http://fyreflash.blogspot.com/
I'll just leave this here..
I'm not declaring any political sway (I'd vaporize both parties if I could) so much as just (trying to) enjoy the ride (slightly car sick though).
You guys should look at the Onion.com;
"J. Biden was quoted as saying in regards to Gov. Palin, 'Definetly do'able'."
Or Tina Fey's uncanny impersonation (she does look damn close in visage) of her, "Is this the talent portion of the contest?"
Hmm. "Cute" and "Sarah Palin" are certainly two phrases I never expected to see paired together. She looks like a porn-star trying to tone it down for a court appearance.
No, I meant the satire, comedy, whatever you want to call it was cute. Everyone is getting so antsy the closer we get (what's it, 27 days now?) that I think a good laugh helps lighten the mood.
There are so many things wrong with her, I don't know where to start. However, I do have 'executive' experience, and from what I've read of Palin, she'd not have lasted long in a 'real' job. She's aggressive I'll give her that. But she's self-serving, hypocritical, and just on this side of 'touched'.
Please ... for all your sakes, get the facts. Understand what it really is you're looking to elect. You're already badly regarded on the world stage. The views Palin espouses will just serve to make it worse.
I agree with all of that.
i did not quote the entire block but it mentions how Americans are not looked well-upon in the world stage.
I agree with that also from an internal point of view.
I wonder what would happen if instead of Americans voting, we allowed 2 representatives from every other country in the world to elect our leader. I think we (americans), as a whole, are wearing a thick set of blinders.
1 Ton Ghost "I'm not declaring any political sway (I'd vaporize both parties if I could) so much as just (trying to) enjoy the ride (slightly car sick though)."
same here....every candidate has promised REFORM for as long as i can remember. No matter who is voted in i really doubt there ideas will happen, or that anything will change. I am just along for the ride.
I'd rather have Palin as veep than Obama as pres. I think the post requires a bit more experience than Obama has. He should spend some more time working at the federal level before he tries to run the show. I'd feel about as comfortable with him as pres as I would with a newly minted teenage driver behind the wheel of a Ferrari.
And I really don't care what the rest of the world thinks about us. We've never been liked much in our entire history, why should it change now?
No, I meant the satire, comedy, whatever you want to call it was cute.
I know, I was just riffing on the phrase "cute Sarah Palin".
I'd rather have Palin as veep than Obama as pres. I think the post requires a bit more experience than Obama has. He should spend some more time working at the federal level before he tries to run the show.
See, I think that years of being corrupted by the Washington Old Boys club is the last thing he needs. Old white men have been running the USA for a long time, what the harm in giving an outsider a shot at it? From the toilet Bush has flushed the country down there is little Obama could do to **** it up any worse.
I hate to be quoting McCain, whom I'm not that hot over, but the Oval Office is not the place for On-the-Job training. What's the harm? Let a boy scout fly the space shuttle. That'll show the harm. I have no confidence in his ability to lead. True, if he wins he may prove us wrong, but that's not a chance I'm willing to take with the future of my country.
OK, your points made, if McCain has a heart attack on the swearing in ceremony, or other complications related to being a 70+ year old cancer survivor, Palin will need more on-job training than Obama, and be far more dangerous in a position of authority. Statistically speaking the chances of McCain surviving his first term are fiercely low.
Let's say that the office of the president is a computer that takes 1 GB of RAM to operate.
Configuration 1:
Slot A: Obama = 500 mb
Slot B: Biden = 1 GB
Configuration 2:
Slot A: McCain = 1 GB
Slot B: Palin = 256 mb
Which configuration would you rather have if slot A fails? any computer technician will tell you that configuration 1 is a superior design.
Palin has at least run a state. What has Obama run?
Please, like you really need to have experience running anything to be President.
:PPalin has at least run a state. What has Obama run?
How about being president of the Harvard Law Review?
well, let's see...
Obama was State legislator from 1997–2004, and then became Senator in 05. in his career, he has had no major scandals or career mishaps. he graduated Magna *** Laude from Harvard with a J.D in Law.
Palin was mayor of a tiny (miniscule, not listed on most maps) town from October of '96 to 2002, and was governor for 2 years after that. during which time, she has had incidents ranging from mismanagement of state projects (bridge to nowhere) to abuse of power (troopergate) and has ties to a group of Alaskan separatists. she has a BS in communications journalism from Idaho state university, by way of community college.
Edit: seriously? they bleeped the middle part of Magna 'come' laude"? touchy!
Why does a small town origin have such an impact? The dynamic and mechanic is the same as any civic organization in the US. I recommend living in a small town if you haven't already. (Been there, Mayer AZ pop. 600 when I was there. Going there, New Sweden, Maine, about the same. Also lived in larger cities, such as San Jose, CA.) Same issues as far as running such a community goes. I put more faith in her experience running shows at that level than I do in Obama's career of running for president or community organizing. He needs a few more notches in his belt. He's just not ready.
The Bridge the Nowhere wasn't hers, and she's not hiding from "troopergate".
What I find funny is that the Obama camp feels so threatened by Palin, and she's not even the one we're voting for. I don't think there's ever been a campaign where so much attention has been thrust on the veep candidate by the other party.
There are, however, two things I don't like about her; the words "hockey mom" and "lipstick". Gah! Enough already!
Sarah Palin is a selectively moral bigoted hick who is incapable of teaching her daughter how to use a condom. Bush Jr., worst president ever, would look great compared to her as president. That's how bad she is.
What has she said that you find bigoted? "I do." to an ethnic husband? Agreeing with Joe Biden on gay marriage? Just curious as to where you get that.
As to her daughter, I suppose you did everything your parents ever suggested? Believe everything that they ever taught? I mean, honestly, I knew about condoms well in advance of 17 and my parents never mentioned them. Were things much different for you?
I've gotten more than a bit weary with both parties. I've seen enough of pandering to those who want a hand out (rich and poor) and mad power grabs from both parties to be thoroughly disinclined to trust much of anything that comes about to be for any ultimate benefit to the country or to me.
And what did he accomplish in these lofty positions? Voting "present"? He doesn't have the actual leadership experience that even heading up a small town would call for. You have to do more than just show up. I'd even take Biden over Obama, even though his concept of historical events is a bit muddled, shall we say.
heading up the Harvard law review > mayor of a town of less than 900 people in terms of difficulty.
EDIT: Since the question of 'what has Obama Done that's so bloody awesome' was raised, I took the liberty of compiling this:
-Obama voted in favor of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and cosponsored the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act.
-In September 2006, Obama supported a related bill, the Secure Fence Act.[58] Obama introduced two initiatives bearing his name: Lugar–Obama, which expanded the Nunn–Lugar cooperative threat reduction concept to conventional weapons, and the Coburn–Obama Transparency Act, which authorized the establishment of USAspending.gov, a web search engine on federal spending.
-On June 3, 2008, Senator Obama, along with Senators Thomas R. Carper, Tom Coburn, and John McCain, introduced follow-up legislation: Strengthening Transparency and Accountability in Federal Spending Act of 2008.
-Obama sponsored legislation requiring nuclear plant owners to notify state and local authorities of radioactive leaks.
- In December 2006, President Bush signed into law the Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act, marking the first federal legislation to be enacted with Obama as its primary sponsor.
-In January 2007, Obama and Senator Feingold introduced a corporate jet provision to the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act, which was signed into law in September 2007.
-He introduced Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act, a bill to criminalize deceptive practices in federal elections.
-Obama also introduced the Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007.
-Later in 2007, Obama sponsored an amendment to the Defense Authorization Act adding safeguards for personality disorder military discharges.
- He sponsored the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act supporting divestment of state pension funds from Iran's oil and gas industry, and co-sponsored legislation to reduce risks of nuclear terrorism.
- Obama also sponsored a Senate amendment to the State Children's Health Insurance Program providing one year of job protection for family members caring for soldiers with combat-related injuries.
As mayor:
-Tried to have a city librarian fired because she refused to remove a book at Palin's request (book title: 'Pastor, I'm gay')
-four months later, fired the police chief because he "didn't support her politically" (incidentally, this is not the same as Troopergate)
-cut property taxes by 75%, and used the revenue generated by a 2% sales tax that was enacted before her election to pay for said tax cut
-reduced spending on the town museum, and blocked entirely the new town library.
-incorrectly allocated funds for a sports complex that later caused the city to endure a $1.3 million lawsuit over immanent domain.
-increased the town's debt from aprox $1 million to $25 million.
As Governor:
-promoted drilling the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) for oil
-Palin followed through on a campaign promise to sell the Westwind II jet, a purchase made by the Murkowski administration for $2.7 million in 2005 against the wishes of the legislature.[102] In August 2007, the jet was listed on eBay, but the sale fell through, and the plane was later sold for $2.1 million through a private brokerage firm.
- during Palin's time as governor; as of 2008, Alaska was, and still is the largest per-capita recipient of federal earmarks, requesting nearly $750 million in special federal spending over two years
-Palin gave a list of 31 proposed federal earmarks or requests for funding, totaling $197 million, to Alaska Senator Ted Stevens.
-offered a bounty of $150 per wolf killed from helicopter. Said bounty was later ruled illegal by a state judge.
-Bridge to Nowhere:
Two proposed bridges were supported by Palin in her 2006 Gubernatorial campaign, after Congress had already provided hundreds of millions of dollars in transportation funds. These bridge proposals had gained national attention earlier in 2005 and 2006 as symbols of pork-barrel spending. the Gravina Island bridge was to connect to an international airport that services less than half a million people per year. the Knick Arm bridge would be to replace a ferry that presently serves an island with a population of 50. Although the Knick arm bridge was the officially labeled project, both bridges have come to bear the moniker. In 2005, the Senate approved a $442-million earmark for bridge as part of an omnibus spending bill, but was strongly criticized. Congress then stripped the earmark from the bill before final passage in November 2005 and instead gave the $442 million to Alaska as transportation money with no strings attached.
In 2006, Palin ran for governor with a "build-the-bridge" plank in her platform, saying she would "not allow the spinmeisters to turn this project ... into something that's so negative." Palin criticized the use of the word "nowhere" as insulting to local residents and urged speedy work on building the infrastructure "while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist."
In September 2007, Palin cancelled the Gravina Island Bridge which she had previously supported. She opted not to return the $442 million in federal transportation funds and directed Alaska officials to look for an alternative to reach the bridgeless island. She also went ahead with spending $25 million in federal funds to build a controversial Gravina Island Highway to the place where the bridge would have gone, rather than return the funds to the Federal government.
Palin continues to support the Knik Arm project, although in June 2008, she ordered a funding and feasibility review. The Knik Arm Bridge project is also being studied for its deleterious impacts on beluga whales.[126]
-Troopergate: Sarah Palin dismissed Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan on July 11, 2008, citing performance-related issues, such as not being "a team player on budgeting issues." Monegan said (and there is substantial evidence to support) that he had resisted subtle but persistent pressure from the Governor, her husband, and her staff, including State Attorney General Talis Colberg, to fire Palin’s ex-brother-in-law, state trooper Mike Wooten; Wooten was involved in a child custody battle with Palin’s sister.
The Alaska Legislature hired an investigator on August 1 to review the Monegan dismissal; the atmosphere was bipartisan and Palin pledged to cooperate.After ordering her own internal investigation, Palin acknowledged on August 13 that "pressure could have been perceived to exist, although I have only now become aware of it."
On September 1, Palin asked the legislature to drop its investigation, saying that the state Personnel Board had jurisdiction over ethics issues. Palin also asked the Board to review the matter. On September 5, legislators set an October 10 completion date. On September 15, Palin filed arguments of "no probable cause" before the Personnel Board. On September 19, the Governor's husband and several state employees refused to honor subpoenas, the validity of which were disputed by Talis Colberg, Palin's appointee as Alaska's Attorney General. On October 2, a court rejected Colberg's challenge to the subpoenas, and on October 5, seven of the witnesses agreed that they would testify, leaving only Sarah and Todd Palin's appearances in doubt.
I hope that helps.
Why does a small town origin have such an impact? The dynamic and mechanic is the same as any civic organization in the US. I recommend living in a small town if you haven't already. (Been there, Mayer AZ pop. 600 when I was there. Going there, New Sweden, Maine, about the same. Also lived in larger cities, such as San Jose, CA.) Same issues as far as running such a community goes. I put more faith in her experience running shows at that level than I do in Obama's career of running for president or community organizing. He needs a few more notches in his belt. He's just not ready.
funny that you mention Maine (where I'm originally from) and Arizona (where I presently live)
small town origin doesn't have an impact at all. the fact that her career as mayor is the majority of her political experience does. she has never existed at a federal level, and actively demonizes the federal government (don't believe me? watch the VP debate) if we want to talk about notches in belts, you might want to notice the lack of any in Palin's. she has done nothing, and what she has done has been a fairly spectacular set of disasters.
The Bridge the Nowhere wasn't hers, and she's not hiding from "troopergate".
the bridge to nowhere wasn't hers to start with, but she flip-flopped three times on it before redistributing the money the federal government had alloted for it to other projects... including a road leading to the vacant beach where the bridge would have been.
on Troopergate, she has failed to cooperate with the official investigation. her statements of cooperation were in regards to her own private investigation. she has thus-far ignored all subpoenas regarding the mater.
]
What I find funny is that the Obama camp feels so threatened by Palin, and she's not even the one we're voting for. I don't think there's ever been a campaign where so much attention has been thrust on the veep candidate by the other party.
if you vote for McCain, you are voting for Palin. that is how a presidential ticket works. you vote for the president and the president's VP. and just a minute ago, you were telling us about how you weren't hot on McCain. so obviously, it's Palin who is drawing you to the ticket. or am I wrong?
there have not been many VP's that drew attention like Palin mostly due to media over-exposure, and her talent for stupidity.
There are, however, two things I don't like about her; the words "hockey mom" and "lipstick". Gah! Enough already!
I really do love hockey, and moms, and even moms who take their kids to hockey. I'm not a big fan of lipstick, however.
How about being president of the Harvard Law Review?
well, let's see...
Obama was State legislator from 1997–2004, and then became Senator in 05. in his career, he has had no major scandals or career mishaps. he graduated Magna *** Laude from Harvard with a J.D in Law.
Palin was mayor of a tiny (miniscule, not listed on most maps) town from October of '96 to 2002, and was governor for 2 years after that. during which time, she has had incidents ranging from mismanagement of state projects (bridge to nowhere) to abuse of power (troopergate) and has ties to a group of Alaskan separatists. she has a BS in communications journalism from Idaho state university, by way of community college.
Edit: seriously? they bleeped the middle part of Magna 'come' laude"? touchy!
It must be nice to live in Obama "the messiah" land. Heck your even making Titanium Dragon look like a McCain supporter. And while your at it could you give Obama's grades at Columbia and explain how he's one of the few people who lacked the credentials and yet made it on the Harvard law review, let alone Harvard ? Since he has so much administrative experience and all.
What has she said that you find bigoted? ... Agreeing with Joe Biden on gay marriage?
Yes. :P
And to repeat sirpatricshieldstrik "...could you give Obama's grades at Columbia and explain how he's one of the few people who lacked the credentials and yet made it on the Harvard law review, let alone Harvard ? Since he has so much administrative experience and all."
I also posit this against the idea that as governor of Alaska Palin would not be fit to be president should McCain bite it:
Governors who went on to become presidents:
Thomas Jefferson, Governor of Virginia, 1779-81
James Monroe, Governor of Virginia, 1799-1802
Andrew Jackson, Governor of the Florida Territory, 1821
Martin Van Buren, Governor of New York, 1829
William Henry Harrison, Territorial Governor of Indiana, 1801-13
John Tyler, Governor of Virginia, 1825-26
James Knox Polk, Governor of Tennessee, 1839-41
Andrew Johnson, Governor of Tennessee, 1853-57, Military Governor of Tennessee, 1862-65
Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Governor of Ohio, 1868-72, Governor of Ohio, 1876-77
Grover Cleveland, Governor of New York, 1883-85
William McKinley, Governor of Ohio, 1892-96
Theodore Roosevelt, Governor of New York, 1898-1900
William Howard Taft, Governor of the Philippines, 1901-04
Woodrow Wilson, Governor of New Jersey, 1911-13
Calvin Coolidge, Governor of Massachusetts, 1919-20
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Governor of New York, 1929-33
James Earl Carter, Jr., Governor of Georgia, 1971-75
Ronald Wilson Reagan, Governor of California, 1967-75
William Jefferson Clinton, Governor of Arkansas, 1978-80, 1982-92
George Walker Bush, Governor of Texas, 1995-2000
So being a governor seems hardly a setback to becoming a president should the need arise.
Sarah Palin is a selectively moral bigoted hick who is incapable of teaching her daughter how to use a condom. Bush Jr., worst president ever, would look great compared to her as president. That's how bad she is.
Biden is a bigot as well, no? What were his feelings on convenience store workers and Obama, again? Hell, he's probably more of a danger to Obama than anyone else. He can get a racially motivated assassination accomplished from the inside. ;)
I'm not saying one is better than the other. But, if you make indictments against one's moral character, it's best to remember that the opposition is in no way better on that front. Otherwise, it makes you sound biased. :D
EDIT: @ Aran: Biased much? Much like the media, you have elected to disregard a couple of major points with "Troopergate". One, the trooper in question made death threats to two people. Two, the trooper in question tasered his 11 year old stepson.
Results of internal police investigation
Death threat
On March 1, 2006, Wooten was notified of the results of the Alaska State Trooper internal investigation. The probe found that Wooten violated internal policy, but not the law, in making a death threat against Heath.[20] Wooten denied having made the threat, but the investigation decided that he had in fact done so.[20] The investigation concluded that the death threat was not a crime because Wooten did not threaten the father directly; therefore, the investigator deemed the threat to be a violation of trooper policy rather than a violation of criminal law.[2] Although the death threat was listed as a violation of trooper policy in the Memorandum of Findings[20] issued on October 29, 2005, it was not mentioned at all in the suspension letter[26] sent to Wooten by Col. Grimes on March 1, 2006.
Moose hunt
The investigation found that Wooten had committed a hunting violation in shooting a moose without a permit: he had been out hunting with McCann in September 2003 and had shot the animal himself even though their permit was in McCann's name only.[20] According to subsequent news reports, McCann had obtained the permit but balked at killing the moose herself, so she handed the gun to her then-husband, who shot the animal.[27]
Taser incident
Wooten was also found to have violated department policy in using a Taser on his then 11-year old stepson in 2003. He told investigators that he did so "in a training capacity" after the child had asked to be tased.[17][20][28][29] In a statement to police, the boy said "he wanted to be tased to show that he's not a mommy's boy in front of Bristol [his cousin, Palin's daughter]. Following being tased he went upstairs to tell his mother that he was fine."[15] In a statement to police, Molly McCann said "she was up stairs giving a bath to the kids … Mike was going to show Payton what it feels like and she told Mike that he better not."[15] According to Molly's account, she remained upstairs during the incident.
Although the Taser incident happened in 2003, it was not reported to police until on or after April 11, 2005, the day McCann filed for divorce. On June 6, 2005, a police investigator asked Bristol why they "waited so long and brought the incident up after two years." Bristol said "because of the divorce."[15]
Alcohol-related allegations
The investigation initially cleared Wooten on all of the alcohol-related charges,[20] but Grimes overturned that result and found that Wooten did "take [an] open beer with him when he drove away in his trooper vehicle" on one occasion in the summer of 2004, violating both the law and internal trooper policy.
The result of these findings? A paltry 10 day suspension. Now, you tell me how this guy's boss did his job by not firing this guy? Who abused their power here? Palin for firing a man that refused to do his job properly and remove this obviously unstable trooper - who was found guilty of many violations of trooper policy and some laws? Or the guy who refused to fire him in the first place? ;) Ask yourself this, if you were caught drinking in a vehicle, breaking game laws, tasering your child and making death threats on top of it and your boss found out, would you still have a job? Think about it for a minute. This guy was entrusted with the safety of the public. He violated that trust on several occasions. He should have been fired. But he was not. So she got rid of his boss. Because he was not doing the job he was being paid to do.
I also posit this against the idea that as governor of Alaska Palin would not be fit to be president should McCain bite it:
Governors who went on to become presidents:
Thomas Jefferson, Governor of Virginia, 1779-81
James Monroe, Governor of Virginia, 1799-1802
Andrew Jackson, Governor of the Florida Territory, 1821
Martin Van Buren, Governor of New York, 1829
William Henry Harrison, Territorial Governor of Indiana, 1801-13
John Tyler, Governor of Virginia, 1825-26
James Knox Polk, Governor of Tennessee, 1839-41
Andrew Johnson, Governor of Tennessee, 1853-57, Military Governor of Tennessee, 1862-65
Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Governor of Ohio, 1868-72, Governor of Ohio, 1876-77
Grover Cleveland, Governor of New York, 1883-85
William McKinley, Governor of Ohio, 1892-96
Theodore Roosevelt, Governor of New York, 1898-1900
William Howard Taft, Governor of the Philippines, 1901-04
Woodrow Wilson, Governor of New Jersey, 1911-13
Calvin Coolidge, Governor of Massachusetts, 1919-20
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Governor of New York, 1929-33
James Earl Carter, Jr., Governor of Georgia, 1971-75
Ronald Wilson Reagan, Governor of California, 1967-75
William Jefferson Clinton, Governor of Arkansas, 1978-80, 1982-92
George Walker Bush, Governor of Texas, 1995-2000
So being a governor seems hardly a setback to becoming a president should the need arise.
Those who were governors for two years or less: Andrew Jackson, Martin Van Buren, John Tyler, Grover Cleveland, Calvin Coolidge. Not exactly a list of out best presidents...
And I think that the VP of a candidate who has significant risk of death in the next ten years should get more attention than normal.
......and just a minute ago, you were telling us about how you weren't hot on McCain, so obviously it's Palin who is drawing you to the ticket or am I wrong?
Just because somebody is voting for someone it doesn't mean that they support them.
Have you ever thought to consider that a person may vote for one candidate because they are terrified of the policies of the other candidate?
Have you ever thought that a person would not vote for a candidate because they do not believe in socialism?
Have you ever thought that some people may not vote for who they believe will save the country, but instead they believe in voting for who is less likely to destroy the country?
Kistra, Andrew Jackson got rid of the national debt so how does that make him a bad president?
Also Obama is just as likely to die as McCain is.
Have you ever thought that a person would not vote for a candidate because they do not believe in socialism?
You know, people use that as an excuse a lot, but half the time I ask them about it, it turns out they either:
A) don't even really know what socialism is,
B) can't name any socialist policies a candidate supports,
C) or incorrectly interpret a policy as socialist when it is not.
Of course, most people can't even actually name anything that's wrong with the idea socialism. :P
Same with communism, actually.
EDIT: To clarify, I'm not saying that any of the above apply to you specifically, dirtyfrank. In fact, I'm not even saying that I don't think Obama's policies are be socialist (though I'm also not saying that socialism can't be a good thing, in moderation of course). I'm just making a observation about people who use that line in general.
Those who were governors for two years or less: Andrew Jackson, Martin Van Buren, John Tyler, Grover Cleveland, Calvin Coolidge. Not exactly a list of out best presidents...
Hm. Let's look these guys up.
Andrew Jackson: Admittedly a mixed bag. Less nation debt is good. But, that depression was bad. ood intentions with the national bank opposition, nullification crisis, and such, but obviously mixed results. Mediocre.
Martin Van Buren: Actually, seems pretty solid. Got some bad situations, but, considering what he had to work with, I think he did rather well dealing with the financial and internationl tensions.
John Tyler: Yeah, doesn't look like a strong showing, compared to so far.
Grover Cleveland: Dude, he did great! I'd call him one of our best, and one of our most underappreciated. So there weren't any wars or huge disasters; this guy helped promote some major reform in the system.
Calvin Coolidge: Again, seems like a pretty good POTUS. Other than his policy with federal flood aid, I don't really see many, if any, problems (obviously, this is likely biased due to my personal views on government and such). Even then, I can understand his reasoning.
So we've got on relatively poor Pres, 2 mediocre to okay, and 2 solid to great.
Really, I don't feel too bad on our chances.
What has she said that you find bigoted? "I do." to an ethnic husband? Agreeing with Joe Biden on gay marriage? Just curious as to where you get that.
She doesn't agree with Joe Biden on gay marriage. She doesn't believe in giving gay couples the same civil rights as straight couples, and as much as said so in the debate.
Of course, BOTH are bigoted on that issue. Call it gay marriage or you're a bigot. Period.
But that's not really the whole of it.
She's a bigot because she's anti-intellectual.
She's a bigot because she's been making borderline racist comments. You remember when people yelled in response "Kill him!" and yelled racist epithits at a black cameraman at her rally?
I guess not. They did.
She's a bigot because she's a religious nut.
As to her daughter, I suppose you did everything your parents ever suggested? Believe everything that they ever taught? I mean, honestly, I knew about condoms well in advance of 17 and my parents never mentioned them. Were things much different for you?
First off, my parents aren't idiots. They're intelligent people. Palin... well, she doesn't give the impression of education. At all. Nothing about her says she knows what she's doing.
Secondly, my parents DID talk to me about BC. So did my school. Now, given Palin is a woman who made women pay for their own **** kits, I'm afraid I'm kind of skeptical she gave the condom talk to her daughter, and with people like her in charge, I doubt her daughter got any sort of quality education. Heck, did Palin opt her out of sex ed classes? It'd be entirely in character.
Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, even assuming she was so stupid, there's something called an abortion.
So being a governor seems hardly a setback to becoming a president should the need arise.
Being an idiot, however, does, and of the last four governers made president we've had, one of them was the worst president ever (Bush), one of them was in the lower half (Reagan), and two were middling (Carter and Clinton). Johnson, also a governer, was pretty terrible.
Palin is very much like Bush, but even worse. Anti-intellectuals are awful presidents.
Biden is a bigot as well, no? What were his feelings on convenience store workers and Obama, again? Hell, he's probably more of a danger to Obama than anyone else. He can get a racially motivated assassination accomplished from the inside.
It wouldn't be racially motivated, it'd be power motivated.
I doubt Biden would be a worse president than Obama anyway, so its not particularly relevant.
I'm not saying one is better than the other. But, if you make indictments against one's moral character, it's best to remember that the opposition is in no way better on that front. Otherwise, it makes you sound biased.
He's nowhere near as bad as Palin. Period. Palin is an anti-intellectual and an ignorant moron. I'd rather have an educated bigot than an uneducated bigot any day of the week, and Biden is far, far less bigoted.
Those who were governors for two years or less: Andrew Jackson, Martin Van Buren, John Tyler, Grover Cleveland, Calvin Coolidge. Not exactly a list of out best presidents...
Indeed. Jackson killed the Native Americans, and no one even knows who the others are. To be fair, Jackson wasn't a terrible president, just a bastard.
Just because somebody is voting for someone it doesn't mean that they support them.
yes it does. voting for some one means you support them. if you don't like a candidate, don't vote for them. Vote for a libertarian, or a member of the Green party. If you don't like ANY of the candidates, use a write-in, and vote for Mickey Mouse or Cthulhu, or yourself.
I'm pretty sure that Obama will classify my vote as my supporting him.
Have you ever thought to consider that a person may vote for one candidate because they are terrified of the policies of the other candidate?
yes, I am familiar with the concept of being frightened of the policies of a candidate. In fact, Palin's track record scares the bejezus out of me. that's a big reason why I'm voting Obama, and it doesn't hurt that he has charisma, intelligence, and that his stated policies are the correct choices in government.
Have you ever thought that a person would not vote for a candidate because they do not believe in socialism?
it's reasonable to not vote for a system you do not believe in, but Obama/Biden = socialism? Hardly!
Have you ever thought that some people may not vote for who they believe will save the country, but instead they believe in voting for who is less likely to destroy the country?
I am doing both. funny, that.
Also Obama is just as likely to die as McCain is.
don't give me that "Obama is going to get assassinated" BS. the chances of Obama being assassinated are about as likely as the chances of Ozzy Ozbourne becoming Amish. McCain's health is a really immanent problem. he may last one term (unlikely, but possible) he WON'T last a second.
and even if Obama does die, Biden is a better option than McCain or Palin.
This just makes me like McCain more..
Here's a solution: if you think your politician needs experience, send him or her to Ukraine or Belarus or other Eastern-Europe country and try to hold their government together. Good luck.
From what I read here that Palin woman strikes me as a female A. Lepper. That is no good.
Hm. Let's look these guys up.
Andrew Jackson: Admittedly a mixed bag. Less nation debt is good. But, that depression was bad. ood intentions with the national bank opposition, nullification crisis, and such, but obviously mixed results. Mediocre.
Martin Van Buren: Actually, seems pretty solid. Got some bad situations, but, considering what he had to work with, I think he did rather well dealing with the financial and internationl tensions.
John Tyler: Yeah, doesn't look like a strong showing, compared to so far.
Grover Cleveland: Dude, he did great! I'd call him one of our best, and one of our most underappreciated. So there weren't any wars or huge disasters; this guy helped promote some major reform in the system.
Calvin Coolidge: Again, seems like a pretty good POTUS. Other than his policy with federal flood aid, I don't really see many, if any, problems (obviously, this is likely biased due to my personal views on government and such). Even then, I can understand his reasoning.
So we've got on relatively poor Pres, 2 mediocre to okay, and 2 solid to great.
Really, I don't feel too bad on our chances.
I guess I see it (mostly) differently:
Andrew Jackson: famous for winning battle of New Orleans after the peace treaty was already signed, notorious hothead and personally responsible for the Trail of Tears
Martin van Buren: he was Secretary of State for Jackson and helped create those financial and international tensions in the first place
Grover Cleveland: I agree, great president, did a lot to combat corruption, however he had a long history of doing the same as mayor and governor
Calvin Coolidge: President from 1923 - 1928. Lots of financial deregulation. What happened in 1929?
I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy, I mean, that's a storybook, man.
I've had a great relationship. In Delaware, the largest growth in population is Indian-Americans moving from India. You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I'm not joking.
He's nowhere near as bad as Palin. Period. Palin is an anti-intellectual and an ignorant moron. I'd rather have an educated bigot than an uneducated bigot any day of the week, and Biden is far, far less bigoted.
Riiiiiiight. Far less bigoted. Nevermind that, to Biden, all blacks have issues speaking, are none too bright, dirty and are - apparently - ugly. And all Indians in America do is work at 7-Elevens and Dunkin' Donuts. Sounds very intelligent and not bigoted at all. ;) Oh, this - by the way - is the definition of ignorance. Sterotyping, which is Biden's best pal, generally implies ignorance.
Palin's religion seems to be a problem, too. Her ideology - to you - implies ignorance. Well, hate to break it to ya', but Biden is a devout Catholic as well. Here's just a taste:
The New York Times reported that Biden "departed from party doctrine on abortion rights, declaring that as a Catholic, he believes life begins at conception"
So, if this sort of stance makes Palin an uneducated, ignorant boob, what of Biden? He shares the same thoughts. I also like all of the conjecture you made about Palin and her family. Guesses you made at what she may or may not have done seem to have colored your opinion a bit. For one spouting off about education and ignorance, it seems odd that conjecture would carry so much weight, no? Wouldn't it be more prudent to actually find out what she did in those situations - if it is of significant import - than just, I dunno, making it up? ;)
. Moving on...I'm seeing alot of good, factual evidence and history, and am learning alot (still undecided [is that apathy or lethargy?]) from some of the more responsible posters (respect btw w/out making overt bias/coming correct here). However, I'm seeing alot of filler too from others. And by "filler" I mean outright propaganda, slander and libel, paranoid speculation, and the general spin of late that has shamefully become a buzzword in an otherwise decent (IMO) culture.
The fact that they make reference and embrace "the spin room" post debate on the major networks scares the Hell out of me. Would you adopt the position of film critic 'x' on 2 movies you were dying to see and write one off cuz' it was panned by said critic? Or would you research & see both and decide for yourself which was better (for you, not all audiences)?
-I highly recommend each of you search around for the facts and stay away from most media outlets, namely major network news (most have political connections no matter how discrete). Like the rest of the universe, everything is interconnected and favors/bias are rooted in the farthest of corners.
League of Women Voters, I have found in the past to be perhaps the most impartial and informed on canidacy, voting history, what's at stake, etc. Worth a look.
-McCain's age: might be an issue. Who knows. Remember Regan? Wasn't he up there w/ Methuselah? Old as Hell, polyps & other surgeries, got shot a few times, and had probably the most stressful job on the planet during some scary times (terrorism isn't so bad when squaring against another superpower). Old, but tough as nails. Also, they don't just give the Cmndr in Chief bargain basement medicals. Walter Reed is the sh-t.
-Bigotry: Haven't heard much of anything in that dept. and w/ tensions running so high and total media coverage being so rampant, you'd think the slightest, uh, slight would be jumped upon and blown up like no tomorrow. Americans love to sensationalize everything...
-Assassination: Not many are saying it, but it's a possibility. A scary one at that. Ultra-stealth pink elephant (or donkey depending on your affiliation ;) ). No one wants to address it, but it's like a cancer (further you ignore it, worse it can get). God forbid it happens, specifically Obama. The LA riots will look tame in comarison given racial fallout, presuming that's the motivation. And even if it isn't, it is likely to be construed that way for opportunists, disenfranchised, or whomever. Spin again...It won't be ressurecting anyone, only hurting the rest of the living ppl IMO. Hence, we should be preparing for his (or McCain's) additional security and possible fallout should the unthinkable happen.
It might actually bring Americans closer together, but more than likely, it will inflict horrific damage and further malign the would-be assassin's political objectives. Like terrorism; you don't actually win much support for your cause when you blow up markets full of potential supporters, you know?
Just because somebody is voting for someone it doesn't mean that they support them.
Truly. Often it's just to snub the other guy or keep an opposing position they endorse from slagging your own political sensibilities/motives/etc. There are plenty of bitter Hillary supporters that are dyed in the wool Dems that will be voting for McCain given the fallout w/ Obama, etc. If that isn't a b/w example, I don't know what is IMO.
Good thread for what it's worth and the visual aids are priceless. I particularly like the the OJ one...He's a crook & has been for a long time. We all know he did it (the murders prior), and again, the spin then made modern America look like another Jerry Springer showing. Embarrassing and trivial.
yes it does. voting for some one means you support them. if you don't like a candidate, don't vote for them. Vote for a libertarian, or a member of the Green party. If you don't like ANY of the candidates, use a write-in, and vote for Mickey Mouse or Cthulhu, or yourself.
I'm pretty sure that Obama will classify my vote as my supporting him.
I’m sure he will to but that’s not what he’s saying. What he is saying is that if it’s between Cthulhu and Mickey Mouse even though he supports neither he will vote for Mickey Mouse. How the candidate interprets that information is up to them and none of the other parties or write in candidates mean a hill of beans to who will win between those two prime candidates. In other words you can either vote with your heart or vote with your brain. If you vote with your heart anything goes if you vote with your brain there are only two choices bad and worse.
yes, I am familiar with the concept of being frightened of the policies of a candidate. In fact, Palin's track record scares the bejezus out of me. that's a big reason why I'm voting Obama, and it doesn't hurt that he has charisma, intelligence, and that his stated policies are the correct choices in government.
So if McCain picked another running mate say Lieberman you would vote for him? After what you wrote thus far I highly doubt it, making you assertion about Palin a moot point.
it's reasonable to not vote for a system you do not believe in, but Obama/Biden = socialism? Hardly!
Your right taking more tax money from wealthy individuals and giving it to individuals who do not pay taxes is not Socialism:
“a lot of those "working families" don't pay federal income taxes. How are you going to cut taxes they don't pay? According to the National Taxpayer's Union, the top half of American taxpayers pay 97% of all federal income taxes, leaving the other half to pay a combined 3%. Most of those familes pay no federal income taxes at all. Sen. Obama isn't proposing a tax cut--tax rates on the vast majority of Americans will either remain the same or go up under Sen. Obama's plan. Instead, he's planning on sending those non-payers an income tax "rebate" check--despite the fact that they never "bated" any income taxes in the first place. That's not a tax cut. That's welfare.” The Natural Truth, By Michael Graham
I am doing both. funny, that.
The messiah will save everyone have no fear.
don't give me that "Obama is going to get assassinated" BS. the chances of Obama being assassinated are about as likely as the chances of Ozzy Ozbourne becoming Amish. McCain's health is a really immanent problem. he may last one term (unlikely, but possible) he WON'T last a second.
Thank you Matt Damon. I’m sure if he was a Democrat you would be singing a different tune.
and even if Obama does die, Biden is a better option than McCain or Palin.
So if McCain picked another running mate say Lieberman you would vote for him?
See I didn’t think so and even though I do agree that Biden is a better choice then Obama because I do believe he loves America as misguided as his liberal views are; he is not better then McCain and his liberal views (even though I would vote for him over McCain: see reason below) but I do think he has the advantage over Palin due to experience alone and not policy or ideology.
So to get back to dirtyfrank’s point this year should have been a slam dunk for the Democratic Party. In fact I believe that if it were Biden or Edwards (before the scandal) would be ahead 20 points right now against McCain. McCain is a very weak candidate who is disliked by his own party and myself. If they had a true conservative like Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo or Mitt Romney this would be a different race. Instead we have Barack Hussein Obama super leftist, radical liberal, who prescribes to black theology and is friends with Bill Ayers and Tony Rezco and McCain wants amnesty for illegal immigrants and the McCain-Feingold bill regulates freedom of speech. McCain has no problem reaching across the aisle and making friends with the likes of Ted Kennedy and passing liberal agendas to get things done. No thanks. We need a fiscal conservative to get us out of this mess and those two lack the credentials.
don't give me that "Obama is going to get assassinated" BS. the chances of Obama being assassinated are about as likely as the chances of Ozzy Ozbourne becoming Amish. McCain's health is a really immanent problem. he may last one term (unlikely, but possible) he WON'T last a second.
I don't remember ever saying anything about Obama being assassinated. Let us look at what I typed.
Also Obama is just as likely to die as McCain is.
Assassination is not the only way for a person to die. Obama could have a health problem that nobody knows about (not even he himself knows about). Obama can have a sudden heart attack during his presidency. Health problems can not be predicted, we can only know when health problems are more likely to occur. The future is greatly unforeseeable and in that future there is always a chance that Obama could develop cancer, get a disease, obtain a virus, or have a mental illness develop.
Even though McCain is not in great shape he could end up living until he is one hundred years old. Obama could die tomorrow and McCain could live for another 3 decades.
I wish everyone would drop the "because he is old he may die tomorrow" thing because it has gotten old quick.
I wish everyone would drop the "because he is old he may die tomorrow" thing because it has gotten old quick.
How about the "stage 3/4 melanoma 10 year survival rate is less than 50% and therefore McCain is at a high risk of death" statement?
Who cares about his age? It is his history of multiple melanomas comorbid with other conditions that concerns people (or at least me).
To me someone saying something like "McCain shouldn't be president because he is old" is the same as someone saying "Obama shouldn't be president because he is black". I just don't like these bigoted arguments.
But yes, the "melanoma" argument is much better than the "he is over 70" argument.
Obama has no known health problems. McCain has a history of them. saying Obama is just as likely to die of natural causes as McCain is simply incorrect.
and I'm leaving this thread now because it is clearly not worth my time. every one here who is going to vote for Obama is already going to, and every one who is going to vote for McCain is already going to, and in the end, none of our votes actually matter since the Electoral college will vote the way it wants regardless of the popular vote. Fortunately for America, that choice is extremely likely to be in favor of Obama.
Ciao
And all Indians in America do is work at 7-Elevens and Dunkin' Donuts.
its funny because it is true. I can't blame or hate on a guy with a sense of humor and who speaks the truth, whether people like the truth or not.
some people like their truth served with an overwhelming side of B.S.
nope not me! I like cold hard painful truth! I want a leader who is blunt, cold, and honest. Someone who won't butter things up.
The messiah will save everyone have no fear.
My, it's intelligent, mature remarks like this that make reading your posts such an enjoyable experience.
Obama has no known health problems. McCain has a history of them. saying Obama is just as likely to die of natural causes as McCain is simply incorrect.
You are correct that Obama has no known health problems, but this does not mean that he doesn't have health problems.
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Obama could have a health problem that nobody knows about or could develop in the near future. He has just as much a chance of crocking at any moment as the next man.
Obama could have a health problem that nobody knows about or could develop in the near future. He has just as much a chance of crocking at any moment as the next man.
Not if that "next man" has been treated for cancer on several different occasions and falls into a demographic (former POWs) with markedly reduced longevity.
This is a ghoulish line of conversation we're all probably better off avoiding, but it's not one where Obama and McCain are at all on even ground.
Not if that "next man" has been treated for cancer on several different occasions and falls into a demographic (former POWs) with markedly reduced longevity.
This is a ghoulish line of conversation we're all probably better off avoiding, but it's not one where Obama and McCain are at all on even ground.
I am just trying to point out that McCain could live for many more years and Obama could come down with a quick hitting mysterious illness.
Yes, evidence does show that McCain likely wont live much longer but that doesn't mean that he is going to die tomorrow, next week, next month, next year, or any time in the next 5 years.
Of course, BOTH are bigoted on that issue. Call it gay marriage or you're a bigot. Period.
Quoted for so much truth that just typing "QFT" doesn't quite cover it.
Crimson Concerto I assure that I and many others know full well what Socialism is...
I would suggest you speak for yourself. ;)
Also, again, I did not mean to imply that you yourself do not. Nor did I even begin to suggest why my actual opinion on the matter is. It was just a personal observation, and my point in calling it out was that so many people use that line without actually knowing what it means, and I hate when people do that sort of thing. Most people don't even know what the "sanctity of marriage" means, for example. It's always better to thoroughly explain yourself than to present a vague and hackneyed statement.
I am just trying to point out that McCain could live for many more years and Obama could come down with a quick hitting mysterious illness.
Yes, evidence does show that McCain likely wont live much longer but that doesn't mean that he is going to die tomorrow, next week, next month, next year, or any time in the next 5 years.
This is true.
However, it is so astronomically unlikely it can be for the most part disregarded as fodder or reasoning for a competent argument.
And what did he accomplish in these lofty positions? Voting "present"?
I understand that the inner workings of Illinois senate procedure are not very widely known, but voting "present" is the same as a "no" vote. Why do I mention the Illinois senate? Because there is no option to vote present in the US Senate.
To paraphrase Alpine "But now you know, and knowing is not likely to change your spoon fed talking points."
Okay, but why is everyone in that picture so hot and bothered over Austin Powers?
I understand that the inner workings of Illinois senate procedure are not very widely known, but voting "present" is the same as a "no" vote. Why do I mention the Illinois senate? Because there is no option to vote present in the US Senate.
A vote of "present" in the Illinois senate counts towards quorum but doesn't count as a "yea" or "nay". In the Federal senate it's "abstain". Counting yourself as there without actually voting is a time-honored tradition, it means that you have no opinion on the topic at hand and will defer to the rest of the assembly's decision.
I can't slight Obama for voting "present". At the very least, it shows that he understood that the assembly's business was important enough that he would defer to the concensus. He could've walked out and removed himself from the quorum, but that might have caused the vote to simply be postponed.
My, it's intelligent, mature remarks like this that make reading your posts such an enjoyable experience.
Hey thanks, I mean this thread is about cartoons that make fun of Sarah Palin, which to your vast intelligence and ethical standard is OK to do, but make a comment about how zealous Obama supporters are to Obama and now you are walking on thin ice.
Farrakhan's 'Savior'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: October 14, 2008
1:00 am Eastern
© 2008
The video is absolutely chilling.
It captures Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan saying about Barack Obama: "The Messiah is absolutely speaking."
But there was much more to this address last February at the Nation of Islam's annual "Savior's Day" event in Chicago.
The speech was called "The Gods at War." It was a carefully crafted endorsement of Obama not just as a presidential candidate, but as a political and spiritual "Savior" who will unite the world and correct America's course "as an evil imperialist empire."
"Brothers and sisters," Farrakhan said, "Barack Obama to me, is a herald of the Messiah. Barack Obama is like the trumpet that alerts you something new, something better is on the way."
Farrakhan points out that the man Nation of Islam followers refer to as "the Savior," Fard Muhammad, had a black father and a white mother, just as Obama did.
"A black man with a white mother became a savior to us," he said. "A black man with a white mother could turn out to be one who can lift America from her fall."
The racist demagogue went on to paint an end-times picture of the world – high levels of stress, new incurable diseases, sightings of UFOs, unusual weather patterns, the collapse of the economy.
But because of Obama's campaign, "People are being transformed from what they were. His language is raising them above their racial, ethnic, cultural, religious differences, and he is welding people into a bond that has never been seen before."
"If this man is doing what has never been done before by any politician, white or black, where is God in this, and why now?" he asked rhetorically. "We have never seen Caucasian people vote like this for a man of color. Why is this happening at this time? It is because the gods are at war, and you don't even know that the war has already started, and you are being victimized by the arch deceiver who sees this world coming down. At the same time, we are witnessing the rise of a young man of color in the country that persecuted us. You know, when the gods are at war, you have to understand the kind of world that God wants to bring in against the world that Satan has us living in."
Farrakhan made clear he believes Obama is a divine tool.
"Would God allow Barack to be president of a country that has been so racist, so evil in its treatment of Hispanics, native Americans, blacks?" he asked. "Would God do something like that? Yeah. Of course he would. That's to show you that the stone that the builders rejected has become the headstone of the corner. This is a sign to you. It's the time of our rise. It's the time that we should take our place. The future is all about you."
Farrakhan suggested he would keep a low profile in the campaign, despite his enthusiasm for Obama.
"That's why you have never heard me make any comment," he explained. "I love that brother, and I want to see that brother successful. I don't want to say anything that would hurt that brother, and I don't want them to use me or the Nation of Islam."
Returning to the theme that Obama is a mystical figure, Farrakhan said, he "is not the Messiah for sure, but anytime he gives you a sign of uniting races, ethnic groups, ideologies, religions and makes people feel a sense of oneness, that's not necessarily Satan's work, that is, I believe, the work of God."
He went on to point out that when religious scholars talk about Christ or the Islamic Mahdi, they never talk in racial terms – again, pointing to Obama's mixed racial background.
Americans need to decide right now whether they want Louis Farrakhan's Messiah in the White House. The polls show Obama would win today. That reality is even more chilling than Farrakhan's delusions.
A vote of "present" in the Illinois senate counts towards quorum but doesn't count as a "yea" or "nay". In the Federal senate it's "abstain". Counting yourself as there without actually voting is a time-honored tradition, it means that you have no opinion on the topic at hand and will defer to the rest of the assembly's decision.
I can't slight Obama for voting "present". At the very least, it shows that he understood that the assembly's business was important enough that he would defer to the concensus. He could've walked out and removed himself from the quorum, but that might have caused the vote to simply be postponed.
Examining Obama's 'Present' Votes in Illinois
by David Schaper
Stan Honda
Democratic presidential hopeful New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama spar during the Democratic Presidential Primary Debate, Jan. 21. AFP/Getty Images
Related NPR Stories
Jan. 23, 2008
Fact-Checking Clinton, Obama's Political SparringJan. 23, 2008
Obama Criticizes Bush Stimulus Plan
All Things Considered, January 23, 2008 · In Monday night's debate between Democratic presidential candidates, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards attacked Illinois Sen. Barack Obama's voting record from his days as an Illinois lawmaker.
"In the Illinois State Senate, Senator Obama voted 130 times 'present,'" Clinton said. "That's not 'yes.' That's not 'no.' That's 'maybe.'"
The actual number of Obama's "present" votes was 129 during his eight years in the Illinois Senate. Obama's campaign says anyone criticizing his "present" votes doesn't understand how this type of vote is used in the rough-and-tumble give-and-take of the Illinois legislature.
To register a vote in the Illinois General Assembly, lawmakers have a choice of three buttons on their desk. The "yes" button is green. The "no" button is red, and the "present" button is yellow, says Rich Miller, who writes and publishes The Capitol Fax, a daily newsletter and blog on Illinois politics.
"There's a saying in Springfield that there's a reason why the present button is yellow," Miller says.
But Miller says that not all "present" votes are cowardly, including those cast by then-state Sen. Obama.
"After having put some thought into it, I don't think that Barack Obama was necessarily a coward for voting present on those bills. In fact, I think he believed that he was doing the right thing, because something, in his mind, might have been unconstitutional," Miller says.
Miller points out that, at times, Obama was the only lawmaker voting "present" on bills winning near unanimous support, even on issues he supported and on one he sponsored.
Chris Mooney is a political science professor at the University of Illinois, Springfield.
"A person as cerebral as Sen. Obama might be prone to such a thing, thinking things through a little too carefully," Mooney says.
Mooney and other state capitol watchers and players say Illinois lawmakers often vote "present" as part of a larger party or issue bloc strategy.
Pam Sutherland is the president and CEO of the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council. She says Obama voted "present" at least seven times to provide cover to other abortion-rights supporters on such bills as the "Born Alive Infant Protection Act."
"Senators didn't want to vote pro-choice anymore, because they knew these were being used against them in their campaigns," Sutherland said.
Potentially more damaging for Obama is Clinton's attack about Tony Rezko, an indicted Chicago real estate developer and political fundraiser, whom Clinton characterized as a slumlord for whom Obama did legal work.
Billing records from Obama's former law firm show that he did do five hours of legal work in the late 1990s for community groups that partnered with Rezko's development company, but did not work for Rezko directly.
Still, the two have known each other since Rezko tried to recruit Obama out of law school for a job. Cindy Canary of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform explains Rezko's place in Illinois politics.
"He's kind of been like a virus in our political culture, if you will, and he has given money to candidates on both sides of the aisle," she says.
When Obama bought a mansion in Chicago's Hyde Park neighborhood in 2004, Rezko's wife bought the lots next door and then sold a portion of it to Obama to expand his yard.
It happened at a time when Rezko was under federal investigation — for his fundraising activities on behalf of Illinois Gov. Rob Blagojevich, and his role on a couple of state boards and commissions.
Though there are no allegations of wrong-doing by Obama, Canary says the relationship may hurt him.
"I think this will stand out in Sen. Obama's career as the date he wishes he'd never gone on," she says.
Tony Rezko goes on trial Feb. 25, three weeks after much of the country votes in the Super Tuesday Democratic primaries.
It's a time honored event and I can totally see local legislators and so on show up to kick start the ceremonies, especially when there are so veyr few ppl in Alaska. No problem there. It just seemed odd given the timing of the program in relation to what's going on now, you know? Not saying whoever owns Discovery is indebted to Republican interests. TV air time is definetly getting way less discrete, politically or otherwise in terms of "coincidental programming, advertising, and documentation".
And now the other side:
"Farrakhan's Savior". Farrakhan scares the Hell out of me. I cannot abide a "religious figure(head)" that espouses violence and hateful speech as part of his/her platform and rise to celebrity status. Furthermore, he is a blight upon the Muslim-American community IMO. There are plenty of more enlightened and qualified imams and other Islamic clergy that do far more to facilitate the growth/acceptance/contribution of the Muslim community. He rarely serves to bolster it, namely lashing out at other demographics rather than trying to uplift his own. Attack outside vs. build w/in as it were.
I like parts of Obama, I like parts of McCain, and bla bla bla. Not endorsing either. Just tossing this stuff out there.
However, it did surprise me that Frarrakhan had been relatively quiet up till now. That is to say, an endorsement from him is not unlike having Satan backing you at a press conference. That's help you don't want given his past history of political rhetoric and jargon. A nice way of saying, "He's said some fairly inflammatory things about certain peoples, namely the Jews."
And it was no mystery the McCain campaign didn't want any help from 'W' given his own poll's of late. Not an easy way to politely distance yourself from your own party's most powerful figure, but a necessary/popular one. The affiliation w/ a negative character is likely to besmirch one's own is the simplest way I can put it, and this rat race, as disgusting as it is, is no exception.
What this might mean: Farrakhan could be doing more damage to the Obama campaign w/ his supprt by rallying prospective Jewish & other interests/voters to vote McCain instead of a possible Obama.
If I were an Obama media consultant, big cog in his machine, whatever, I would send an encrypted message, e-mail, call, something to Farrakhan and say, "Thanks, but shut the Hell up...you're killing it for both of us. We'll call you back after the election and then we can talk, but keep your finger off the trigger as you're likely to shoot us both in the foot."
However, it did surprise me that Frarrakhan had been relatively quiet up till now. That is to say, an endorsement from him is not unlike having Satan backing you at a press conference.
I know Satan. Farrakhan's no Satan, just a hate-filled idealogue that thinks the rest of us are deluded.
I know Satan. Farrakhan's no Satan, just a hate-filled idealogue that thinks the rest of us are deluded.
Appreciated, but play along, you know? It's not a literal mention, savvy?
A bad figure associating w/ a theoretical good and tarnishing an otherwise promising future or track record is the dynamic here.
A bad figure associating w/ a theoretical good and tarnishing an otherwise promising future or track record is the dynamic here.
Sorry, I was trying to do a Lloyd Bentson thing. I'll just wander off into obscurity again.
Hey thanks, I mean this thread is about cartoons that make fun of Sarah Palin, which to your vast intelligence and ethical standard is OK to do, but make a comment about how zealous Obama supporters are to Obama and now you are walking on thin ice.
riiiiiiiiight. Because that's all you intended by saying "the messiah will save us all have no fear".
No sarcasm or mockery.
So in your book poking a little fun=mocking supporters?
I could understand maybe if I had submitted a link to a cartoon depicting palin walking along a street followed by flocks of lobotomy patients your point would be valid.
If all you really meant to say was that some of Obama's supporters may be overzealous, just say that. Don't play coy with me.
Because goldarnit if I've just had too much of this fancy-mancy talk, hoo boy you betcha.
riiiiiiiiight. Because that's all you intended by saying "the messiah will save us all have no fear".
No sarcasm or mockery.
I never said that but I will admit that was the gist of it to poke fun and mock Obama's supporter that think Obama is the end all be all like Lewis Farrakhan. You got me.
So in your book poking a little fun=mocking supporters?
No, just Obama supporters that think he’s the messiah. Just like posters are making fun=mocking supporters of Sara Palin.
I could understand maybe if I had submitted a link to a cartoon depicting palin walking along a street followed by flocks of lobotomy patients your point would be valid.
The fact you decided to add your two cents on this particular thread makes my point valid. You could have left it alone or let the person I was posting my comment to answer it but for some reason you felt compelled to do so with (I guess) not understanding what the comedic topic of this thread was about. Next time read before you post and we wouldn’t be having a discussion.
If all you really meant to say was that some of Obama's supporters may be overzealous, just say that. Don't play coy with me.
Because goldarnit if I've just had too much of this fancy-mancy talk, hoo boy you betcha.
I wasn’t being coy with you in fact I wasn’t even posting my post to you and I’m not even sure why you were responding to it in the first place. Maybe you are the person that keeps us all in line because goldarnit you’re awesome.
I never said that but I will admit that was the gist of it to poke fun and mock Obama's supporter that think Obama is the end all be all like Lewis Farrakhan. You got me.
I will say it again: the palin cartoons mock PALIN, not her supporters.
The analogy is far from perfect.
No, just Obama supporters that think he’s the messiah. Just like posters are making fun=mocking supporters of Sara Palin.
Had this been prefaced with a "some", your joke would be easier. As it is the two possible options are:
1. You truly meant it purely in jest, in which case you did a poor job of making that clear, or
2. You meant it kidding on the square, and refuse to admit it.
The fact you decided to add your two cents on this particular thread makes my point valid. You could have left it alone or let the person I was posting my comment to answer it but for some reason you felt compelled to do so with (I guess) not understanding what the comedic topic of this thread was about. Next time read before you post and we wouldn’t be having a discussion.
And your point being that I am having a secret oneway gay love affair with Obama because I respond to insulting comments directed at him or (people like) me? You could learn to differentiate between defending every single accusation and remarking upon a statement's crudeness, but we both know that's not going to happen any time soon.
Don't tell me to "read it" next time. If I hadn't read it, why would I have quoted it? And if I hadn't read it, wouldn't you think it a remarkable coincidence that my point lined up with the content of the quote?
I wasn’t being coy with you in fact I wasn’t even posting my post to you and I’m not even sure why you were responding to it in the first place. Maybe you are the person that keeps us all in line because goldarnit you’re awesome.
I was responding to its insultory and crude nature. Maybe you are now making my point. My folksy response was, in the event that this was over your head, an ironic jest. Seems you tripped the wire.
If you honestly can't see the offensiveness (regardless of degree) of your post, I'm done with this argument.
-Bro's wife makes the killer cranberries and the turkey isn't too dry
-I'm moved into my new place (where I can finally DM from rather than drive 40 min every Sunday) w/ a better standard of living
-OSU football and probably other man-esque viewing that day (probably a Bond marathon, occaisional war movie, typical stuff)
-The cost of gas going down
-But mostly...this damned election being over. At this point, I don't care who wins as I feel like WE'RE ALL losing.
, I'm done with this argument.
You were done the minute you started.