Pages: 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 13

 

2008-08-29 23:38:18
Reciprocity
Member
+721|7001|the dank(super) side of Oregon
So McCain had only met Palin once at some governor's dinner.  And the second time he ever spoke to her was to ask her to be VP. 

McCain is one skin lesion away from the big bamboo cage in the sky, and we'd end up with this little cougar stalking the oval offce.  Can you imagine her facing off against Putin or Ahmadinejad? 

For some reason this reminds me of Bush's Harriet Meiers cluster fuck
2008-08-29 23:41:02
God Save the Queen
Banned
+628|6764|tropical regions of london

Reciprocity wrote:

For some reason this reminds me of Bush's Harriet Meiers cluster fuck
me too
2008-08-29 23:41:53
CC-Marley
Member
+407|7249

KILLSWITCH wrote:

I'm thinking she could win some votes for McCain from the would-be Clinton voters.  Yes, No?

In other news:

REM frontman Michael Stipe reckons he'll leave the US if McCain gets in.

"It is unfathomable to me as an American and a world citizen that anyone would vote for that man," he said.

"He served his country and he did a good job as a serviceman, I will honour him for that, but he is not presidential material."
I'll pack for him.
2008-08-29 23:43:30
CC-Marley
Member
+407|7249

Reciprocity wrote:

So McCain had only met Palin once at some governor's dinner.  And the second time he ever spoke to her was to ask her to be VP. 

McCain is one skin lesion away from the big bamboo cage in the sky, and we'd end up with this little cougar stalking the oval offce.  Can you imagine her facing off against Putin or Ahmadinejad? 

For some reason this reminds me of Bush's Harriet Meiers cluster fuck
You guys were gonna vote for Dukakis
2008-08-29 23:49:33
Reciprocity
Member
+721|7001|the dank(super) side of Oregon

CC-Marley wrote:

You guys were gonna vote for Dukakis
I was busy being 6 years old.  You know, tearing the legs off spiders, playing doctor with the hot 8 year old two houses down.
2008-08-29 23:52:25
God Save the Queen
Banned
+628|6764|tropical regions of london
internet people are so wishy washy
2008-08-30 00:58:09
Reciprocity
Member
+721|7001|the dank(super) side of Oregon
Ever seen a cat visciously playing with a mouse?  Slowly and gleefully killing it with overbearing attention.  That is exactly what a debate between Biden and Palin will look like.  Biden throwing her from one end of the stage to the other, stomping on her at every chance.  All the while she's squeaking about abortion and her profound faith.  It'll be much more fun than any McCain/Obama debate.
2008-08-30 01:32:33
Poseidon
Fudgepack DeQueef
+3,253|6958|Long Island, New York

Reciprocity wrote:

Ever seen a cat visciously playing with a mouse?  Slowly and gleefully killing it with overbearing attention.  That is exactly what a debate between Biden and Palin will look like.  Biden throwing her from one end of the stage to the other, stomping on her at every chance.  All the while she's squeaking about abortion and her profound faith.  It'll be much more fun than any McCain/Obama debate.
Seriously. I can't wait.

"Well, up here in Alaska..."
2008-08-30 02:58:21
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7230|Nårvei

Will be interesting to watch the debates, whatever campaign debates from the US i have watch earlier it seems whoever looks good on the television and scores the cheapest points towards the opposition is the winner of the presidency ... it seems to me very random how you elect the most powerful people on earth ... a little scary actually
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
2008-08-30 03:48:51
Flecco
iPod is broken.
+1,048|7085|NT, like Mick Dundee

Varegg wrote:

Will be interesting to watch the debates, whatever campaign debates from the US i have watch earlier it seems whoever looks good on the television and scores the cheapest points towards the opposition is the winner of the presidency ... it seems to me very random how you elect the most powerful people on earth ... a little scary actually
Not to mention that their secretaries are selected/delegated their portfolios, rather than chosen by the public.
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
2008-08-30 04:13:05
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6831|'Murka

Poseidon wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

Ever seen a cat visciously playing with a mouse?  Slowly and gleefully killing it with overbearing attention.  That is exactly what a debate between Biden and Palin will look like.  Biden throwing her from one end of the stage to the other, stomping on her at every chance.  All the while she's squeaking about abortion and her profound faith.  It'll be much more fun than any McCain/Obama debate.
Seriously. I can't wait.

"Well, up here in Alaska..."
Wait a minute. You guys say we know nothing about this woman, then you turn around and say she'll be destroyed in a debate...as if you know how she would do in that situation.

The benefit of being a relative unknown is that you get to prove yourself during the electoral process.

She's been the VP nominee for less than 24 hours. Give her a chance to either succeed or fail first.

Personally, I'd rather see who their Cabinet picks are going to be. That's a much bigger issue than VP.

As for Palin, I think she's a foil for the arguments against McCain, just as Biden is a foil for the arguments against Obama. I think Palin gives McCain two distinct advantages: He can still talk about Obama's inexperience, since Palin's inexperience is mitigated by the fact that she's not actually running for President, where Obama is; and Palin didn't eviscerate McCain during the primaries like Biden did with Obama.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2008-08-30 08:20:12
OrangeHound
Busy doing highfalutin adminy stuff ...
+1,335|7070|Washington DC

FEOS wrote:

Personally, I'd rather see who their Cabinet picks are going to be. That's a much bigger issue than VP.
Very true ... wow, I wish that we got to see choices for Secretary of State and Chief of Staff prior to the election.  But, unfortunately the VP selection is typically the only clue one has for the cabinet selections and other major executive positions.

And, if this is any indication, McCain is going to bring in some new blood to Washington (probably because he has lots of existing "inside the beltway" connections) that are rebels to the GOP establishment  ... on the other hand, Obama looks to be bringing in the well-entrenched DNC beltway establishment that has, for example, failed in the last Congress to do anything constructive except political saber-rattling.


I've been leaning Obama prior to the VP selections, but now I'm reconsidering ... I want change.
2008-08-30 08:26:02
chittydog
less busy
+586|7255|Kubra, Damn it!

OrangeHound wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Personally, I'd rather see who their Cabinet picks are going to be. That's a much bigger issue than VP.
Very true ... wow, I wish that we got to see choices for Secretary of State and Chief of Staff prior to the election.  But, unfortunately the VP selection is typically the only clue one has for the cabinet selections and other major executive positions.

And, if this is any indication, McCain is going to bring in some new blood to Washington (probably because he has lots of existing "inside the beltway" connections) that are rebels to the GOP establishment  ... on the other hand, Obama looks to be bringing in the well-entrenched DNC beltway establishment that has, for example, failed in the last Congress to do anything constructive except political saber-rattling.


I've been leaning Obama prior to the VP selections, but now I'm reconsidering ... I want change.
The reasoning behind a VP choice is not necessarily going to reflect the reasoning behind a cabinet selection. A running mate is chosen to help get the candidate elected. The cabinet is chosen on basis (hopefully) of merit, though we know that cronyism plays a factor as well.

I think it's ironic as hell that people are now considering McCain (an elderly W Jr ) as the candidate for change.

Last edited by chittydog (2008-08-30 08:27:59)

2008-08-30 08:32:39
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7230|Nårvei

OrangeHound wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Personally, I'd rather see who their Cabinet picks are going to be. That's a much bigger issue than VP.
Very true ... wow, I wish that we got to see choices for Secretary of State and Chief of Staff prior to the election.  But, unfortunately the VP selection is typically the only clue one has for the cabinet selections and other major executive positions.

And, if this is any indication, McCain is going to bring in some new blood to Washington (probably because he has lots of existing "inside the beltway" connections) that are rebels to the GOP establishment  ... on the other hand, Obama looks to be bringing in the well-entrenched DNC beltway establishment that has, for example, failed in the last Congress to do anything constructive except political saber-rattling.


I've been leaning Obama prior to the VP selections, but now I'm reconsidering ... I want change.
What change ?

I hear a lot about inexperience and bringing in new blood etc etc ... but what change are the American voter looking for ?

I have a feeling that big issues like abortion and gun control are what people consider when chosing a candidate but those two issues hardly have anything to do with change in America that really matters ?

Who votes on the politics behind the nominee rather than the nominated person ?
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
2008-08-30 08:40:28
OrangeHound
Busy doing highfalutin adminy stuff ...
+1,335|7070|Washington DC

chittydog wrote:

The reasoning behind a VP choice is not necessarily going to reflect the reasoning behind a cabinet selection ...
Of course not ... it just tips their hand a bit.  Dubya, for example, chose one of his daddy's cronies for VP, right?  What did his eventual cabinet look like?  Yep.  A bunch of his daddy's cronies.



chittydog wrote:

I think it's ironic as hell that people are now considering McCain (an elderly W Jr ) as the candidate for change.
I think it is amazing that people consider McCain to be just another Dubya ... aside from sharing an (R) after their name.  McCain has been a sore spot for Bush, and has opposed him often.

Why do you think that the conservatives of the GOP dislike McCain?  Why do you think Rush hates him (or did hate him)?
2008-08-30 08:45:03
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6949|Global Command

Varegg wrote:

OrangeHound wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Personally, I'd rather see who their Cabinet picks are going to be. That's a much bigger issue than VP.
Very true ... wow, I wish that we got to see choices for Secretary of State and Chief of Staff prior to the election.  But, unfortunately the VP selection is typically the only clue one has for the cabinet selections and other major executive positions.

And, if this is any indication, McCain is going to bring in some new blood to Washington (probably because he has lots of existing "inside the beltway" connections) that are rebels to the GOP establishment  ... on the other hand, Obama looks to be bringing in the well-entrenched DNC beltway establishment that has, for example, failed in the last Congress to do anything constructive except political saber-rattling.


I've been leaning Obama prior to the VP selections, but now I'm reconsidering ... I want change.
What change ?

I hear a lot about inexperience and bringing in new blood etc etc ... but what change are the American voter looking for ?

I have a feeling that big issues like abortion and gun control are what people consider when chosing a candidate but those two issues hardly have anything to do with change in America that really matters ?

Who votes on the politics behind the nominee rather than the nominated person ?
Me.

And Obama was right when he said people cling to their guns and religion, or he meant that politicians cling to guns and religion as wedge issues that divert attention away from real problems.

The change we want is strict financial control, a government that pays as it goes.  The government is telling us social security will be broke right about the time I would start to receive payments.  I get a statement showing how much I have paid into the system every year, but apparently they have spent all the money.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases … 04-12.html

We want leadership that is not based in hypocrisy; we are occupying Iraq and Afghanistan and getting all blustery when Russia reclaims a former territory. Btw, apparently the money to fight the war in Iraq is not counted in the budget. How does that work?

We want a government that enforces its border and does not reward businesses that ship production to another country.

We want common sense involved in drug laws and to NOT have the largest prison population.
A flat tax would also be nice.
2008-08-30 08:58:29
OrangeHound
Busy doing highfalutin adminy stuff ...
+1,335|7070|Washington DC

ATG wrote:

The change we want is strict financial control, a government that pays as it goes.
I think most American's want this, but the problem is that the core of neither party does this.  Each has its agendas, and both agendas cost money ... the only way to keep the agendas mute is to have a split government with one party controlling the Executive branch and the other the Legislative branch ... when one party controls both, then we always have problems as the spending gates open.  We know the Congress will have a big "D" on it after these elections ...


But, ATG, I would add that although Americans would want sound business practices in Government, a greater priority for Americans is that they want their Government to be their god.
  • Americans want their government to be the source of all benefit and good things
  • Americans want their government to protect them and be strong
  • Americans want want their government to lead them and create vision for them
  • Americans want their government to be the agent of morality.


Whichever party can grab 3 of the 4 points usually wins.  Obama and the Dems seem to have points #1 and #3 this year, and they are battling for #2 ... McCain and the Pubs seem to have points #2 and #4 on their side, and they are hoping that Obama fails somewhere on #3.
2008-08-30 09:01:06
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6949|Global Command

OrangeHound wrote:

ATG wrote:

The change we want is strict financial control, a government that pays as it goes.
I think most American's want this, but the problem is that the core of neither party does this.  Each has its agendas, and both agendas cost money ... the only way to keep the agendas mute is to have a split government with one party controlling the Executive branch and the other the Legislative branch ... when one party controls both, then we always have problems as the spending gates open.  We know the Congress will have a big "D" on it after these elections ...


But, ATG, I would add that although Americans would want sound business practices in Government, a greater priority for Americans is that they want their Government to be their god.
  • Americans want their government to be the source of all benefit and good things
  • Americans want their government to protect them and be strong
  • Americans want want their government to lead them and create vision for them
  • Americans want their government to be the agent of morality.


Whichever party can grab 3 of the 4 points usually wins.  Obama and the Dems seem to have points #1 and #3 this year, and they are battling for #2 ... McCain and the Pubs seem to have points #2 and #4 on their side, and they are hoping that Obama fails somewhere on #3.
Yes. Well said. The Alter of " Freedom ".


Sadly nobody speaks for those who just want to be left alone and have a fair shake at life without interference from busy bodies.
2008-08-30 09:24:08
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6825|North Carolina

OrangeHound wrote:

But, ATG, I would add that although Americans would want sound business practices in Government, a greater priority for Americans is that they want their Government to be their god.
  • Americans want their government to be the source of all benefit and good things
  • Americans want their government to protect them and be strong
  • Americans want want their government to lead them and create vision for them
  • Americans want their government to be the agent of morality.
...and this is the real reason why Ron Paul isn't that popular.  He's promoting an idea of truly weaning yourself off of government dependency.  That doesn't resonate well with the typical sheep.

Granted, the irony is that a lot of Ron Paul supporters behave as sheep in their own way.

Probably the greatest evidence that Americans have short memories is their persistent willingness to trust the government with virtually every aspect of their lives.  I'll admit that I support the socialization of things like healthcare, but I do it with a wary eye towards government.  I may like Obama, but I don't worship him the way that some people seem to.

It's just sad to see this election as being so close.  McCain really is similar to Bush if you look at his voting record in the last year.  McCain used to be a political maverick.  He even had the balls to call out Jerry Falwell as the scumbag he was back when he ran in 2000, but now, he spends more time kissing the asses of the evangelicals, because unfortunately, theocons have been a cancer upon the Republican party ever since the 80s.  McCain used to have a conscience and protest the torture methods we employ unethically to people who we haven't used the due process of law to determine the guilt of, but now, he supports torture as if he was never a POW.

So, I think it's pretty clear that McCain would only be different from Bush in that he would be a more intelligent form of Bush but with the same agendas.
2008-08-30 09:46:20
War Man
Australians are hermaphrodites.
+564|7134|Purplicious Wisconsin

Spearhead wrote:

CC-Marley wrote:

Poseidon wrote:


Yeah, mayor of a town of 5,000 before becoming Governor IIRC.

Real experienced.
She's run a state goverment almost as long as Obama has been a Senator.
Yeah, Alaska, real important state there.

Does she have any foreign policy experience at all?  I'm not sure.
No but she is feisty meaning biden is going to be put in his seat in vice-presidential debate, and Alaska happens to have oil.

Spearhead wrote:

From your own source

"Biden effectively exploited the chairmanship to transform himself from a junior member into one of the Senate's most knowledgeable experts on arms control, nuclear weapons, European attitudes toward America and the Soviet Union, the European Union's policies, and the role of NATO,"

Obama doesnt have much experience.  No shit.  Where's your outcry over this Palin chick though?  Double standards ftl.
She has more experience than Obama does, she it hot, she is cool because she has guns(my kind of chick), and she does a better job than Obama.
The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.
2008-08-30 10:03:19
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7021|132 and Bush

Varegg wrote:

Will be interesting to watch the debates, whatever campaign debates from the US i have watch earlier it seems whoever looks good on the television and scores the cheapest points towards the opposition is the winner of the presidency ... it seems to me very random how you elect the most powerful people on earth ... a little scary actually
You think McCain looked good on TV? Romney and even Paul owned him six ways to Sunday. At one point McCain was even booed after a very cheap shot.


There were clearly better looking candidates on that stage.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2008-08-30 10:17:49
PureFodder
Member
+225|6706

ATG wrote:

The change we want is strict financial control, a government that pays as it goes.  The government is telling us social security will be broke right about the time I would start to receive payments.  I get a statement showing how much I have paid into the system every year, but apparently they have spent all the money.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases … 04-12.html
Don't worry about US social security going broke. It's fully expected to be solvent till at least 2049.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/96xx/doc9649 … Update.pdf
Even in 75 years when it is expected to be broke, the cost of fixing it is so pathetically small relative to the size of the US federal budget it's almost laughable. Bush's tax cuts represent something like a 2% reduction in the federal budget. The costs of proping up social security in 75 years is estimated to be around 0.5% of the federal budget. Reverse a quarter of Bush's tax cuts and that saves social security for at least the next 75 years.

Social security reform has been described as a solution in search of a problem.
2008-08-30 10:49:04
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7021|132 and Bush

Raise the taxes and watch more jobs go over seas. What's 1% of nothing?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2008-08-30 11:08:06
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6825|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Raise the taxes and watch more jobs go over seas. What's 1% of nothing?
Ending the Bush tax cuts is a good thing.  As far as outsourcing goes, that has less to do with personal income taxes and more to do with corporate ones.

What we need to do more than anything though is to cut spending.  We could even keep the Bush tax cuts in place if we'd just spend less on things like the military.
2008-08-30 11:30:42
PureFodder
Member
+225|6706

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Raise the taxes and watch more jobs go over seas. What's 1% of nothing?
Ending the Bush tax cuts is a good thing.  As far as outsourcing goes, that has less to do with personal income taxes and more to do with corporate ones.

What we need to do more than anything though is to cut spending.  We could even keep the Bush tax cuts in place if we'd just spend less on things like the military.
If I recall correctly the increase in defense spending over the Bush years was 2.5 times as much as would be required to keep social security solvent pretty much indefinately. You don't even need to raise taxes to solve the problem.

The healthcare industry is the real elephant in the room, it's costs are rising by approximately twice the rate of inflation and that will cripple the US economy if people are too dumb to overhaul it soon.

 

Pages: 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 13

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard