvm then.
Are you kidding me?! She only has been governor for 18 months. Palin is under investigation by the state legislature. How would she fare in a debate against Biden, especially on foreign policy? She is a presidential assassination or a presidential death in office away from being president and her experience is only being mayor of an 8,000-person town and 18 months of governorship. Senator McCain simply put did not make a smart choice and he criticizes Obama on his experience and judgement.
I should also say that several congressional republicans from Alaska are currently under suspicion for corruption.
Very true. On the face of it, this may try to woo those disgruntled Clinton supporters, but a closer look would reveal that this move will ultimately backfire and just provide more grist for Obama's mill. Just wait until the VP debates and watch; Biden will make mincemeat of her.
Consider this: Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal(who was just elected no sweat months ago) was also considered by McCain as his running mate(McCain even invited Jindal to spend a weekend at his ranch in Arizona).
Jindal was supposed to give a speech at the Republican convention but he's probably canceled those plans with Hurricane Gustav on the horizon.
Compared to some of the other women in politics who are real howlers, she ain't so bad looking. Still don't know who I'd vote for, as I have no real strong conviction about either one of these idiots.
"The Good, the Bad, and Videogame"
Reviews on the best, worst, and controversial issues of Videogames.
gryphonosiris.blogspot.com/
Biden is a media whore who is good at foreign policy, Mcain VP is a woman....we are screwed ><
I am still partially for the dims tho...whos the VP for the loltarians?
I is fuzzy brained mew =^^=
http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/
(in need of a bad overhaul)
All those Hillary voters were never Democrats if they switch. Palin does NOT have the same vision for America has Hillary and Obama.
We are truly doomed if McCain/Palin take office. Hello Canada?
We're doomed either way, the only difference is whether we use gasoline or kerosine for the fire.
....even the feminists are going to be going "Who the hell is this broad?"
This is partially because the new age "Feminists" are currently becoming less a group of women for self-determination and equal rights and chance under the law than a left-wing voting block for equality of outcome.
Having picked Palin is a complete swipe at Obama for not picking Hillary has his running mate. Also he picked her for more of her moderate right wing views he does not want to isolate his Independent voters and his right wing base. This might have clinched his presidency but I am waiting for the debates to finalize my vote.
She's very much on the right for social issues. This assumption that it she was picked to play to the middle is a bit off I think. Pro-life and anti-same-sex marriage makes her more comforting to the evangelical right. If McCain had picked Lieberman or Ridge, it would have blown up the party and sealed a victory for Obama in November. Since McCain still has some trouble with his base, this was both a cynical attempt to woo more disaffected Hillary voters as well as reassure the values voters in the Republican party.
"Her oldest son, age 18, is scheduled to be deployed to Iraq later this year."
And now comes the question of Republican integrity. Will he actually go? My money says he won't. He'll be redeployed somewhere safer.
So her son is heading to that abomination in Iraq?
I don't understand how Republicans can get any votes as long as they're sending their kids to die in a meaningless, valueless, senseless war against a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 or Al Queda before we got there.
So, is it hypocritical attacking Obama for his lack of experience while choosing someone for your VP ticket with a fraction of Obama's experience?
Obama's 'experience' is 143 days. She ran ALASKA, the toughest state to run from logistical standpoints, for 18 months with no major incident.
He won't be now. He just got Secret Service protection. Federal law.
Can't say I'm thrilled with this choice, but I'm not quite cynical enough yet to utterly dismiss her. I'll wait and see how she does against Biden in the debates before I form a final opinion.
As many have already figured out here this is a political gambit.
Either McCain gains votes of those who supported Hillary and want a woman in the white house, makes them second guess voting for Obama, or makes them too disgusted with the situation to vote at all.
In response after the Republican National Convention you'll see Obama turn the focus to his wife as the woman who is coming with him to the White House.
-Loudspeaker
"Volume helps to get a point across but sharp teeth are better."
I don't know about you guys, but my interests are fucked no matter what.
I'm Pro-Choice, Anti-Gun Control, against the war in Iraq, for alternative fuels, against offshore oil drilling, and...yeah...shit... the closest for me was Ron Paul...
-Entertainment isn't the reason the world sucks. It's the reason we know the world sucks. For information on games and psychology, look up: Jonathan Freedman(2002)Block & Crain(2007)Grand Theft Childhood, by Harvard researchers Larry Kutner&Cheryl Olson
If it's any help, the Democrats seem to have fallen off the whole gun control issue lately; it's a low-priority issue for them, and the public in general isn't exactly clamoring for tighter restrictions, so any moves in that direction would be very unpopular. There's also the Supreme Court's recent strikedown of DC's handgun ban per the Second Amendment. Basically the NRA has won the war. Granted, I don't care one way or another about firearm law, so I haven't been paying it a lot of attention, but my impression's been that Democrats are not about to make any waves on the issue (much like how Republicans are all talk, no action on restricting abortions).