Why I laugh my ass off when liberals / Radiclas scream inexperience for VP pick. - Page 2

1997 GA16DE · 09-02-2008, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HybridSS

I would say it like this. It takes much longer as a Senator to gain useful experiance as compared to Governor. I put Barrack in that catagory. I do not put Palin ahead of Barrack though. I would say they are "roughly equal".

And where, if any, would this become available to Palin? She has none of those qualities, in fact, the only "Experience" she has is based on her home life, hobbies, and opinions. Maybe, MAYBE she can balance the budget for Alaska, but the jury is still out on that one.

To say that Palin worked her way to where she is, I'm almost convinced it wasn't a very tough fight. She probably worked her way up because she was a pretty woman who the people really liked as a person and as a family person. That's kinda like a person working his way up to President, just because he's a regular guy you'd like to have a beer with. To me, she just kinda smiled her way to the top.

**jabtay** · 09-02-2008, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1997 GA16DE

And where, if any, would this become available to Palin? She has none of those qualities, in fact, the only "Experience" she has is based on her home life, hobbies, and opinions. Maybe, MAYBE she can balance the budget for Alaska, but the jury is still out on that one.

To say that Palin worked her way to where she is, I'm almost convinced it wasn't a very tough fight. She probably worked her way up because she was a pretty woman who the people really liked as a person and as a family person. That's kinda like a person working his way up to President, just because he's a regular guy you'd like to have a beer with. To me, she just kinda smiled her way to the top.

I respect your opinion, but i have to disagree. with that im done with the Palin debates.

Zealot · 09-02-2008, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1997 GA16DE

And where, if any, would this become available to Palin? She has none of those qualities, in fact, the only "Experience" she has is based on her home life, hobbies, and opinions. Maybe, MAYBE she can balance the budget for Alaska, but the jury is still out on that one.

To say that Palin worked her way to where she is, I'm almost convinced it wasn't a very tough fight. She probably worked her way up because she was a pretty woman who the people really liked as a person and as a family person. That's kinda like a person working his way up to President, just because he's a regular guy you'd like to have a beer with. To me, she just kinda smiled her way to the top.

And Obama just read a teleprompter. Either way she still has the edge.

HybridSS · 09-02-2008, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1997 GA16DE

And where, if any, would this become available to Palin? .

As Governor. As I said...IMO you accumulate necessary experiance (for President) faster as a Governor as compared to Senator. There are no "junior governors" . As Governor...its all on your shoulders from day 1.
There are however "Junior Senators". Obama is Junior pee-on senator for the most part. And that would be true of any new US Senator. A new Senator can get elected and do absolutely NOTHING for a year and no one would notice...especially is that senator could talk a good game. I dont believe Obama has done anything to speak about in his time as a US Senator....except vote "present" alot. And if you want to talk about getting into power through alternative means...see how Obama prevented his predacessor from running again. They had to import Alan Keyes to run. Obama would not have beat the lady he prevented from running. But that means little to me. I want to know if they have done meaningful work. When looking at it that way...I actually give the edge to Palin.

Again...the differences are debatable...so I call this one a wash.

NuclearWinter · 09-04-2008, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jabtay

they dont. obama made an ass of him self last night. he was talking about having 2500 people working for him, and Palin only having 50. He was wrong, she has 77000 people working under her. then he said she dealt with 12mil or so a month, when he blows through 25 mil a month. She actually goes through a hell of a lot more a month. that would seem to be a point for Palin

im not counting points, but if was so for change, why would he pick a typical politician that has a lobbiest for a son? Just wiat until (if) his issues come out.

I think Palin set EVERYONE straight last night at the convention. She is soooo much more eloquent and presidential than Obama its kinda sad. Obama should be running for VP. You can not compare Obama's horrid record as senator to anything..he plainly sucks, no quams. If you really want to leave your country in the hands of a man who is not only a racist but also has NO IDEA of how to run a country then go ahead...vote for your cluelessness. You will not win. I feel that there are wayyy more people in the US that understand the facts infront of them than the people who do not. This is not a friggen popularity contest it's our country, just because all Obama talks about is how is the opposite of BUSH DOES NOT mean that he is good for president. Words are just words people, they blow with the wind. He has done NOTHING in his carrer as a politician to show that he is APT to do anything productive for the country and we are in NEED for a great leader and he is not it.

philliez · 09-04-2008, 01:24 PM

but the ass-backwards old school conservative anti-abortion mentality of the mccain and palin scares me a whole lot more.

its 2008 for fucks sake, i cant be voting for that kind of shit

**jabtay** · 09-04-2008, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philliez

but the ass-backwards old school conservative anti-abortion mentality of the mccain and palin scares me a whole lot more.

its 2008 for fucks sake, i cant be voting for that kind of shit

This is what i dont get...is that the only reason you wont vote for them, or is there more? Because if its just over 1 issue, that is just pathetic

HullBreach · 09-04-2008, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jabtay

This is what i dont get...is that the only reason you wont vote for them, or is there more? Because if its just over 1 issue, that is just pathetic

Besides, for Abortion to even come into play its going to take the Supreme Court overturning Roe vs. Wade (Not likely anytime soon) or a supermajority vote in both houses of congress, which is going to be Democrate controlled.

So basically, this is a non-issue for the forseeable future.

**BAMF** · 09-04-2008, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philliez

but the ass-backwards old school conservative anti-abortion mentality of the mccain and palin scares me a whole lot more.

its 2008 for fucks sake, i cant be voting for that kind of shit

I wouldn't be surprised if you're also voting for seperate water fountains and pools by voting for them.

For realz though, I agree. Thats the parts of their views that have me worried more than anything. I don't like their views on 'morality' one bit.

**Strongest Man In The World** · 09-04-2008, 02:46 PM

I cant stand the way Mccain got involved in the MLB doping issue. He was the one who headed the government investigation. I think hes a little too liberal for a repub and his public speaking is less than desireable. (bush's huge downfall)

But, I will be voting for him, b/c His stance on smaller fed government, 2nd amendment, anti socialism and military are the same as mine. Those are the important issues to me. Did i vote for him in the primaries, NO! I wanted Mike Huckabee as our president b/c his views were 90% the same as mine, but unfortunatly, he didnt make it.

Mccain has the most experiece, hes prior military(which i believe should be a requirement for leadership of this country) and Hes the best choice for a country at "war"(of the 2 major candidates). Bottom line, downsizing the military(which obama openly admits he plans to do) is just not the way to go. There are programs in the federal government that he can be downsized or eliminated, but the countrys first line of defense is not one of them.

edit.. about Palin: do I think she is the best choice for VP, based on her resume? probably not. But mccain, knowing the mentality of most of americans, picked her for the popularity factor. He knew that the majority of feminist would vote for a women, no matter what the partisin affiliation. From what ive researched on her, she is qualified for service, but that wasnt the reason she was chosen. Plain and simple, Mccain and co trumped Obama's party and they are doing their damnest to undermine that move. Personally, I think it will be the decisive move for the repubs and it should solidify a victory.

philliez · 09-04-2008, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jabtay

This is what i dont get...is that the only reason you wont vote for them, or is there more? Because if its just over 1 issue, that is just pathetic

no, but its one of the biggest in my opinion. thats a big fucking deal to me.

for the record, im not a democrat so don't start to include me in your bashing mmk

**jabtay** · 09-04-2008, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philliez

no, but its one of the biggest in my opinion. thats a big fucking deal to me.

for the record, im not a democrat so don't start to include me in your bashing mmk

Dude, i wasnt bashing...just trying to stress my case. I see abortion is a big deal around here, but like hullbreach said, its unlikely to be overturned.

philliez · 09-04-2008, 03:51 PM

oh, well its just that on here i read alot of THIS SIDE vs THAT SIDE bashing going on, and people being grouped into category.

for example I definitely consider myself liberal, but im definitely not a disillusioned san fransisco tree hugger. But for some reason when you say "liberal" thats what everyone assumes

I definitely say no to big government, and thats one of my biggest problems with the dems

Chuck 98 RT/10 · 09-04-2008, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philliez

but the ass-backwards old school conservative anti-abortion mentality of the mccain and palin scares me a whole lot more.

That perplexes me. As I mentioned in a previous thread since Roe v. Wade (1973) every president except Clinton was pro life and we've replaced almost a dozen Supreme Court Justices. AND NOTHING HAS CHANGED REGARDING ABORTION. If anything abortion has been made more available.

In light of those facts, I don't see why any pro choicer would base their vote on that issue.

**PPGMD** · 09-04-2008, 04:07 PM

Roe vs Wade is established law, there is not much you can do about the issue. The Supreme court doesn't like to have to rehash issues, it took almost 70 years for them to rule on the Second Amendment again.

philliez · 09-04-2008, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuck 98 RT/10

In light of those facts, I don't see why any pro choicer would base their vote on that issue.

The fact that he wants to reverse Roe vs Wade shows a mentality that simply do not agree with, and I don't want to support in any way.

As we all know every election gets chisled to do the lesser of two evils. I don't believe in support someone just because I disagree with him/her a little bit less than the other.

Thats not the only issue I disagree with him on, I just mention it often because to me its a big deal and shouldn't even be an issue anymore.

His stance on embryonic stem cell research. - I strongly disagree with.

His stance on the war - I strongly disagree with. Enough Americans are dead. But what do I know?

His stance on gun control -

philliez · 09-04-2008, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PPGMD

The Supreme court doesn't like to have to rehash issues

not exactly, it only took about 17 years (if i remember correctly) for lawrence vs texas to happen and do some reversing

**PPGMD** · 09-04-2008, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philliez

not exactly, it only took about 17 years (if i remember correctly) for lawrence vs texas to happen and do some reversing

That is true, but that is fairly rare for the Supreme Court. Most times they cite their old decision when they reject cases on the same subject.

Chuck 98 RT/10 · 09-04-2008, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philliez

The fact that he wants to reverse Roe vs Wade shows a mentality that simply do not agree with, and I don't want to support in any way.

Thats not the only issue I disagree with him on, I just mention it often because to me its a big deal and shouldn't even be an issue anymore.

Considering the abortion ineffectiveness the last six pro-life Presidents have had I kinda wonder how much they were truly pro-life or if they just played the role for the votes.

Personally I wouldn't care if a candidate was pro-life or pro-choice as long as they promised to not pay for it. But that happens to be where the pro-choicers are crossing the line.

HullBreach · 09-04-2008, 04:47 PM

Personally, I think its a states-rights issue. Let individual states decide how they want to deal with it. Federalism is the capitalism of ideas, where they must compete in a free market type system.

If you disagree with the culture and/or laws of your state, you can try and have them changed. If the majority of your state disagrees with you, you can move to a state more aligned with your ideas and values.

In the end, the states with the best systems will be the most prosperous. Think of it a legislative "suvival of the fittest".

09-04-2008, 02:46 PM	#30 (permalink)
Strongest Man In The World Embrace the Hate	I cant stand the way Mccain got involved in the MLB doping issue. He was the one who headed the government investigation. I think hes a little too liberal for a repub and his public speaking is less than desireable. (bush's huge downfall) But, I will be voting for him, b/c His stance on smaller fed government, 2nd amendment, anti socialism and military are the same as mine. Those are the important issues to me. Did i vote for him in the primaries, NO! I wanted Mike Huckabee as our president b/c his views were 90% the same as mine, but unfortunatly, he didnt make it. Mccain has the most experiece, hes prior military(which i believe should be a requirement for leadership of this country) and Hes the best choice for a country at "war"(of the 2 major candidates). Bottom line, downsizing the military(which obama openly admits he plans to do) is just not the way to go. There are programs in the federal government that he can be downsized or eliminated, but the countrys first line of defense is not one of them. edit.. about Palin: do I think she is the best choice for VP, based on her resume? probably not. But mccain, knowing the mentality of most of americans, picked her for the popularity factor. He knew that the majority of feminist would vote for a women, no matter what the partisin affiliation. From what ive researched on her, she is qualified for service, but that wasnt the reason she was chosen. Plain and simple, Mccain and co trumped Obama's party and they are doing their damnest to undermine that move. Personally, I think it will be the decisive move for the repubs and it should solidify a victory. Last edited by Strongest Man In The World : 09-04-2008 at 02:52 PM.

09-04-2008, 01:24 PM	#26 (permalink)
philliez Progressive-Agressive	but the ass-backwards old school conservative anti-abortion mentality of the mccain and palin scares me a whole lot more. its 2008 for fucks sake, i cant be voting for that kind of shit

09-04-2008, 03:51 PM	#33 (permalink)
philliez Progressive-Agressive	oh, well its just that on here i read alot of THIS SIDE vs THAT SIDE bashing going on, and people being grouped into category. for example I definitely consider myself liberal, but im definitely not a disillusioned san fransisco tree hugger. But for some reason when you say "liberal" thats what everyone assumes I definitely say no to big government, and thats one of my biggest problems with the dems

09-04-2008, 04:07 PM	#35 (permalink)
PPGMD CYFG	Roe vs Wade is established law, there is not much you can do about the issue. The Supreme court doesn't like to have to rehash issues, it took almost 70 years for them to rule on the Second Amendment again.

09-04-2008, 04:47 PM	#40 (permalink)
HullBreach Registered User	Personally, I think its a states-rights issue. Let individual states decide how they want to deal with it. Federalism is the capitalism of ideas, where they must compete in a free market type system. If you disagree with the culture and/or laws of your state, you can try and have them changed. If the majority of your state disagrees with you, you can move to a state more aligned with your ideas and values. In the end, the states with the best systems will be the most prosperous. Think of it a legislative "suvival of the fittest".