GOP senator: A 'stretch' to say Palin is qualified

I love Hagel, he's a great politician and has a good sense of humor to boot!

Hagel, who has a tradition of wearing costumes to work on Halloween, has previously dressed up as Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, former Secretary of State Colin Powell and Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, according to his Senate office.

Source

Somebody is clearly "off message."

Go Chuck!

Be honest, she's not qualified. Smart in her own way, but not qualified. This is beginning to hurt McCain; but to me, it's close to an embarrassing pick.

And cue the Newsvine conservatives throwing Hagel under the bus in 3...2...1...

Chuck's from my state! :D

I always thought he was pretty cool.

I'm also a Nebraskan and I'm proud of Chuck Hagel. I'm a democrat and I disagree with Hagel on a host of issues, but I think it's extremely important for our representatives (regardless of party) to stand up for what they believe in rather than toe the party line.

Also, if anyone knows foreign policy--it's Chuck. Not to mention that in addition to being a vocal critic of the war (and an advocate for talking to our adversaries) he's a Vietnam vet...so, all those Republican veterans don't think alike.

And cue the Newsvine conservatives throwing Hagel under the bus in 3...2...1...

It wouldn't be the first time. Many Nebraskan Republicans have had enough of him...especially after he said he could "understand" why people might impeach Bush/Cheney. Heh... :D

actually wish obama picked hagel.. now that would have been a landslide.

I don't know, Joules. Hagel has voted with Bush 70-80% of the time for the past couple of years and like Biden - initially supported the Iraq War. He is clearly right smack within his party's membership and I don't think that would have boded well with his own party - especially after the Clinton fiasco.

With the newest poll of polls showing Obama up 48-44, and this newest remark from someone from McCain's own party, my faith in the intelligence of the American people is restored!

Turbo Terminator, you hit the nail on the head.

I cant agree more.

She is the butt of jokes in all foreign newspapers at international airports. She makes an American ashamed that any eager beaver with a refueling stop as one of the countries she visited - run the most powerful country in the world. Send her back to the cave she crawled from ! For Gods sake.

You cant throw enough tomatoes and rotten eggs at this woman if she reaches the White House !!!

I'm not so quick to say my faith in the people are restored. One sane guy done not do it for me.

Be honest, she's not qualified. Smart in her own way, but not qualified. This is beginning to hurt McCain; but to me, it's close to an embarrassing pick.

Apparently you are counting Obama's handshaking trip to Europe as foreign policy experience, since if you don't count that she has just as much experience as he does.

And don't even say that sitting in the Senate and voting "present" on 85% of the votes counts as experience.

All in favor of John McCain hiring Awake as his political adviser say "aye".

Gosh... between Palin and McCain's "The fundamentals of the Economy are sound" comment on Monday, I think McCain is headed for a nose dive.

Who cares about what Hagel thinks or not think?

He is leaving the Congress and should be part of the Democrats.

Obviously he has switched his alliances which is fine. However, it creates a conflict of interest as far as his opinion of Palin goes. What good has Biden's "experience" done for America? According to all you libs the US has lost all credibility. Palin is a fresh change we can believe in.

But Obama is qualified? What is the difference in the qualifications between the two? Obama has zero foreign experience just like her.

Grabanidiot, she is the butt of all jokes in foreign newspapers at international airports? What? I travel allot for work and I don't find that at all, in actual countries, not international airports.

You guys go on believing that Obama has no more understanding of foreign affairs than Sarah Palin while the more reasonable among us laugh.

I like Hagel too. I think that he is a great American. He is one of those Republicans that I wouln't mind crossing party lines to vote for. If Obama is elected I hope he puts Hagel in his administration. We need more people who are willing to look out for the American people instead of their party.

determined0a1
Who cares about what Hagel thinks or not think?

He is leaving the Congress and should be part of the Democrats.

Hagel should be a Democrat because he is retiring? I'm not sure that I follow your logic here...

The Eye of Horus
What good has Biden's "experience" done for America?

Foreign Policy experience? Tell me what expeirence you wish to know about.

He was instrumental in the U.S. involvement in the Balkans in the 1990's. He is in known for calling Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic a "war criminal." He fought for lifting the arms embargo, NATO air strikes, training Bosnian Muslims and investigating war crimes. Biden's "lift and strike" resolution helped lead to President Bill Clinton's use of military force to end the conflict. Voted for the war though his resolution with Republican Senator Richard Lugar which authorized military action only after all diplomatic efforts had been exhausted failed to pass.

Source

Ryan-339660
But Obama is qualified? What is the difference in the qualifications between the two? Obama has zero foreign experience just like her.

Before I answer - why are you comparing Palin to Obama? Palin isn't running for President.

Obviously he has switched his alliances which is fine.

Hagel has not switched his alliances. He has not endorsed any candidate officially. He votes pretty much strictly Republican on everything except the Iraq war.

Get the facts straight. Oh wait, I guess I forgot that "Straight Talk" isn't about getting the facts straight, its about perfecting the art of staring straight at the American public and lying through your teeth.

Chuck Hagel seems to be 10 times the maverick that McCain claims to be.

it's close to an embarrassing pick

I have to agree with this. The republican party has repeatedly embarassed itself here in the last eight years. But this is just not a smart choice.

One does not have to officially endorse a candidate to show that they are a supporter. Your cliche'd response shows your lack of critical thinking skills.

No need to personally attack me Eye of Horus. My point was that, unlike Lieberman--who did formally endorse McCain, Hagel has not officially endorsed either candidate (notice that I didn't say "supported"). He hasn't completely "bucked his party." I'm not saying he hasn't upset anyone by his comments in support of the Obama/Biden ticket...but comments are all that he's made, no endorsements.

I guess if you understood the use of italics you would have realized the point I was making...

I would be very shocked if many voters go into that booth and vote to put "their children's future" in the hands of Palin.

Remember, her son and McCain's are "already serving their country" and you can be sure they'll have plans for your sons and daughter too.

The Eye of Horus

Arcanebliss, So Biden helped train muslims in Bosnia and voted for a different war. Many of those muslims that he helped train are against us now. What good has he done in regards to Iraq? At lease Jesse Jackson went to the Balkins and was instrumental in freeing some American hostages.

Spotlight, One does not have to officially endorse a candidate to show that they are a supporter. Your cliche'd response shows your lack of critical thinking skills.

Negative.

She's got executive experience on both the small town level and the state level which is fantastic as far as understanding everyone's needs, and she has a pure view of what government's role should be. I like it.

What is it exactly that the VP does every day?

He hasn't completely "bucked his party."

Hagel is leaving the US Senate, he announced it some time ago.

Yes, Hagel is leaving the Senate after his term expires, but that is not the same thing as "bucking the party".

"Who is the President of the Senate Alex". I'd be curious how she did on high school constitution tests, assuming she had to take one.

Who cares about what Hagel thinks or not think?

Old school Republicans and genuine conservatives for starters. They are not at all happy with the party as it is currently configured but are reluctant to make their opinions known lest they incur the wrath of the Kool-Aid drinking party fanatics.

When the GOP got into bed with the Christian right, the eventual destruction of the party was guaranteed. I'm just surprised it took so long. What is unforgivable though, is how they destroyed America in the process.

Hagel sees the writing on the wall, he is leaving because he just can't put up with the GOP bull@!$%# anymore. He has decided that his loyalty to his country trumps loyalty to political party. Too bad more of his fellow Republicans cannot understand this. He is one of the few Republicans remaining with any integrity and honor.

Hagel sees the writing on the wall, he is leaving because he just can't put up with the GOP bull@!$%# anymore. He has decided that his loyalty to his country trumps loyalty to political party. Too bad more of his fellow Republicans cannot understand this. He is one of the few Republicans remaining with any integrity and honor.

Hagel is leaving? Hmmm.
Anyway, if Hagel was loyal he would not lash out at his own party. If Hagel had any integrity, he would point out that Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin is not running for President - John McCain is - and therefore his comments are meaningless. If Hagel possesed even a slice of honor, he would point out the even moreso inexperience of Barack Obama.

Have fun with it though...

If Hagel had any integrity

That word you keep using, I don't think it means what you think it does.

Ahhhh, leave poor JackB alone, AdipicAcid. He's had a hard eight years.

No one but frustrated partisanship-before-country-and-before-reason right-wingers will agree with him anyway.

I have a lot of respect for Hagel. He has something that most republicans are lacking, integrity. Colin Powell is another republican that I respect. Either Chuck or Colin would have made a better VP pick than Pain.

Colin Powell sold his integrity on February 5, 2003 when he knowingly presented bogus intel to the Security Council at the UN. He is the only reason many people who did not trust Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz reluctantly went along with the invasion. That's why he was picked as SoS in the first place, to give the appearance of legitimacy and integrity to an obviously compromised administration. He destroyed everything he'd accomplished in his career with that fateful decision. If he truly had integrity he'd have resigned. History will not treat him kindly.

True, he shouldn't have made that case. I think that he realized that too late. He did try to convince dubya not to invade but that course was set before the 2k election.

Colin Powell sold his integrity on February 5, 2003 when he knowingly presented bogus intel to the Security Council at the UN. He is the only reason many people who did not trust Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz reluctantly went along with the invasion.

I wouldn't put him in the same class as Cheney/Rumsfeld, not by a long shot. It wasn't so much that he sold his integrity as he had misplaced priorities with regards to his integrity. If you've read anything about his life, you'll know that he is a military man through and through, and that being loyal to his chain of command is a deep part of his moral code. He has since admitted his mistake. He was the only person in the Bush administration that didn't just toe the line. He was disliked by the rest of the cabinet. And he ended up leaving the administration because of his integrity.

I'm not saying let his mistake slide. I'm just saying be reasonable. Don't demonize. At least acknowledge the positive.

He is the only reason many people who did not trust Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz reluctantly went along with the invasion.

And by the way, laying the entire blame on him is ridiculous scapegoating. The American people shold stop laying all the blame on the politicians and start looking in the mirror and realize that apathy and ignorance by the people is the root cause.

The problem with American political discourse is that there are too many judges and too few who walk the talk.

To Bad someone in the Democratic party don't have the guts to tell the truth!!
If Palin is inexperienced then what is Obama? not even ranked high enough to be called inexperienced, if it wasn't for someone else telling him what to say , we would get to see the real obama just like we did when we seen his TelePrompTer go out! oh ya hes just tired like it is harder on him than any one else, at least palin proved she knew what she was talking about when hers went out, that all got pushed under the table fast huh!!!

Sorry I don't need or want a person who cant even talk to a crowd of people on a low key meaningless low stress speech, when he is tired running the Greatest Country in the world. Think what would happen when the stress is really on and the our country is at stake!
No Thanks!
DO YOU?

I wouldn't put him in the same class as Cheney/Rumsfeld, …] [ …Don't demonize. …..] [..laying the entire blame on him is ridiculous scapegoating….]

I'm doing so such thing, or at least it was certainly not my intent. I do respect Powell and his career. I am saying from the standpoint of history, he will be remembered for his UN presentation and his role in taking the country to war – period. He should have resigned. He knew the intelligence was bull@!$%#. He knew that Bush was being used because he had a hard on to go into Iraq for personal, political and historical reasons. He has essentially admitted as much. His role in the administration was an extremely cynical one from the beginning. He was used by far lesser men like Cheney - men who had never served, had never seen the horrors of war and sure as hell did not understand that war is incredibly messy and unpredictable. Powell knew, he had walked the walk as you say. He should have laid down the gauntlet right there, if you are doing this you are doing this my way, following the so-called Powell doctrine - he did not, they did not. They conducted an illegal war on the cheap for political reasons. Powell watched it all and knew what was going on. He was an experienced, politically savvy general; he should have known what was coming. He should have resigned without public comment at the very least.

Sometimes good men make bad or unfortunate decisions, history judges them by those decisions.

Don't call Hagel a great politician and turn around and label Joe Lieberman a traitor. You libs can't have it both ways.

Hagel is a closet Democrat and a liar calling himself a Republican. The fact that he said he would consider being Obama's running mate proves that out.

If Palin is inexperienced then what is Obama?

Our only hope.

Hagel is absolutely correct - Palin is totally unqualified to be President. She has the same experience as Obama - who is also totally unqualified to be President.

JnC1234

Alright Bristol you know your mom wants you to get more sleep and get off the computer. Geeze, and take that picture of you at a kegger off myspace!

John-538373

"Palin is totally unqualified to be President"

Palin is not running for President.

McCain could live to be 100 years old look at his mother. Longevity huh? Palin is smart and she can do anything that is put in front of her. She is up to the task.

I'm sure Palin is plenty smart. She reads well for sure. But it's not about if you're smart, it's like Hagel said, what kind of perspective you have of the world around you outside of your small town, or small state, or country. President's can't live in a bubble, and having not only foreign policy experience or foreign travel, she also doesn't have much knowledge of foreign affairs.

And while she isn't running for president, the vice president is chosen (according to John McCain) with the assumption that if something were to happen to the president, that VP would be ready on day one. She's up to the task? I am quite curious to find how that is gauged, because no one knows anything about where she stands on issues, or what she knows. The little that we've seen thus far is that she's very good at skating around a question, and memorizing talking points.

Those who continue to try to compare her career to Obama's are dumb. Let's see: Community Organizer, Civil Rights Lawyer/ Constitutional Law Professor, State Senator of Illinois, U.S Senator of Illinois VS. PTA, City Council, Mayor of Wasilla, Governor of Alaska. I mean, without even going into dates and specifics & extras, it's easy to see who is most likely both more knowledgeable and who is more qualified. Now on the other hand, if we were talking about qualifications to be top hunter or something, then yes, Palin is the one!!

Stick a fork in her, she's done.

Ahhhh, leave poor JackB alone, AdipicAcid. He's had a hard eight years.

No one but frustrated partisanship-before-country-and-before-reason right-wingers will agree with him anyway.

Next time you all tune in to cry, and reach your hand out to your only hope (the empty suit) as he evangelically shouts you into an emotional, triumphant, telepromted euphoria - just remember these last eight years were Clintons doing - not Bush. Clinton sliced defense / military which opened the door for 9/11. Clinton sold American jobs which has caught up now in the unemployment statistics. Clinton's economic "legacy" DID NOT COME FREE. The past eight years have shown the after effects of Clinton ideas - the same foolishness Obama plans to embrace. So what if you don't agree. We don't need another defense slashing President counting his surplus of beans while terrorists train to attack us here in the USA.

Nothing to see here. We can all move along.

Deli

You are right when you compare Obama's experiences versus Palin's experience's it is obvious who is the one that should become President, and the answer is Palin, that is if she were running for President. Although it is nice to have community Organizers, however is not step up to the White House, nor is having a law degree, there are a lot of people with law degree's that can't be the President of the United States. He is still "green" in the senate, not many days of experience there.

Yes, Palin knows how to have leisure time with a sport she can enjoy, and people from large cities can't even comprehend getting out into nature and doing something they enjoy. Fishing and hunting, yes seems like she is the Top Hunter and fisher-woman. She is all-American. The visual of Hillary Clinton out in the woods with a rifle hunting Moose, is even hysterical. Can't go out their in Pant suits and heel's.

If people didn't think Palin would be a good running mate for McCain, and they thought she would bring him down, there would not be this much discussion about her. People would sit back and let her blow away in the wind, But I don't think she is going anywhere. Hillary and her supporter are angry with John McCain because of him asking Palin to be his running mate, because Clinton and her supporters are wanting her to be the first lady in the White House and that is the reason for all the slander against Palin, everyone wants to shoot her down.

BB-385952,

Obama's community service days were back in the mid-1980s, during which time he accomplished huge things for the underprivileged of South Chicago. He was the first black president of the Harvard Law Review, a gargantuan accomplishment in that environment. He's been a senator for 12 years, three as U.S. senator. He has worked on the senate committees for Veterans' Affairs, Foreign Relations, and Environment and Public Works. He also has done work with Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, as well as Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs before becoming chairman of the senate's subcommittee on European Affairs. He is also a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Tell me, how can you compare this experience against Palin, who got her first passport last year and has had only one trip abroad? Please...give us some valid specifics on what you believe qualifies Palin to be veep or president.

Palin's outdoor leisure activities are just one way Americans enjoy themselves. There are a million things to do in a big city, things to which rural people don't even have access. Landmarks like the Academy of Music in Philadelphia, the Guggenheim Museum in New York, et cetera. America is not only for outdoor adventurers; it's for everyone who is a citizen, including urban dwellers. City people are also "all-American," as you like to say. To imply otherwise is reverse snobbery.

There are plenty of situations in which Hillary Clinton would be completely at home while Palin would look "hysterical." There is no comparison between these two women, and there doesn't have to be.

The first reason Palin's opponents talk about her is that if McCain is elected and should die, Palin, in all her unqualified glory, would become our president. Opponents also talk about her because her nomination as VP is ludicrous. The claims of her qualifications are equally ridiculous. In fact, McCain's choice of Palin disqualifies both of them for any positions in the White House.

From The Sarah Palin Selection: Why McCain's Inexperienced Running Mate Falls Short of Meeting the Implicit Constitutional Qualifications For Vice Presidents by former presidential counsel John Dean:

Does anyone believe that if John McCain were president and had selected Governor Sarah Palin under the Twenty-fifty Amendment to fill a vacancy in the vice presidency, Congress would have confirmed her? Not likely. In fact, it is even less likely that McCain would have even attempted to do so, for he would have embarrassed himself.

If you're unbiased and want to know what the constitution and history has to say about these matters, I strongly encourage you to give the above link a full read.

Well said!

What an interesting read on your link VC.

So, does this mean if McCain is elected President that the congress could disallow palin being the VP based on these implied qualifications per twenty five amendment?

If she is not approved then who do you think would take her place?

Very interesting points to think about.

This could potentially cause a constitutional issue arising, to say the least.

visioncoast-

I am sure it is nice to look out and see the Gulf Coast where you live. A lot of people can't afford that luxury....What I was saying about Palin hunting, is,... that is where she is from, she can enjoy that, but you all make a big joke about it.

I still stand by what I said, about Obama and his experience, or lack there of. yes I know when he started as a community organizer and I also know it was with his friend William Ayers held in ayers living room. One would think if Obama is as smart as you all think that he is he would have been smarter at picking out his associates for the past several years. Now he has the ones that mishandled the money from freddie mac fannie mae that he capitalize big off himself, 3rd from the top......That is a bit suspicious to me. Rezko. Ayers, ...ACORN......Rev. Wright, Pfleger, Farrakhan, Dorhn, the list keeps going on. oh yeh Malcome X....Gee how can you trust the guy. These arn't just not 'nice people' some of these are terrorist.

So yeah, I will go on trusting John McCain and Sarah Palin. If I could link you some reading to do, I would. Just google Barry Soetoro that is a start. Everything that the Dems link on these postings is nothing but Left wing propaganda, so I don't click on them. I go for the truth.

I don't understand why McCain doesn't mention Raines and Johnson when he is making a speech about the economy and Obama's part in it. Maybe he has by now, I've been out of touch with the news today.

BB-375952: I am sure it is nice to look out and see the Gulf Coast where you live. A lot of people can't afford that luxury.

To dispatch your assumption that I rank among the wealthy, know this: I paid $115,000 for my 1,411 square-foot house, and I have to drive three miles to see the Gulf of Mexico. I usually can't park at the beach for which I pay taxes because of all the tourists who clog our beach accesses, roads, stores and restaurants. That's not exactly what I'd call a luxury.

Barry Soetoro...provide a credible source to support your assertion that Obama was not born a United States citizen or that he's a practicing Muslim or that he's supported or been supported by associates at the time of any alleged or proved illegal behaviors. And, while you're at it, back up their illegalities with sources that can be trusted.

From Chicagoans Against Obama:

When Barack and his mother lived in Indonesia, with Oil exec Lolo, he went by the name Barry Soetoro. ...just the truth…….Obama never seems to mention this……..wonder why?…..

Why? Because it's irrelevant.

From MyDD: Barak Obama aka Barry Obama aka Barry Soetoro was raised Muslim

Obama is 48 he became a Christian 20 years ago? was he Muslim till he was 28?

From the Chicago Tribune: "History of Schooling Distorted":

But initial reports have distorted the reality of the four years Obama spent in Indonesia, from 1967 to 1971. In fact, Obama's religious upbringing in Indonesia depended more on the conventions of the schools he attended than on any decision by him, his mother or his stepfather. When he was at a Catholic school for three years, he prayed as a Catholic.

Anybody with a computer and Internet connection can google anything. That doesn't assure credible search results. Look at the three examples I posted above . Who do you trust more, MyDD or the Chicago Tribune? (Or are you simply going to trust the media outlet that supports your prejudiced opinon?) This is when intelligence and common sense must prevail if an informed decision is to be made.

BB-375952: If I could link you some reading to do, I would. Just google Barry Soetoro that is a start. Everything that the Dems link on these postings is nothing but Left wing propaganda, so I don't click on them. I go for the truth.

So there's an admission that you have nothing credible to point to that will support your assertions, compounded by an attitude that I should consider your argument while you will not do the same.How do you expect to learn anything if you refuse to come out of your myopic den?

This is the type of thinking that is taking this country to the edge of the abyss...a kind of behavior that is close-minded, self-restricted, regressive, willfully ignorant and dangerous. An honest person will look at all the arguments—pro and con—before coming to a conclusion. Are you one of those, or are you a mole? Only you can answer that.

VC, good try, but sometimes its like talking to a wall, so when I recommend anything to people I also encourage them to take their search to Factcheck.org. They are a neutral party that have debunked all kinds of inaccurate information people like to spout or imply.

This way they don't feel like they are being fed 'left-wing propaganda', and we don't have to repeatedly debunk or defend every stupid rumor.

These things that another brought up have been discussed and debunked at factcheck as well.

Everything that the Dems link on these postings is nothing but Left wing propaganda, so I don't click on them. I go for the truth.

The truth is often labled "left wing propaganda".

BB, it is sad but enlightening to read your responses when someone addresses your posts directly. You try to back-pedal and explain away some of what you said, but can still write:

"Everything that the Dems link on these postings is nothing but Left wing propaganda, so I don't click on them. I go for the truth."

Who told you that you can determine the truth of something by putting your hands over your ears (and eyes?) and singing "LA LA LA" as loudly as you can? If you are too afraid to look at something, you don't have an opinion. You have a stereotype, a prejudice, or a bias, through which you will form opinions--based on your ignorance--but you don't get an opinion on anything you won't look at.

BB-375952

So yeah, I will go on trusting John McCain and Sarah Palin. If I could link you some reading to do, I would. Just google Barry Soetoro that is a start. Everything that the Dems link on these postings is nothing but Left wing propaganda, so I don't click on them. I go for the truth.

Posters if you did not know what ignorance and/or racism would look like on these posts...

Prophet- You know when the seeds are posted the TITLE is changed to fit your Propaganda words. It will not have anything in the article that has anything to do with the Headlines. That my friend is misleading. Most of the links that I have clicked onto go to articles written by left-wing rags. Daily KOS. etc.

Dharma Girl
I didn't quite understand you post here, but the part about me backpeddling, I am certainly sure I don't know what you are saying. And the Part of me saying Lalala and putting my hands over my eyes, why? because I don't believe everything the democrats say, you are only telling me that because I am Republican and I don't agree with you. Maybe you are the one that is not facing the TRUTH!!! Now don't you do the LaLaLa thing and put your hands over your eyes and ears and ignore the truth.

Jen-357892

I am not racist.....I am careful not to put someone who I don't know who they are and where they come from in the White House. I think that I have the right to feel as I do. If I were a democrat, I would still feel the same way. I don't TRUST him. I would plead to you 'don't trust him" but I know you want listen to me, because you think that you are right on your thinking and also, If he were to win I hope for your sake and Mine along with everyone else that he is not pulling the wool over your eyes and we do not lose our Freedom.

BB-375952

Your argument is weak.

Are you telling me you know you know McCain and Palin personally? Some how I doubt that.

McCain told you his history and Obama told you his. Only Obama's story is an issue for you although both told you where they are from and documentation shows this as true. The irony is McCain's birth place was outside of America although considered American soil, while Sen. Obama was born (and it's documented) in Hawaii.

Oh I believe you would indeed still feel that way if you were a Democrat-racism has no official Party! So I believe you when you say that your Party association would not matter.

I have no doubt the next President will have the biggest task ever in our life time and I do not expect perfection or for all things to get done. What I want is to know that I have fairly weighed with my eyes wide open ALL choices and from that determined who seems to have the right direction to possibly change things around.

What I hear from those like you never has to do with the issues at hand. You want to talk about things that really can not be measured beyond opinions. What I do is check behind what I hear them tell me and instead of focusing on what I can't prove, I focus on what I can. It's funny how easy it is to prove and disprove what they say if you make that your goal. So yes, I know who I chose is the black man that many will not vote for because being black, well-educated, lived outside of America in his youth, speaks well, energized Americans into wanting to participate in government again, has folks overseas thinking we are not racist and are capable of accepting those be it in America or elsewhere that do not have white skin, and has worked despite his education in the trenches with the least of us, as a drawback in choosing a President for some like you.

Instead, you think I should choose McCain although every time I check those resources you don't want to see like the Library of congress, I keep finding lie after lie. I watch the ads and check them against both their records and find lie after lie. No radio broadcast or TV show is telling me this, I research it myself. I should ignore FactCheck.org although checking their sources prove to be accurate information which shows too often how McCain is stretching the truth, blatantly lying or misrepresenting facts.

There is no rationale for choosing McCain except making a party-line decision or racism. I heard nothing from you in this or the last post to think any differently than my original thoughts.

Let's take a look at just two differences and maybe you can tell me why your candidate has the better plan:

education
Obama: public school gets better teachers
McCain: parents get vouchers to take them elsewhere

taxes
McCain: tax cuts stay the the top 2% become permanent
Obama: tax cuts or no taxes for middle class and top 2% return to taxes that were in place during Clinton's Presidency.

dcstone01: VC, good try

I know ::sigh:: I keep trying to encourage people to look at the reliable information, more information than their media habits, to think like a responsible American in these dark days.

I'm sure BB won't reply, won't check my links, won't take any advice that encourages opening a mind. But I keep trying...

I agree with McCain that parents should be able to take their kids to a school that they think that is better to educate them. I think busing should be in the past. I don't know about all states , but I know some states when you have taught for 3 years you are tenured in and it would take something of breaking the law to get you out of that school no matter how bad a teacher you are. So getting rid of bad teachers will not work in every state.

With McCain and Obama on taxes I would not be affected, but a lot of my friends would be. Small Businesses and Capital Gains. I also know when you put a high tax on capital gains people tend to hold on their homes, etc. so that slows down the economy.

My major concern, however, is HEALTH MATTERS, I don't believe in Socialized medicine. I know I am going to get some flak on this, but don't turn everything over to the government. Not necessarily good business. It has to paid for by someone and, Yeah, that is through TAXES.

As you stated my Argument is WEAK, but hey, it is my argument! Also my OPINION
You have yours.

As I said, BB, putting your hands over your ears and saying "LA LA LA" doesn't allow you to see the truth--so I don't do it. You were the one who said something you don't look at is 'Left wing propaganda.' I read and listen to plenty of right-wing propaganda. It doesn't stand up to fact-checking, but I don't refuse to look at it and just SAY it is not truthful without having a clue.

Considering that you "will go on trusting John McCain and Sarah Palin" when they are rather spectacularly dishonest in their campaigning, it is obviously not the truth you are interested in. For instance, you wrote "I don't understand why McCain doesn't mention Raines and Johnson when he is making a speech about the economy and Obama's part in it."

It's not a big mystery--Senator McCain would look even more deceitful if he tried to push Senator Obama's contacts as 'suspect'. While Senator McCain is campaigning on the EVILS of lobbyists, and how squeaky clean he is and always has been...his campaign is run by lobbyists--his campaign manager, chief political advisor, senior advisors, and many of his fund-raisers are LOBBYISTS. Hmm...now I wonder why SO MANY lobbyists would be SO DEDICATED to the presidential campaign of Senator John McCain that they would volunteer (for the most part, that is their claim--their THEIR LOBBYING FIRMS ARE PAYING THEM, the campaign is not...hmm...) to run his campaign for him? Ok, I don't. It is pretty obvious why.

As for your back-pedaling,you wrote:

..."people from large cities can't even comprehend getting out into nature and doing something they enjoy. Fishing and hunting, yes seems like she is the Top Hunter and fisher-woman. She is all-American. The visual of Hillary Clinton out in the woods with a rifle hunting Moose, is even hysterical. Can't go out their in Pant suits and heel's."

But when VisionCoast called you on it , suddenly, you WEREN'T saying anything about hunters and fishers being all-American, as if people from large cities are NOT, or saying something ludicrous like "people from large cities can't even comprehend getting out into nature" (which would take a special kind of stupid if there was any truth to it) and I guess you weren't even poking fun at Senator Clinton's clothes when she was campaigning, as if Governor Palin doesn't wear dress or business attire including HEELS when SHE is campaigning...

...no, you were just saying "...that is where she is from, she can enjoy that, but you all make a big joke about it." THAT is back-pedaling, BB, it is NOTHING like what you said.

But if you "trust" Senator McCain and Governor Palin, I suppose you have to believe that telling big lies is just fine. As long as it is your lies, or their lies. You know, the RIGHTEOUS lies.

And you are making yet other assumptions that just aren't true--I don't want you to "...believe everything the democrats say, you are only telling me that because I am Republican and I don't agree with you." I'm not a Democrat and I think it is stupid to believe everything ANYONE tells you. Just as stupid as refusing to look at anything you don't agree with. And it has nothing to do with the fact that you are a Republican--I think EVERYONE should be smarter than that.

As for socialized medicine, we have had that for more than 40 years--it costs a bundle (a taxpayer's bundle) it just doesn't cover everyone, and is massively inefficient as it currently stands. You are entitled to your opinion, that HEALTHCARE should be FOR PROFIT. And I am entitled to mine, that that is simply immoral. But you aren't entitled to the delusion that we haven't had socialized medicine for over 40 years already, that somehow Senator Obama is going to bring us to that terrible pass. That is just a lie. Another lie. NOT a weak argument.

It's also rather amusing that you are worried about people "holding on their homes." because it "slows down the economy." There are so many people who haven't been able to hold on to their homes. Maybe you hadn't heard.

Dharma Girl-

Propaganda- the meaning of...Propaganda often presents facts selectively (thus lying by omission) to encourage a particular synthesis, or gives loaded messages in order to produce an emotional rather than rational response to the information presented.

I don't need this in my life. I want to read the facts. All of this "mud slinging against Sarah Palin and her enjoying hunting and fishing was just a way of making fun, trying to break her character. So I mention Hillary in her "heels and Pant suits" but you dems can't take it when it is given to you. So no, again I wasn't back peddling. I am just explaining that is Sarah Palin's life style, because it isn't yours doesn't mean she is a joke.

I don't think any of John McCain's friends are known terrorist he is not friends with Ayers, Dorhn, Rezko, Malcom X Farrakhan ACORN........gosh the list goes on. Now he has added Raines and Johnson to his list for advisers, and we know what they have been up to.

There is one thing that I agree with you on and that is McCain is not the Perfect Candidate, but he is the BETTER candidate.

Yes, our health care has been screwed up for years and we know who we can blame that on, Hillary didn't do a good job there when her Husband Bill put it in her hands. There will always be some form of Government in Health Care. People can not afford insurance. So I agree they need help. but that is not exactly what Obama has in mind. He wants America to be on socialized Medicine Like the British National Health Service.

So you are saying when someone sales their home or anything that brings them "GAIN" they owe a major percent of it to the Government.
I know what the situation is today, but it doesn't have anything to do with "Capital Gain", it has to do with the Loan Companies loaning people who couldn't afford to buy a home the money to do so. Of course if you spend over your head you are going to sink.

You know there will be a "future" and saying that we can get through this CRUNCH, people who have done the right thing, made smart decision with their money and have earned money they do not owe the government a large percentage of it.

Hey, I will admit I am not smart. Most of the people writing here should run for President or get in on the committee's, or become advisers, but mine is just and OPINION...........

I agree with McCain that parents should be able to take their kids to a school that they think that is better to educate them.

Why not bring all schools up to the same level and hold them all to the same standards? Why shouldn't the kids in the inner cities have the same quality of education as the kids in the suburbs?

You are entitled to your opinion, that HEALTHCARE should be FOR PROFIT.

I think that all insurance should be "not for profit".

Why is seeking alternatives to the public school system always spun as a rich suburban person's tool? In DC there are now only 50,000 kids in its public school system, and 26,000 kids in public charter schools. When parents have a choice, they vote with their feet to go to something, anything, other than the public school system that has been failing them for so long. And it's not about resources or funding. DC public schools spend $12,979 per student per year, higher than the average in all but 2 states and considerably more than the tuition at many private schools, and they still fail.

BB-375952

You want us to accept your arguments as weak, but as your right. You are right, yet you post here for a reason. You give sites to visit with a purpose, so readers have the right to respond with our opinions.

Unlike McCain and by association you, Sen. Obama and I think that every single child is important and regardless of their parents income, if the child is willing to work hard, they should be given the opportunity to achieve at the height of their personal ability. What McCain is suggesting is allowing those who can afford it with the help of vouchers to move forward and those children whose parents can not afford it, to be left behind. McCain is suffering the least among us: the children. This man, your choice, Sen. McCain, who claims Christ, has it in his heart to suffer the children to potential and deigned failure.

Sen. Obama says get rid of bad teachers, monitor teachers and rate them and by their performance like most other jobs, they will be paid. He leaves no child behind. Now when comparing the two, I ask you to tell me why Sen. Obama's plan is not the better.

Yes, we do like to look out for our kind as you stated how taxes would effect your friends. Would those friends be the ones leaving corporate America with millions? I guess you have not paid much attention to what is happening to our country under the Republican leadership and the status quo? Before you go for the rhetoric of the Democrats being in charge of the congress, you might want to check the records to see what has past and failed in votes/vetoes, then get back to me. I think you Will find the reading enlightening.

Your major concern, however, is in health matters. You don't believe in Socialized medicine. I know I am going to get some flak on this, but don't turn everything over to the government. Why did we send troops to Iraq? We supposedly did so because Americans died and we were angry about that. Yet you say here you do not mind if Americans die, it is American for America to determine how we allow our citizens to die. We like them dying in a war we should have never been in and remain because our ego says we must figure out a way to say we won. AS for those who died 9/11, it would have been just fine with you had someone said they died because they could not afford to get the cancer removed as John McCain can due to the money I send in for his income. You are simply priceless.

WELL DONE - Dharma Girl- WELL DONE!

JEN-357892-

This is one thing about the Newvine that I don't like. YOU take things and twist them around. You are a true Politician yourself....In this POSTING I did not mention 911, nor did I mention the war in Iraq. I appreciate the soldiers that died in Iraq more than the Democrats do, because they mock the war. All the DEMS do is complain about the WAR and George Bush and they forget they are troops over there fighting for their freedom. McCain is done what he thought for the WAR he voted on the surge....It worked.

People having surgery for CANCER, of course I am for people having surgery for CANCER, I myself have had CANCER. I don't like being told what Doctors to go to. I don't want to be governed on what doctor to see.

I realize that you are not worth my responding to, but if I had not seen BB in this posting I wouldn't have recognized that it was meant for me.

This is like the nasty ads coming from obama and McCain, it is a waste of money and time people have already made up their minds on who they are gong to vote for. I already know about the underhanded things about obama and also know about his earmark spending, also Biden's.

Yeh, give Dharma her KUDOS

COUNTRY FIRST
MCCAIN-PALIN

In DC there are now only 50,000 kids in its public school system, and 26,000 kids in public charter schools. When parents have a choice, they vote with their feet to go to something, anything, other than the public school system that has been failing them for so long. And it's not about resources or funding. DC public schools spend $12,979 per student per year, higher than the average in all but 2 states and considerably more than the tuition at many private schools, and they still fail.

Why can't public schools preform as well as private? It may not be an issue of funding. We have to hold schools accountable. Our children should have access to the best education in the world, all of our children.

BB-375952

It is my opinion that you are angry because I hit a nerve. Gee, what will it do to your absolutes if I tell you I am a Republican? I am just saying that for effect? The point is you are assuming a great deal as factual when it is actually an opinion. You say I am twisting things, but I could all the more easily say the it is not me but you who are twisting things. After you did tell us you do not bother to read anything you deem Democratic so if you are not aware of both sides, there is no way to fairly balance one against the other. You are stuck believing whatever your Party tells you. I on the other hand will read it all and weigh it with intelligence and commonsense. You have no problems in believing only one side can be right about all things at all times, which of course the intelligent mind knows no one is perfect. Then you contradict yourself by acknowledging the lies of the campaign camp yet somehow upholding their lies are of higher standard. You twist meaning like my use of 9/11. Irate that I mentioned it, you said, "...I did not mention 911, nor did I mention the war in Iraq." Guess what you are right you did not mention 9/11...I did. I know in your small minded world only what you say should matter, but no, I have y own thoughts and choose the right to express them. See how you twisted that statement asserting that I had somehow you get to decide what comparisons I choose to make? That's twisted, sir. I never suggested you brought up 9/11, did I? Nope, again your assumptions. It sounds to me that you are telling me I can not use 9/11 as an illustration of my opinions. Well, sorry, you do not get to decide what I use as an example. I liken your behavior to the war and 9/11 and I stand by how you come across IN MY OPINION.

Speaking of War, you said,

All the DEMS do is complain about the WAR and George Bush and they forget they are troops over there fighting for their freedom. McCain is done what he thought for the WAR he voted on the surge....It worked.

That implies that all troop are Republicans or that the Democrats fighting the war are complainers. You do realize they too are Americans and possibly voters? So are our soldiers complainers or fighters? Your world is too confusing for reason. As for the surge, you and McCain so desperately want someone to say the surge worked! Okay, if it makes you feel better, I will say it just for kicks, it worked. THere! Now what? do they all get to come home? Was there some magic way to say it so it would end the war? Exactly what does that statement of empty words do for you? Either the soldiers are fighting and away from thier loved ones or not. When Sen. Obama said this was a mistake, he was at least stating something that if followed would not have cost the soldiers their lives and the economy would have possiblynot be where it is today. SO when I compare the suggestion of Sen. Obama to the McCain dire need for "Surge" credit, this issue pales and even becomes quite petty. Nonethe less, if it makes you happy....

I really do not care who you vote for, I really don't. This is a strong country and we will survive with the brilliance of Barrak Obama or the stupidity of John McCain. We proved that ability with the present White House nut. What made you a focal point was how proudly stated how ignorant you were about political issues. IN MY OPINION. When you hear lies from anyone it should matter and when you determine not to learn all you can about a matter this important, it speaks volumes to others. I would prefer that folks like you just not post as you bring out the worst of the mentality of some folks in our country. In other words, you make us all look bad. You have the right to be ignorant, you really do, but if you post that, I feel obligated to let those particularly outside our country know we all are not at your level. :-)

Don't be angry. I believe you really beleive what you are saying and it was/is for that reason I stand by my original post to you. :-)

BB,

I'm only going to respond to the points that I think are the underlying factor in all the thoughts presented above. I'm doing this because of an article I wrote today for Newsvine, an article that truthfully presents the mechanisms of the human mind. I'll try to remember to email you when I post the article so you can see better what I'm talking about.

First, let me say that I don't enjoy arguing with people. I'm not here to prove that you're an idiot and I'm somehow superior. No way.

Regarding Palin's outdoor pastimes... My mother is from Brooklyn and my father is from Philadelphia. I was born and raised in a Philly suburb. I've had lots of trips to the cities, I've enjoyed the museums, performance venues, restaurants, concert halls and diversity of humanity. I love what the big cities offer—culture and talent that will not be found in small towns.

That said, nature is one of my most favorite aspects of living. Trees, wildlife, rain, sunshine, cloud formations, the peace and beauty of the world in which we live. Few things give me more pleasure than being outside on my patio when a family of raccoons come around to see what they can find for food. I used to work for Safari magazine, published by the world's premier hunting organization. I love nature. It gives me peace and balance.

If you want to be a full-blown informed person, you have got to open your mind and listen to all the arguments, because many of them are not composed of what you probably expect. Further, it's OK to say, I changed my mind...I didn't have all the information. The challenge comes in this: Are you willing to consider points that are contrary to what you already believe?

If you consider yourself a good American, this is the time to open your mind. Our country is going through strife not seen in more than 70 years, and it's up to us, each one of us, to dig and dig and dig until we get to the truth about these candidates. Palin's hunting is great...have fun, get yourself a trophy. But don't tell me that city dwellers are somehow less deserving of having a voice and an impact on the direction this country will go. We are as American as Palin. It is my country, my flag, my allegiance as much as it is yours.

Remember, you are just one piece of a much bigger pie. We're in it together. Unity now.

Why can't public schools preform as well as private? It may not be an issue of funding. We have to hold schools accountable. Our children should have access to the best education in the world, all of our children.

If I had to pick a single reason I would say "teacher's unions". But there is more involved. Fundamentally the public school system is afraid to try anything new, even when they know the old thing didn't work, out of fear of being blamed when the new thing works worse than the old thing. They are also afraid of individualized education, preferring that everyone be mediocre at everything. Look at how our K-12 system is different from our university system. K-12 is mostly public. K-12 is one size fits all. K-12 you are assigned a school by your address. K-12 we are very bad worldwide, behind 23 other countries. Universities are mostly private. Universities offer vastly different education tracks from each other, and within the same institution. Universities you can go to whichever one you want, close to you or not. Our university system is among the best in the world. Hence, it makes sense to me to offer parents school choice among an array of school options: public, public charter, private since that will let the K-12 system more closely track the university system.

Keep your fake kudos, BB, you are twisting MY words and you have the nerve to complain it's being done to you. You don't need to explain propaganda to me, and it's obvious you "don't need it in your life." You prefer lies. Your own, Senator McCain's and Governor Palin's. That isn't the moral high ground you apparently think it is, though. Just so you know.

You aren't just making unwarranted assumptions now, I told you I'm not a Democrat and you are still using that as if it is an argument against everything I said. If the only way you can support your position is by lying, maybe you need to rethink your position. According to you, the truth matters to you?? Your posts don't indicate that.

If you wanted to write that people shouldn't joke about Governor Palin's pastime of going out into nature (and killing things) I think you are perfectly capable of writing that. You've done it, twice. But that wasn't what you said, you suggested that people who don't live in small towns AREN'T all-American like she is, and that they wouldn't "comprehend" about enjoying nature--maybe it doesn't count to you if we don't kill anything? And if you were really thinking people were being unfair about Governor Palin, why would you say that monumentally stupid thing about Senator Clinton? Like Governor Palin is dressed for killing moose when she campaigns?? YEAH, you got called on it, you were back-pedaling, you WEREN'T just saying people shouldn't laugh at Governor Palin. And now you are lying about it. I don't give a rat's behind what you say about Senator Clinton--she isn't my candidate, and she's probably tough enough to kick your butt--but it does show what you were REALLY doing. (I'd be embarassed too, it isn't that I don't understand that.)

"So you are saying when someone sales their home or anything that brings them "GAIN" they owe a major percent of it to the Government." Uh..no, BB, I never said one word about Capital Gains taxes, pro or con. You made that up--and attributed it to me. I guess McCain and Palin really are your heroes.

Senator Obama hangs out with terrorists, hmm? So...the people you hang out with say something about you? Hmm..doesn't that make it a teensy bit awkward that Senator McCain's campaign is run and staffed by the EVIL LOBBYISTS he claims he wants out of Washington? Whose lobbying firms are PAYING them to campaign for him? I suppose you think that is because they have seen the error of their ways and want to be out of business?

Oh, and BB? Again, I AM NOT A DEMOCRAT--but I AM smart enough to know that nobody in Iraq is fighting for my freedom (or my freedom of speech, I hear that one a lot, too.) NEWS FLASH--No Iraqi ever tried to take away your freedom of speech, or any other freedoms we are guaranteed. If you appreciated our soldiers (dead or alive) it would NOT be ok with you that they are being sent over there to draw fire.

That stupid line about how we haven't had another big terrorist attack on our soil all thanks to President Bush?

THE TERRORISTS DON'T HAVE TO ATTACK US ON OUR OWN SOIL WHEN WE SEND OUR MILITARY OVER THERE WHERE ANYONE CAN ATTACK THEM AT ANY TIME. And do.

I DO appreciate our military, and I DON'T want them used as sacrifices.

Yes, Jen, his/her kind of ignorance nearly breaks me. Thank you for providing a hell of a counterbalance.

And VisionQuest...I have no words. Tears and gratitude, though. I will try to do better.

Dharma Girl,

You've made compelling points in this seed, and I thank you for them. The problem is the adversarial position we all tend to take with our opponents; it's human nature (which can be hard to harness). It's challenging to argue your point if you feel it passionately, and that position can sometimes come across as rancor. I'm as guilty as anyone.

Lately, I've realized that if we cannot at least begin to speak to one another with the goal of consensus, nothing will change. Our politicians (I won't name names) have done a beautiful job of separating Americans; you can almost draw a line straight through us.

We can each do our part in reaching out to one another, but some people are so stubborn, they'll break for no one. There will be no reasoning with such people. Hope dies hard with me, so I keep trying to at least get others to look at all the information instead of their preferred sources.

I've lived long enough to know that the U.S. is at a critical turning point, and there are others here who know far more than I do and have seen a lot more than I have. All I can do is my best to open doors. That's all any of us can do, you included.

VisionCoast-

I am not one to argue either, especially with someone I don't even know, but what I do know is if you post anything on the Vine that suggest that you are a McCain person you are hammered.

My point about Palin, maybe I shouldn't have used the term all-american, I guess I didn't realized that I did. I was just defending her sport. I too like to do things that the Cities offer. I have a love for Opera I don't get it very often in the city I live in although it is the second largest city in my state. I would have to drive 100 miles for that enjoyment. I also like the outdoors walking in the parks and I have fished, been a long time though. My point of the whole statement was, I didn't think it to be fair to Sarah Palin to be made fun of, it seems like you, Dharma and Jen do not get that. I will say that Jen and Dharma are so h--- bent into labeling me as Ignorant. I guess a lot of my friends are ignorant as well, because they believe as I do.

I do not think that you can go to the Daily Kos and get the true information and that is what I am talking about when I say I don't go to the links that are given. The seeds that are planted here are somewhat distorted, especially with the Headline are changed and has nothing to do with the Article, it does spell out slander.

I can understand that you don't care for McCain and Palin that is OK, that is a freedom that I am talking about, we can go and vote for the candidate we think that is best for the Job.

You are welcomed to email me when the article is published. Again since you closed your posting with a statement about Sarah Palin, I never said that she was a better person because of her outdoor enjoyment, I just didn't think she should have been made fun of and that is all. I personally couldn't kill anything, but I have been around hunters long enough that there is a hunting season for a reason.

JEN-357892-

Yes you hit a nerve, but it wasn't because I believe you are right and I am wrong. It is you are calling me ignorant because I don't see things as you do. That is what this whole conversation is about.

I trust McCain a lot more than I do Obama.

The soldiers believe they are fighting for their Country when they go to war, and fighting for their country in my eyes is fighting for our Freedom. It belittles them for anyone to say they are doing anything less. They also know when they join the Military their chances of going to war exist. I do not like war..........

Dharma Girl-

I was just repeating Jen on the KUDOS thing, not giving you fake kudos, nor did I twist your words.

I think that Gov. Palin has taken more sh_— from the dems or even repubs., more than I think she deserves. A lot of it has been about her children. I am tired of it. I know her skin is thicker than mine so I am defending her. She just passes it on as people are going to talk and say what they want to say she can handle it.

Again I never back peddled. I stood my ground.

I have explained about the Outdoor sport of Palin's and I told you I joked about Clinton hunting, you know to let you know that when you say something about somebody you don't care about it means nothing, but when you read it said about somebody you do care about the tone is different.

I told Jen my feelings about the soldiers fighting for our country and our freedom's and that I truly believe and I believe the Troops need to believe it also and it keeps them going. They love their country to make sacrifices and I love them and my Country.

Too bad that these postings had to become arguments, I was just posting an Opinion like everyone else does here on the Vine.

"It's also rather amusing that you are worried about people "holding on their homes." because it "slows down the economy." There are so many people who haven't been able to hold on to their homes. Maybe you hadn't heard."

The statement above is what was repeated to me when i had mentioned "Capital Gain Taxes" I explained to you what I meant about the future if high taxes are applied people will hold on to their homes, etc. and the economy stands still.

I also resent people saying that I am a lost cause, because I don't think nor vote their way. It is a democracy here, and for that I am thankful, and I want it to stay that way.

BB,

I think everyone is especially sensitive right now with this historic election looming in the not-distant future. It can be difficult to remain civil while debating these topics because so much is at stake.

It wouldn't interest me to make fun of Palin because she hunts. But being a hunter is not exclusively American, which was my point to you. I'm glad you agree. We agreed on something!

The Daily Kos...I rarely go there. I usually rely on PBS (which most Republicans write off as left-wing, an incorrect assessment, in my opinion) and ABC News and Newsvine for my intake of the day's happenings.

You mentioned the Soetoro issue with Obama. Please read the Chicago Tribune article on this subject (and other things to do with Obama) and see if it doesn't put the whole topic in a different slant.

As far as McCain supporters getting hammered on Newsvine, the same thing happens to Obama supporters. It just depends on which seed you're in. It's easy to quickly see if comments in a given seed are from right-wing or left-wing or centrist viewpoints. Some seeds are heavily slanted one direction or the other, so don't feel alone in your pounding. I've been hit hard, too.

We are all free to vote our conscience. What I've been trying to do is get people to look at the biggest picture they can get their hands on before making a decision to give the Republican Party another term. Look where we are now. It's time for someone fresh to step in. We've seen this before, in the 1932 election.

Best wishes to you, BB.

VisionCoast-

Thank you for your response. I do look at the whole picture and I did get on the Vine to read and learn, take in different viewpoints. I have actually learned about different Political sites to go one and learn a lot of the facts.

Again thank you and best wishes to you, as well....

I think that you're right Brian. I hated school until I got to college. Regardless of how great private schools are I think we still need to overhaul public education. We have to step up and take responsibility for the education of our children, all of our children. I think that having a better educated populace will in turn make a better nation.

BB-375952

I used the word ignorant as it means lack of knowledge. You wrote you avoid reading certain things because you think Democrats provide propaganda. My initial point was there is no way to have balance if you only hear the view you already like. I have no doubts you do not agree with me and it does not concern me at all that you do not or that you support McCain. I realize others read your posts and by responding, I allow them to know that there is another view to consider. What you or they do with the information is what I will never know. However, I will not read views like yours and not respond. I do not do so to offend you but to help show how one-sided and easily proven false.

IN MY OPINION, it says much about you that McCain tells lies at least once these days every time he speaks or puts out and ad and yet you "trust" him more than you do Sen. Obama. Sure, it is your right but it also says you would choose a liar over his opponent and unless you have valid policy agreement (which you told me yourself are weak), the natural conclusion is an opinion of racism. I stand by my all my staements.

Jen357892-

I appreciate the fact that you want others to see your viewpoint. I explained my Idea of Propaganda and that was with Daily Kos. and other rags. I go on line and read facts.

Obama is as guilty with lies and misleadings, and Biden can't make up his mind what he means to say. So both parties are guilty, but someone is going to win. It is just a matter of who. Both camps put out the "nasty ads", which I do not see the need for, it is a waste of money.

I don't really believe my arguement is weak, I just agreed with you when you said my arguement was weak, being a little sarcastic I suppose. I trust my judgement and I am not RACIST, but I want to be sure that the one who wins the Presidency loves THIS Country. If I was RACIST I would not admire Condi Rice and Colin Powell.

I know black people too! I also have plenty White associates who smile in their (blacks)faces and make their slurs behind their back. Of course, there is no way to know, but I would not be surprised had either Dr. Rice or Powell had ran, you would not find a reason to dismiss them as well. Look, I call them as I read em. It is my opinion and based on what YOU WROTE through several posts I find no reason to retract my views. Your views do not separate you from any other racist I have come in contact with whose opinions are not based upon facts to demean another characters but your personal views. There is no doubt in my mind had his skin been White, all argument of trust and truth would change not just for you but most racist who need these fake reasons to support their discriminatory practices.

I find it interesting that you and others who are anti Obama want to assert that Obama is as guilty of lies as McCain. This of course, is not true, but it seems to make you and McCain supporters feel better.

Jen-

I will try one more time to explain that I am not racist. I just do not trust Obama.

I was hoping that Dr. Rice would want to run for Vice President, but she said she didn't want to, I think she wanted a break, or some words to that affect. I also know that McCain probably would not ask her because she is from the "Bush" administration. other than that she would be perfect for VP. IMO

BB-375952

Well, that settled it! I see the difference! Powerful insight! How could I ever thought...? Here's the difference in how we see things. My choice was not based on anything that had to do with a visual or what people on news channels fed me. Every conversation that came directly from a candidate was weighed to see how close it came to my thoughts about what was best for America and who we claim to be. I don't care if the rich keep or loose money, I care that those who don't have are able to have. I want everyone to have an opportunity and not just a few. My parents have always told me of the businesses that are formed from the larger companies and thus jobs are created, but now we all agree that it is not working for all Americans. I have a friend who teaches in a school where the Principal has made it clear that NO BLACK child will be allowed advance classes although several qualify. Instead, she fills those seats with students who are members of her church. I, myself, benefited when a Black student in college and I had identical scores on every test/assignment only she had done an extra assignment and when we got our grades, I got an A and she got a B.

My Black friends tell me they deal with "Black tax" every day. It means they are qualified but assumed or intentionally excluded from recognition/positions. They say they are a subgroup within a subgroup because there are intentional practices to hold them back. What's worse is the same group that does it turns around and says it's because they are lazy.

Racism is sometimes subtle and I believe it can be practiced without realizing you are part of the problem. I don't always understand or agree with what they tell me, but I listen and quite often, when I apply the same education level and communication skills, I find they are right! Here's an example, on the news we hear all the time: 'Most blue collar Americans are not comfortable with Obama.' Does this include Black blue Collars workers? Somehow I doubt it. So why are they called Americans when they are leaving out a segment of Americans in that very statement? We all know and accept that the statement is talking about White America and in the statement, we have divided ourselves from united Americans to divided segments based on skin tones. When we supposedly are one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

I do not know you it is true, but I find no reason to change my views.

Jen-

I know you have your mind made up about me and the rest of the world being racist. If this is true what you said about Schools and Colleges, how did OBAMA graduate at the top of his CLASS from HARVARD?

It was a very good try, Jen, but I'm thinking you can see why I didn't bother with any more.

Maybe people who will choose a straightforward lie over the truth with any hint of nuance really aren't capable of reading anything BUT that. Or responding without twisting what you write. Or maybe they can't bring themselves to be honest, either.

So...people of color who will publicly lie for the white guy at the top are ok by him--admired--that proves he is not racist.

But you are right, others can appreciate your response :) Thank you!

Dharma Girl-

You could have answered the question also.....If blacks are held to the lowest of their class, how did Obama Graduate the top of his Class at Harvard? Simple question.

My daughter is an Inner City School teacher and in the South, and she is told nothing what Jen has said. Their goal is to educate everybody, not by color, if that was the case she would be reprimanded because her class is 80 percent Black. She would not be passing many. There are slow learners, Black and White, and when a slow learning child in her class has made a good grade she is excited she feels that she has done her job, no matter what the color of his/her skin. Some of her smartest students are black and try really hard to help out the slow learners. I see her out in public when her students see her they Love her, because she treats them EQUAL.

I ressent being called a RACIST, you know there are racist against white people as well, so when I am called a RACIST, I think that means the same about you.

It is not the Color of Obama's skin that I can't deal with, I promise you, it is his background, his friends, and his experience, or lack of..........

BB: If blacks are held to the lowest of their class, how did Obama Graduate the top of his Class at Harvard? Simple question.

Simple answer, BB: Obama is that smart. And even smarter yet to garner the position of president of Harvard Law Review. Can you imagine what an accomplishment that was for a half-black man in an Ivy League school? It's something to ponder.

BB

I want to say this with as much kindness as I can. Look at what you asked me. You said,

Jen-

I know you have your mind made up about me and the rest of the world being racist. If this is true what you said about Schools and Colleges, how did OBAMA graduate at the top of his CLASS from HARVARD?

Ask yourself why you needed to ask me how Sen. Obama succeeded.

Ask yourself why are you assuming that my one example represented the WORLD instead of my personal experience that (PERHAPS) has occurred to others.

Ask yourself are all White people monolithic and if not, why are you grouping all Blacks together as though they are monolithic.

You told me I have my mind made up about the world. Was that a misstatement or do you really think I have decided this is true for the rest of the world? If so where do you place me? Do you believe that I believe I stand alone in not being a racist?

Try this, before you say something about a Black person, change their color in you head to White and see if you would ask the same question. If it remains, it is most likely legitimate, if it is answered, silly or less relevant, it probably was never relevant to start with. We live in the only country where our skin should not matter at all yet it does. We measure almost everything based upon it; particularly who we want to blame for whatever. WE must get to a place when we see ourselves as Americans first. A blend of culture, beauty and acceptance. When our conversation is not about any divisive comments, I think we can then truly call ourselves the united people of the America.

I have no reason to lie-the school and my college experience is true. Furthermore, I did not mention that the student knew she deserved an A but accepted the B saying she knew if the instructor (Head of his Dept.) were to be challenged, the rest of her college experience would most likely suffer.

Now for the record, the fact that you keep approaching this tells me that you do not like that I said I saw that in your writings and I think that is a good thing. It tells me rather I am right or wrong, you do not wish to be identified even by a person you will never know as a racist. That in itself is a great start, in my opinion.

A bit of irony, I do think there are a number of racist in America but as the majority of the world are of color, the world in my opinion is more ready to accept Sen. Obama as an equal man than his country.

BB-

I read and responded to what you wrote me before reading the post about your daughter. I just want to reiterate that it may help if you did not put people in a box. You use your daughter As if her experience represented all experiences. You used my experience as if I was talking about ALL situations. There are exceptions and at times there are no issues with all people. To place every person no matter the color as a single voice is in itself a stereotype. I think, and again it is my opinion, that you have stereotyped Sen. Obama. It is common to hear 'Beware of the Black man', ' You know they steal' or 'They are not trustworthy' kinds of statements. It is unfair and quite sad for our country.

There is an old poem (I forget whose it by) called "After you, my Dear Alphonse." It is about a White mom who invites her son's black friend over for lunch (story takes place I think in the 50's or 60's). The mom assumes he likes tomatoes, needs clothes, is poor and comes from a large family. When the child innocently deflates her stereotypes by saying he hates tomatoes just like her son, his mom a seamstress sews too much clothes for them and his farther is a business foreman (in charge of White folks), and has only one older sibling, she is beside herself and the kids are never the wiser. I am aware of that story because I had the honor of hearing it from Dr. Maya Angelou.

The school I spoke about is in the South, has one African American teacher and almost a half Black population. The teacher I know is White and has been warned by co-workers that should she make an issue of this, she will be conveniently forced out of the district. The students do not tell their parents, but have accepted that they just are not as smart as the White kids and go along loving their principal! If she was not a single teacher, I think she would have blown the whistle by now. That said, if you ever hear of this on TV, it just may be her and her school because it is indeed upsetting her to no end.

And I might have answered it if that bore any resemblance to what Jen had said, BB. AS usual, it didn't.

Again, you twist what is written to you, and then apparently believe that it proves your point.

Again, you are fine with the lies your heroes tell, and I can't tell if that is because you actually see the world that way, or simply follow their example of ignoring what doesn't fit in your comfortable world view, and know that it works to keep repeating the same lies.

You are fine with the damage they have done while they had the power to do it, and the fact that they repeatedly deny it. You are fine with the company THEY keep, which has done even more damage--Senator McCain's buddy Phil Gramm's work is a great deal of the reason we are in the mess we are now, and Senator McCain supported every bit of it. And profited by it.

JEN has much more patience than I do, and twisting her words should keep you plenty busy.

As for how racist you aren't, that would be more convincing if you weren't so terrified of a black man who doesn't have the history of lies, the ugly, self-serving cronies, the poor judgment, and the plans for this country that are the same ones that he supported (when he didn't lead them) that got us here NOW, that the white guy does.

I am not calling you a racist, I am saying that if you refuse to look at the truly detestable things the white guy has done, and WRITE ABOUT how fearful you are of the black guy who factually compares pretty damn favorably, that is how it looks. You accuse him of everything your guy has been proved to have done. But what he has done, is doing, plans to do, is just fine with you.

As JEN pointed out, racism can be subtle. Unfortunately, it can be much more subtle to the one who is exhibiting it for the world to see. I don't claim to be free of it.

I don't know what is in your heart, I do know what you have written. And I don't need to twist it. At the point where you apparently can't stop twisting my words, I don't see the point of spending much more time on that. I will debate with someone who isn't filled with so much fear that he can't hear anything he doesn't like.

Jen-

I see where I made my mistake here, I said the rest of the world is racist, I should have said anyone that is voting for the White Guy is racist.

My point was exactly that I thought Obama to be smart. He was not held back because of the color of his skin, or being bi-racial or Black....

I thought you were putting people in a box because you were talking about the situation in your college and someone you knew that taught school. That is why I brought up my daughter teaching in the Inner City School and enjoys it. I wanted you to know that is not every where.

The Poem that you mentioned was in the 50's or 60's. A lot of things have changed since then. A lot of Americans have become wiser, and yes there are still a lot of RACIST people out there and I know a few. I just happen not to be one of them.

I have read a lot of what I have written and none of it says that I am a racist. I am just like you are giving an opinion about why I am not voting for Obama and it has nothing to do with his race. There are a lot of people not voting for MCCAIN because he is white. Is that not racism.

I will be honest with you, I don't know where I am twisting words, It seems as you and Dharma are twisting mine.

You are talking about how bad the White Guy is and that you detest him and I haven't begun to say anything like that about Obama.....I

Dharma-

I want you to know that you are not a debater. You just argue.

I have never refered to Obama as being the Black Guy as you and Jen have brought race into this by calling McCain the White Guy and talking about Obama's being Black.

visioncoast-

I was just making a point with Jen and her story when I asked that question. I do think that Obama is a smart Man or he would not have been able to graduate with honors at Harvard. I have never said a word to take that away from him. I did not bring race into this conversation. I think anybody that graduates from Harvard would have some intelligence.

BB-

voting for the White Guy is racist.

There are some Black Republicans to include surrogates who speak out for Sen. McCain, so no, I don't think voting for McCain makes you a racist.

I thought Obama to be smart

I think it is great that you think he is smart and that you clarified this. Thank you.

people in a box

...

that is not every where

You could have asked me for interpretation, but I guess if you thought you understood, you answered accordingly. It is good to know you do not think the way you came across on this issue.

The Poem that you mentioned was in the 50's or 60's

The point was not what time period the poem was written for, but the preconceptions people have of others.

not voting for MCCAIN because he is white. Is that not racism.

I have no evidence of this except your opinion. However, if you were to ask my opinion I would have to say I doubt it is true for the statistics of Blacks voting for Sen. Obama. I say that because there have been Black candidates in the past and when they did not win the nomination, Black folks still voted for whomever was the Democrat running and to my knowledge they have all been White. So my best guess is there vote is not because he is Black but because he represents their party/interests. If you are talking about NON-Blacks, I can only speak for myself and those who I have had conversations with of whom did what I did and that was to read and research everything I could 9including his books) to learn what I could about this man. I had heard him speak and what he said sounded different than what others had said in the past. He spoke of giving the nobody's of the world power through grouping together to stand for what they/we wanted from our leaders. I felt I was heard and as I found through research, I was impressed.

don't know where I am twisting words

Well here is and examples of how you twisted my meaning in my opinion and maybe you will give me an example of when I twisted yours?

1.74

You are a true Politician yourself....In this POSTING I did not mention 911, nor did I mention the war in Iraq.

I did never said you mentioned 9/11 or Iraq.

1.82

calling me ignorant because I don't see things as you do.

No I called you ignorant because from what you wrote, I found you ignorant. You could have been a well-informed McCain supporter, but you did not come across that way, you came across ignorant.

1.92

I know you have your mind made up about me and the rest of the world being racist.

We covered this one, but again, I do not speak assuming anything thoughts apply to all people.

1.99

You are talking about how bad the White Guy is and that you detest him and I haven't begun to say anything like that about Obama.....I

I have looked back at my statements and I do not see when I said how bad the White guy is or that I detest him. I welcome you to provide my statements of this if this is not you twisting yet again!

Jen-

Post 1.66-------->There is no rationale for choosing McCain except making a party-line decision or racism

This is where you said if I voted for John McCain I was a racist.

Post 1.67--------->"the stupidity of John McCain"

This is just one example how you talked about John McCain

I need to get to work so I do not have time to get into all of the postings.

Posting 1.99------>You are talking about how bad the White Guy is and that you detest him and I haven't begun to say anything like that about Obama.....

The above statement probably should have been made just to Dharma When she said, "I am saying that if you refuse to look at the truly detestable things the white guy has done, and WRITE ABOUT how fearful you are of the black guy who factually compares pretty damn favorably,"

You and Dharma have made this in to Black and White, I would say McCain and Obama. You and Dharma would say White Guy and White "Folks" and Black Guy and Black "Folks".

This is why I say it is a Presidential election on Race and not on Experience.

BB: I actually said I wouldn't debate with you. I don't mind a good argument, as it happens, but you aren't capable of an honest argument, either.

You are still making stuff up about what JEN wrote--and attributing everything either one of us wrote to you as "about Race." Believe it or not, the fact that we were both struck by your extreme fear does not erase everything else that we wrote. The fact that you ignore anything we write EXCEPT about race doesn't erase everything else that we wrote.

Except in your mind.

BB

Are you saying I made these statements and they twisted your words? Or are you saying the statements were racial?

Post 1.66-------->There is no rationale for choosing McCain except making a party-line decision or racism

This is where you said if I voted for John McCain I was a racist.

Actually had I said BB, there is no rationale for you choosing McCain except making a party-line decision or racism, you would be right to say I called you a party-line voter or a racist. As it stands, I made a statement of the folks I believe would vote for John McCain. I find it interesting that even in misreading the comment, you had two options as a McCain supporter: Party-line or racist. And YOU chose....????? I did not call you a racist here, you classified yourself one!

Post 1.67--------->"the stupidity of John McCain"

This is just one example how you talked about John McCain

I don't know if this is supposedly a twisted statement about you or a racist statement. Or is it a change of topic from you, AGAIN!

Ah, BB post 1.99 was written by YOU, dear.

I also noted you did not dispute any posts I made.

Jen- I explained in the posting that I didn't have much time to put into this I had to get to work....

" Posting 1.99------>You are talking about how bad the White Guy is and that you detest him and I haven't begun to say anything like that about Obama.....

The above statement probably should have been made just to Dharma When she said, "I am saying that if you refuse to look at the truly detestable things the white guy has done, and WRITE ABOUT how fearful you are of the black guy who factually compares pretty damn favorably,"

I just copied what I wrote in the last posting....Stating that I should have just posted that for Dharma.......

It doesn't bother me that you call me a racist because I know that I am not. That is a bunch of bull when you say if you had added BB then you would have been calling me a racist. You were writing to me and you insinuated that I am, but as I said I am not guilty but don't turn the Election into a Race game with me.

.

Jen-

I meant to add to this posting that this discussion really isn't going anywhere, but you have your opinion about the political situation and I have mine. I am not changing my mind because someone else thinks they are right. I do look at the whole picture which you accuse me of not doing.

Best wishes to you and Dharma

BB

Again BB, I did not write that post-YOU DID. I think age may be the true problem here and I do not say that to offend. I also believe it is why you are having difficulty knowing what is actually said to you as oppose to about you. I know I have not change you mind and it was never in my mind to change your mind. I read your post and it sounded racist to me and I stated that. I stand by that as you obviously do not get it. It is a discussion and I do agree it has become pointless. That said, all the best to you as well. :-)

I really do admire you, JEN, even though I wasn't able to emulate you. I try very hard to understand other points of view, but I don't have infinite patience with someone who has no time for honesty. I'm too old for that ;) Also, in my experience, as soon as someone starts insisting I can't change their mind, I can pretty much tell they've missed the point--which means they aren't trying to understand at all.

VisionCoast, I will enjoy reading the column you referenced over the weekend. I admire your approach as well.

Jen;

I agreed that I wrote the posting, but I said it really should have been for Dharma. It was referred to what Dharma had said. I am sorry about the confusion.........

I am sure I am older than you, but I am not senile, my wits are all here. Maybe age has something to do with, and it is youth. Not meaning to offend you.

I am sorry that you read my postings as racist, but if I told you my biggest fears about Obama (and it isn't about him being black) it would be deleted, because no one wants to admit what he really is or what me and a lot of others fear about him.

Dharma:

Just because you can't change my mind says nothing about me missing any point. I check my facts, I have read everything there is to read about Obama. I have checked out several reliable sources on the Internet and checked out the facts about McCain and Obama. I have said on many forums McCain is not the best man for the position, but he is the BETTER man for it.

Honestly, I have plenty of time for honesty, but with all politicians, you are not going to get complete honesty even with OBAMA and BIDEN. They all make promises that they are not going to keep and they make promises to get the votes knowing they can't keep them.

Honestly, I have plenty of time for honesty, but with all politicians, you are not going to get complete honesty even with OBAMA and BIDEN. They all make promises that they are not going to keep and they make promises to get the votes knowing they can't keep them.

That's because Americans demand promises before they'll choose who they're voting for. It's a contest, a strategy, a battle plan and not a genuine offering of what they'll accomplish if elected. This is politics...American style.

BB

I want you to know I read your post, and I am not offended. I have read your thoughts and believe I have a sense of how you view these things, so it is impossible for me to be offended by you.

...because no one wants to admit what he really is or what me and a lot of others fear about him.

I will keep these words in mind when I think of you (and the others you speak for) and our discussions as I think those who have kept up with our back and forth will do so as well. I really think it brings us full circle, BB.

Dharma and VisionCoast

Thank you for your attempts. I hope enough said. :-)

BB, you said you resent people saying you are a lost cause, but you really force the issue.

I don't gives a rats ass about changing your mind. It's been explained to you several times, by a few people that your original comment (that we responded to) that "you don't bother to click on" links to any sites you don't agree with shows extreme ignorance.

You can't be anything BUT ignorant about something you are afraid to look at. How hard is that for anyone to see but you? You think everyone should have some sort of respect for the propaganda you worship, but you can't even look at any other view--AND you call that "checking."

And SOMETHING about Senator Obama--not his race, but you can't even write it, because it is SO BAD it will be deleted--is the thing you fear most. Let me see...is that debating, or arguing? Let me double check. Nope, that is NOTHING. I have read a lot of really ugly things that have been debunked (that means they were lies, and the truth cancels them out) and MAYBE your biggest fear is one of those things, but we will never know. You certainly won't.

So the argument you ARE willing to make against him is that he surrounds himself with "bad people." (Which is your opinion based on right wing propaganda in the case of Professor Ayers. Do you think he has been teaching "Weatherman 101" for the last 20 years? Actually, I would bet you haven't a clue as to what he has been doing for academia or his community for all these years--he's a "terrorist." You can't actually read any details of the reality of the situation, because that would be 'propaganda.' I bet you think Oliver North--running guns and drugs on government $$-- and G Gordon Liddy--any dirty, illegal thing his boss needed--were American heroes.)

But you won't address the entire campaign staff of LOBBYISTS--the people Senator McCain pretends he thinks are SCUM, but who are running his campaign while they are paid by the firms they LOBBY FOR, at all. That is just 'business as usual'. And, I shouldn't think you missed the point of my argument, just because you can't address it? I shouldn't think you are hypocrite because your only response is something like "well, they all do it."?

The argument you have against JEN and me is that we have said bad things about Senator McCain, and you haven't said anything bad like that about Senator Obama. If you are too afraid to write it, you don't get credit for not saying it. You get "credit" for being a weasel. And thinking that means you win.

And poor you, everyone twisting your words? Yet another example of who is doing that: I didn't say that I detest Senator McCain, you even QUOTED what I wrote. I referred to "truly detestable THINGS" he has done. Which I am not afraid to enumerate, but I think I won't take the time to do it again.

I can see the UN from my house - makes me qualified to take over Kofi Anan's job.
I can Columbia University from my house - makes me qualified to be the president of Columbia.
I can see the Indianapolis 500 track from my house - makes me a qualifier to be in the race.
I can see the LAX airport from my house - makes me qualified to be a pilot.
I can see a cruise ship from the port of Miami - makes me qualified to be the ship captain.

The list can go on and on and on....

Hey, I can see the horse barn from my window! I think I am therefore qualified, if not to confront a Putin, to say I know horse s__t when I see it. McCain (and the GOP) has stepped in a big pile of it. Palin is miserably, tragically unqualified to be the Vice-President.

Well Pete, you clearly should be mayor.

And yet they continue to insist that Obama is unqualified and doesn't have the judgment to lead...

How stupid do they think we are?

Spotlight, to answer your question:

VERY.

America elected Bush...twice....so you have your answer.

I can see the UN from my house - makes me qualified to take over Kofi Anan's job.

Kofi Anan doesn't work at the UN anymore. So you can probably take off your Secretary General hat.

If you became mayor of Cleveland, you'd have more responsibility than the governor of Alaska. Might make you over-qualified for Vice President of the United States.

RK41979: The reason you can't have Kofi Anan's job isn't because you can see the U.N. from your house. It's because you aren't even aware that since 2006, Ban Ki-moon has been the Secretary General of the U.N. So maybe you should restrain your condecension until you get a clue yourself.

You may love Chuck, and he may be a lot of things: conservative, gentleman, scholar, etc. But, to say he's a Republican is like saying Lieberman is a Democrat. The only difference between the two is that Republicans didn't have the moxie (manners? intelligence? or whatever) to do to him what was done to Lieberman by the Conn Dems.
This is an empty headline.

Hilarious. Well McCain needs to start listening because his pick is a embarassement to his own party and they are constantly lying, but it's to late to pick someone else. No do-overs!

I

can see the UN from my house - makes me qualified to take over Kofi Anan's job.

FYI, Kofi Annan is not anymore in the UN. Therefore, Sarah Palin is qualified.

Ban Ki-moon is the new Secretary General.

ElliePhatYou may love Chuck, and he may be a lot of things: conservative, gentleman, scholar, etc. But, to say he's a Republican is like saying Lieberman is a Democrat.

Uh... Ellie... Chuck Hagel has voted in line with the party 70-80% of the time... He is very much a Conservative Republican... Here he is on a graph, here are his positions on the issues...

determined0a1

FYI, Kofi Annan is not anymore in the UN. Therefore, Sarah Palin is qualified.

lol, what?

Palin is qualified because Kofi isn't in the UN anymore? That doesn't make any sense.

Arcane,

Conservative and Republican are not the same thing. Hagel has made a point of offending the GOP and dissenting from his party many, many times. To infer that there will be widespread defection because Hagel dissents is the equivalent of saying because Lieberman supported McCain, there will be widespread Democrat defection.

There's ideology and then there's politics. This is politics. Empty headline.

Ellie, whether you like it or not - Hagel is a Republican. Simply because a Republican argues with his party members doesn't mean he isn't in the party or doesn't vote with the party. lol

I would have been really interested to see what would have happened had Hagel run for the Republican nomination. It would have definitely changed the dialogue and, who knows, maybe Ron Paul would have come off looking slightly less eccentric.

Greg,

I'm very proud to say that I voted against Bush--TWICE!

Hagel has made a point of offending the GOP and dissenting from his party many, many times.

Isn't that what supposedly makes McCain a "maverick"?

Hagel is a Republican. Simply because a Republican argues with his party members doesn't mean he isn't in the party or doesn't vote with the party.

The single biggest sin a Republican can commit in the minds of fellow party members is disloyalty to the party or the appearance of same. In the minds of a modern Republican, any criticism of a Republican or policy favored by the party is considered heretical. Reagan was famous for his First Commandment of the GOP "Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican". Funny thing about this is that disloyalty to the party was also the single biggest sin of a Communist Party member in the USSR.

The second greatest Republican sin of course is raising taxes on the people who can most easily afford to pay more for their extraordinary privileges of citizenship.

God willed Hagel to say this.

Great post, Pete! Since I can see the Gulf of Mexico, I guess I'm qualified to run the Coast Guard. Every man to his own calling, right?

LOL born and raised in Cleveland now live about 35 miles away and never want to see.

Lmao. :)

ABD3...I'm sick at home, and if I die of a heart attack, I'm gonna home back and haunt you for posting something so damned funny! Great seed, Turbo, highlighting the fact that people from within her own party see what the rest of us do...that she, sir is no Jack Kennedy!

LMAO..Hilarious

that she, sir is no Jack Kennedy!

Neither Obama and Biden.

I'm really happy that none of the candidates are JFK.

Now THAT would be Christ-like. (The whole rising from the dead and all)

I, for one, would welcome our new zombie overlords.

I believe this commentary signals that it has, in fact, snapped.

the commentary?or the rubber band? LOL

"If you stretch a rubber band too far it eventually breaks. Even members of the GOP are realizing the band is weakening."

Charles, do you know what happens when rubber band breaks? Lol, it snaps back on you and hurts like hell. There will be some crying in that GOP house. Lol

Anon, sometimes it shoots across the room and hits your opponent in the eye. Ouch.

But still surprising since he is clearly a Conservative Republican, as we can see by his voting record. =]

I was surprised... until I saw it was Chuck Hagel,

Surprised by what ? That a Repub was telling the truth for once ?

until I saw it was Chuck Hagel, a potential vice-presidential candidate for OBAMA.

Maybe the race is all starting to blend together for me, but I thought I saw him mentioned at one time as a possible VP for McCain.

Andrew... He wasn't "a potential vice-presidential candidate" for Obama. Please re-read the statement carefully. "In July, Hagel traveled to Iraq and Afghanistan with Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. Though he didn't expect to be asked, Hagel had said he would have considered serving as Obama's running mate." Someone (I presume a reporter) asked him if he would consider serving as Obama's running mate, and he answered the question.

The fact that a Republican Senator would be willing to run makes me a lot more comfortable about Obama's ability to reach "across the aisle" and work with the Republicans serving in Congress.

And, the fact that Russia is visible from some remote, uninhabited island in Alaska means nothing. I can see the house down the street from mine from my front porch, and I don't even know the owners' names. It doesn't make me more qualified to confront them about their dog crapping on my lawn than it does anybody else in the world.

What I want to know, is since when do the Dems and the GOP both consider people from the opposite party as potential running mates? Lieberman I knew about. Now Hagel on the Dems side? The two parties are just so different at this point. I don't get it.

Lincoln ran for his second term with a Democrat as his running mate.

AdipicAcid:

Yes - thanks for reminding me. But do you see the party differences as being less extreme at that point in time?

The Democratic platform called for allowing the Confederacy to go its own way. Lincoln recognized that that major difference did not apply to all Democrats and reached across the aisle to help solidify his cause.

If anything party differences and rhetoric were more extreme.

The fact that a Republican Senator would be willing to run makes me a lot more comfortable about Obama's ability to reach "across the aisle" and work with the Republicans serving in Congress.

Hagel is extremely conservative on social and fiscal issues...but on everything else, he is willing to work across the aisle. Also, he has endorsed Obama's foreign policy platform numerous times which should alert everyone since this is Hagel's chief area of expertise and interest. Like Obama, Hagel opposed the Iraq war from the start (though he did vote for it...he did speak out and caution against it before the vote). Hagel was also the main co-sponsor of the new GI-Bill in which McCain was one of the few (10 or so?) Senators that opposed it.

Hagel supports our troops. McCain, clearly, does not. Hagel puts Country First and does not care what his party thinks of him...McCain...make up your own mind.

So, what does it say when a man like this criticizes his fellow Republican? Hmmmm...

Here's another Conservative (National Review board of dir, Nixon admin...) for Obama.

Hagel is another politician having mid-life crisis.

determined0a1
Hagel is another politician having mid-life crisis.

Whoa, did I just witness a Republican being ageist towards another Republican? lol?

Moe,

To clarify.................................

Lieberman WAS a Democrat, turned Independent when he thought he might be chosen as McCain's running mate. Then, when he spoke at the republican convention, it made for a better sound byte to say he was a Democrat! He's not.

Lieberman WAS a Democrat, turned Independent when he thought he might be chosen as McCain's running mate. Then, when he spoke at the republican convention, it made for a better sound byte to say he was a Democrat! He's not.

Nice try, Joe Liberman is an Independent Democrat. Here is a statement cut and pasted from his website:

He remains committed to caucusing with Senate Democrats, but will be identified as an Independent Democrat (ID-CT).

Keep it factual please...

The fact that a Republican Senator would be willing to run makes me a lot more comfortable about Obama's ability to reach "across the aisle" and work with the Republicans serving in Congress.

I think that this also shows that it's time to put partisan politics aside and start the process of repairing the damage that the neocon agenda has caused.

"Neocon Agenda"? Way to be non-partisan, Prophet.

Take a look a look at your handle, Mr. Bipartisan.

I didn't want to put blame on the republicans in general or on conservatives. The @!$%# that we're in now is a direct result of the Bush neocon agenda.

Andrew

Maybe Mccain can get you a job since the unemployment rate is so high.

... What?

That does seem to be the requirements as spelled out by the Republicans lately... lol

Oh, OK... I get it now. lol

[facepalm]

Don't mind me!

"Burrito's and drivers manuals!"

That is among one the most senseless, silly things I have ever read on here. And I absolutely love it! Classic!

In seriousness though, let me make a point here. Chuck Hagel is a brilliant man and I commend him for speaking out. But there is something no one seems to be talking about here. Just like Chuck Hagel, there are a large number of Republican governors, senators, congressmen who have spent their lives establishing political clout. They have studied foreign policy, domestic policy, the rules of law and politics, and committed themselves to public service. Though they may speak out in the name of party politics and speak of supporting Sarah Palin, how many of these senior statesmen in the privacy of the voting booth are going to pull the GOP lever? The fact that Sarah Palin was chosen over these far more qualified, more committed, more in tune individuals is an insult to their life long efforts.

I'm glad to see that one prominent Republican has spoken out about the absurdity of this selection and I hope more follow. But either way I firmly believe that come November 4 there is going to be a remarkable number of elder Republican politicians bucking their party. I'm convinced.

From you mouth to God's (insert name of god of your preference here_______________) ear...I heard the same argument used, except to say that white people are talking about being for Obama (for fear of being labeled racist) , but will choose McCain in the privacy of the voting booth. Personally, I hope you're right!

I'm glad to see that one prominent Republican has spoken out about the absurdity of this selection and I hope more follow. But either way I firmly believe that come November 4 there is going to be a remarkable number of elder Republican politicians bucking their party. I'm convinced.

All those elder Republican are welcome to leave the ship. We don't need them.

LOL!!! Burritos and driving manuals! LOL!

jensvoeckler, I'm sooooo glad you pointed that out about Obama. The more important question here is why the all-knowing Obama and all of his supporters don't understand that raising taxes #1: is NOT A PARTRIOTIC ACT (thats the most socialistic comment I've ever heard in my life and really makes me wanna vomit), #2: does NOT RAISE GOVERNMENT REVENUES (gdp drops). Why don't you and Obama understand that? It's not difficult mathematics.

I do believe the taxes being raised are only on the people making over $250,000. He is actually giving tax credit to people making less than $250,000 and small business are getting tax breaks as well.

That is 95% of all US household will not see a tax increase.

There is a pdf of the Tax Policy Institute that did a comparison of the McCain and Obama plans. You can google it yourself to verify.

Hey, guess who supports Obama and doesn't give a flying hoot about Bill Clinton because she didn't support him?

Me.

Maybe because when we looked at Bill Clinton's record up to that point, we saw that he had been a Rhodes Scholar, a professor of law, a State Attorney General and a multi-term Governor. While, yes, his foreign policy experience may have been lacking, he had other experience the public deemed valuable.

We haven't seen that so far with Palin.

There is no double standard - Palin is nominated on a ticket whose platform was experience to lead!!! At least it was the platform until they took on Palin and now it's the mavericks. yeah, she really shook up Alaska, and McCain can't wait to introduce her to Washington. What he lacks realization in is that she will hold the least powerful job in Washington as VP if they win. Wow, you mean to tell me she'll be a tie-breaking vote in the Senate? Oh no, she's really going to shake up the place.

I can't wait for the rebuttal from McCain, I'm leaving the future headline here...

HAGEL IS SEXIST, SAYS MCCAIN CAMP

Oh, good Lord... To even compare the backgrounds and experience of Gov. Palin and Pres. Clinton (even as Governors) indicates you know nothing of which you speak. You may as well compare her record playing high school basketball to Michael Jordan's record in the NBA.

I'm certainly no fan of Pres. Clinton, but for Pete's sake do your homework before you parrot the party line. Look at their backgrounds - particularly their education. Palin: 5 schools in 6 years; BA in Communications, University of Idaho. Clinton: School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University; Oxford University (as a Rhodes Scholar studying Government); Juris Doctorate from Yale University; Law Professor at University of Arkansas.

Palin is quite average without significant achievement on any particular subject anywhere. There are hundreds if not thousands of city commissioners and mayors, state legislators and governors with far juicier resumes than hers. At best, she's a political stunt that's turned me and countless other thinking, educated moderate Republicans toward opposition candidates. The McCain campaign is playing to the lowest common denominator believing the rest of us will just go along for the ride.

That was very well put!

The McCain campaign is playing to the lowest common denominator believing the rest of us will just go along for the ride.

And they got a 20 point bump among women following her nomination. Nobody goes broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.

However, is worth noting that the 20 point bump did not include Democratic women. It appears that McCain simply rallied the women in his own base [or Independents as well] - which should have been expected. I'm of the opinion that choosing Palin was for that very goal and he was successful with that mission.

What we keep forgetting is that she's the Vice Presidential Nominee. Clinton was running for President. Compare her to Biden, if you want a fair comparison; compare McCain's foreign policy experience to Obama's.

Not sure that bounce will maintain for long. A Republican female friend of mine said McCain lost her vote when he picked Palin.

Marno - a high five for the comparison !!!!!!!!

FEDUPWITHLIBERALS - Thank you. Everyone here seems to be overlooking this fact.

ARCANEBLISS - So what if you didn't like Clinton? I'm comparing his foreign policy experience to Palin's. And, I never mentioned Obama - my comments were not about him. You've successfully failed to address the substance of my comments, again.

MARNO (and GRABANIDIOT) - Palin is running for VP. Bill Clinton was running for President. So, to be fair, you should have compared McCain's resume with Clinton's, and Gore's, at the time, to Palin's. And, I know what Clinton's background was (I was there), hence my comment - which was SPECIFIC TO FOREIGN POLICY EXPERIENCE. Truth is, Palin's got just as much as Bill had back then - and yet he was running for President. You've managed to avoid addressing this fact.

Foreign policy experience is such a big deal to Dems now in terms of the opposition party's VP candidate, but it wasn't in 1992 when Bill was running for President. This is the double-standard to which I am referring, and that does, in fact, exist.

Ah, yes, fedupwith liberals, you do have a point. To be fair to Palin, we'd have to compare her foriegn policy experience with Biden's. Let's see, what's she got? "You can see Russia from one point in Alaska," and she got her first passport this year.

Biden... chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Need I go on?

Obama went for a candidate with the experience some felt he lacked. McCain went for... well... I'm still trying to figure that one out.

Not sure that bounce will maintain for long.

It does not matter, four years will pass very fast.

A Republican female friend of mine said McCain lost her vote when he picked Palin.

Well, my hard core Democrat friends are going to vote for McCain.

I'll readily agree with the assertion that Sen. McCain's foreign policy experience is greater than Sen. Obama's by miles. It would be foolish to argue otherwise. And, additionally, I might - upon further consideration, allow that Gov. Palin possesses as much foreign policy experience as Pres. Bill Clinton when he ran for President by virtue of a simple technicality: Governors don't set foreign policy for their States and thus do not carry that skill to Washington.

However, if you'd like to compare the foreign policy knowledge of Gov. Palin vs. that of Pres. Clinton at the time he ran for President, then there is absolutely no contest. Bill Clinton was a student of governments, and was mentored throughout his studies and early career by none other than Sen. J. William Fulbright - one of the most vocal proponents for the creation of the United Nations, and Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for over 15 years. Though without foreign policy experience per se, Pres. Clinton at least brought some semblance of foreign policy knowledge to Washington. I have seen nothing that indicates Gov. Palin has at any time during her undergraduate education or professional career had like or similar levels of interest in or exposure to foreign policy decision-making processes.

I never claimed she had foreign policy experience; my point was that she's not running for President. McCain is. So compare his experience to Obama's and Palin's to Biden's. Then make your choices.

SC Smitty
ARCANEBLISS - So what if you didn't like Clinton? I'm comparing his foreign policy experience to Palin's. And, I never mentioned Obama - my comments were not about him. You've successfully failed to address the substance of my comments, again.

Let me say this again, perhaps the logic will register if I elaborate.

I did not like Bill Clinton.
There were most certainly plenty of other Americans who did not like Bill Clinton, if my guess is correct - you did not like Bill Clinton either.
How can you begin to state that Clinton's lack of foreign policy experience somehow vilifies Palin? Did you think Clinton was qualified even with the lack of foreign policy experience? You're not helping your case here by comparing him to her.

Also, how can you begin to agree with Fed's comment about Palin not running for President and then compare her to a former president?

Despite interference from the republican party for his marital indiscretions and the hearings that followed, Bill Clinton's record speaks for itself. Budget surplus, low unemployment rates, great economy. All you need to do is google the economy when Bill Clinton left office vs. where we are now.

Democrat in CT, there was also a Republican Congress at the time. Wouldn't they deserve credit too?

Actually neither deserves much credit, they just happened to be in office when the dot com bubble was rising. Tax receipts just rose far more than government predictions through nothing government actually did. I would point out that just a year ago the economy was also in great shape, this time thanks to a housing bubble. The problem with all bubbles is that they burst.

Brian,

If you think Bill Clinton had nothing to do with the state of the economy when he was in office, it is you who are in a bubble!

This is probably how you rationalize that Bush has nothing to do with what it is like now!

Every learned political pundit would disagree with you. I guess you know more than them. Maybe You should run for President with Palin. We really could use two people who think they know it all!

If you think Bill Clinton had nothing to do with the state of the economy when he was in office, it is you who are in a bubble!

This is probably how you rationalize that Bush has nothing to do with what it is like now!

No, actually Bill Clinton has everything to do with the economy NOW. To put it blunt and short: He sold our American jobs to foreign nations. Those foreign nations are now becoming, or already are EQUALS in power with the USA. One signature got it all started when the NAFTA treaty was born into action. I have personally lost two jobs because of Mexican and Chinese labor baiting our companies down a road Clinton paved. The trade agreement never benefitted the USA, only foreign nations. Clinton's biggest single downfall during his Presidency was inequality.

Now, picture this for a minute: 9 months after Bush takes office, 9/11 occurs. Did those terrorist train in our country on Bush's watch? No, they trained the entire time Clinton was in office. How could they do that? This is America! Here's how: Clinton jumps in office and cuts defense spending with an original proposal amount of $122 BILLION. He takes 305,000 people off of Federal payroll - 286,000 of which were military. He basically left our country wide open for what happened on 9/11 - while he spent his years counting beans.

This is probably how you rationalize that Bush has nothing to do with what it is like now

He has little to do with it now. That's why it's hillarious that Obama has you thinking that. Obama is another guy like Clinton - probably another economic "genius" - the only difference is that Clinton used "Failing to get Saddam, and should have" to ride into office, and Obama is using "Got Saddam, but shouldn't have" to try to get into office. Funny isn't it? Oh, and let's not forget that Bush has had more terrorism to deal with than Clinton ever had - gee, wonder why? Who was before Clinton? Not to mention natural disasters all over the world for the last eight years...Do you REALLY think Obama could have handled it all better?

Every learned political pundit would disagree with you. I guess you know more than them. Maybe You should run for President with Palin. We really could use two people who think they know it all

Political pundits? So what. Get me someone who can serve you a little "truth" about where Clinton's miracle "surplus" came from - like an "learned" economist. When the elections are over November 5th, you will see that the majority of Americans know better than "Bush's fault" - That's why Obama's linking McCain will fail him.

McCain went for... well... I'm still trying to figure that one out.

Cheesecake, he went for cheesecake.

Unfortunately for McCain... the cake is a lie.

Brian,

If you think Bill Clinton had nothing to do with the state of the economy when he was in office, it is you who are in a bubble!

Insult

This is probably how you rationalize that Bush has nothing to do with what it is like now!

It is. The actions of the Federal Reserve have much more to do with it.

Every learned political pundit would disagree with you.

Argument from authority, fallacious. Also, wrong authority. You should consult economists on the economy, not political pundits.

I guess you know more than them.

Yes.

Maybe You should run for President with Palin.

I'm not old enough, but it's nice to know I have your support.

If you want to read some intelligent commentary on the current economic situation, I would recommend mises.org: http://mises.org/story/3110, http://mises.org/story/3111

Funny as the ship sinks Repubs bring up Bill. Bill had a pregnant teen daughter. Bill had an affair on his first and second wife. Bill can talk to God.

Wait that is someone else.

Funny as the ship sinks Repubs bring up Bill. Bill had a pregnant teen daughter. Bill had an affair on his first and second wife. Bill can talk to God.

Wait that is someone else.

Nothing Bill did in his personal life had anything to do with his failures, so why is it a factor in other candidates? Even if he didn't hook up with Monica - he still would have been a lying, cheating, money monger - who sold the USA out big time.

That and not blinking...

Well, what do you expect, her major claim to fame is a beauty pageant. There are far more intelligent and better female governors if local governance is the issue. She didnt graduate with honors either. Confidence and a face are the usual criteria in a beauty pagent. She thinks the formula will work again.

Grabanidiot, you're dangerously close to living up to your name. Her major claim to fame is a beauty pageant over 20 years ago? Try Governor of Alaska.

BTW, Al Gore and John Kerry both had a "C" average in college - no honors there, yet they were the Presidential nominees in the last two elections.

As did Pres. Bush whose cumulative GPA at Yale was 2.35 (which I believe is also a "C"). And I suppose we've all seen how electing officials with merely average intelligence has worked out for our economy over the last few days...
Personally, I'd like to believe we'd want our elected officials to be the best and brightest this country has to offer. A guy who graduates Harvard Magna Cum Laude with a Juris Doctorate (Law) and editor of the Harvard Law Review is probably better equipped intellectually to be President than a guy that graduates 894 out of 899 in his Naval Academy class. But maybe that's just me...

You're both wrong.

Her major claim to fame is being chosen as a Vice Presidential Nominee. Before that, most of the nation had little clue of who she is. There are over 7 polls I'm looking at right now that reflect that too.

And two years ago half the country had never heard of Barrack Obama. So what's your point? Check the polls.

Since when is the discussion about Barrack Obama? I thought the discussion was over Palin's claim to fame? You were both wrong - that was the point. Anyways, yes - Obama wasn't well known before his 2004 Keynote speech for John Kerry at the DNC.

fedupwithliberals,

You are wrong. Barack Obama (note correct spelling of his name) became known four years ago when he was a major speaker at the democratic convention. It was obvious then that he was an up and coming person in government. And the polls? Obama is up 48-44, which is a total turnaround from last week when he was below McCain. His polls are going up, while McCain's are going down. Sign of things to come. Sorry.

As far as Palin goes, I'm sick of hearing about her. She was never chosen to be a serious candidate, just to draw attention away from the ACTUAL candidate, John McCain. It worked tremendously for a couple of weeks until the first time she opened her mouth in an interview and proved how inexperienced she is. She is the laughing stock of every comedian around and most of the country. But it's not her fault. She has such a big ego that she probably actually thought she would have a major role in his campaign, instead she got a bit part, the equivalent of a "walk-in" on a movie set. She should have stuck to her 19 short months as governor, where she was popular. She'll end up with nothing at all when she's through, because with all the investigations going on, Alaska probably won't welcome her back with open arms.

And as far as her education--6 colleges, 1 four-year degree.

Don't rely on the Polls, as you can tell they change from wk to wk.

Call it slip of the tongue or just pure ego, I heard her today calling the ticket the "Palin/McCain" ticket! She's one baby that McCain won't be able to put in the corner.

BB,

Yes, they are and YES WE CAN!

And two years ago half the country had never heard of Barrack Obama. So what's your point? Check the polls

This is so true. Barack Obama is a evangelical type speaker who has done nothing but shake the DMC up with emotion. I see people crying and as he yells louder and louder they reach out for him...He's a lawyer people - not Jesus. All I see for experience is 143 working days in the Senate. McCain and his resume for this country make Barack Obama look like a guy who just lost his job at a fast food joint trying to be President. Oh, ok - I forgot the real focus is on Palin though... Sorry folks, but the Governor of any state has MUCH more on their plate their FIRST DAY than Obama has had on his in 143 days. You wanna talk about earmarks? Governors ALL request federal funding for their states. Senators however request them based on special interest, or in his case personal interest. Get real about this election folks. McCain is the one to beat - not Palin. And Obama is going to realize that when he doesn't get to debate Palin, although that would be a little more appropriate as far as equality of knowledge.

If my memory serves me right Bill Clinton was behind in the polls when he was elected President.

Why do people keep discussing Bill Clinton?

Proving a point, don't get to excited about the Polls, either party. I might would go by state polls, but not national polls. Bill Clinton was the last Democrat to hold office. Left an "impression" LOL

I believe anyone who is well-informed is perfectly aware that the polls do not represent the most important aspect of the election - the electoral vote.

Yes, and as of yesterday McCain was ahead in electoral votes.

fedupwithliberals
Yes, and as of yesterday McCain was ahead in electoral votes.

Are you sure?
The Electoral Map: Key States

Oh yes, by all means, use the NY Times as your "unbiased" view. I saw at least 4 sites showing McCain ahead, and only 1 showing Obama ahead. Just Google "electoral map" and look up some of the other ones.

It's going to be a tight race all the way to election day. I guarantee the numbers will go back and forth until Nov. 4.

Any news that reports the true is "biased". If FOX broke the news about Palin ordering millions in earmarks for a town of 7000 then I guess they would be biased.

http://electoralmap.net/index.php
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/10/electoral.map/
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
http://innovation.cq.com/prezMap08/

:)

arcanebliss,

I've been trying to avoid listening to polls or looking at electoral maps because I'm so nervous about this upcoming election...but I conceded and had a quick peek at your links.

All I can say is, I hope to God it holds. Thanks (I think) for posting the links.

And here's the latest polls:

Looking better every day!

I am a pretty hardcore dem, but Hagel is a guy I have admired for a long time. A true old-school conservative who speaks his mind. Respectable for sure. It would be great if he had a place in Obama's cabinet!

Whatever Chuck decides to do next, I'm behind him and will be supportive, no questions asked!

God bless Hagel for telling the truth.

Well, if that is the point, what Hagel was doing in the Obama camp?

He could be the chosen V.P.

But.....he talks too much.

It would be great if he had a place in Obama's cabinet!

I think it definitely will happen. It is well known in democratic circles that Hagel and Lawrence Korb (former Reagan Deputy Sec. of Defense, currently of the Center for American Progress) are frontrunners for his Secretary of State/Secretary of Defense positions.

Yea....being president back then was just as difficult as it is today...

I wonder how much experience George Washington had as a foreign policy member back in his day.

And good ole George couldn't use a computer either. So I guess he can relate to both members of the Republican ticket.

P.S. What was the United States position on Iran during the Washington administration ?

Experience isn't that big a deal, in my opinion. George Washington had less political experience than either Palin or Obama, when he became President. His most significant experience prior to that was being head of the Constitutional Convention, where he distinguished himself by keeping his mouth shut.

Check out ol' George Washington's blog ;-)

This is not to say that Iran is run by a bunch of nice guys. The fundamentalist Ayatollahs are radical nuts. But most Iranians are very moderate, and the government harbors no military ambitions to invade foreign countries.

Source.

Washington was a foreign policy genius. If it hadn't been for his farewell address setting the precedent, we would've gone to war with Britain or France in the Adams Presidency, something that this infant country could never have survived. He knew that this country was in such bad financial shape that we would never win that war. He knew war with Britain was evident again, he just wanted to put it off until we were better prepared, and all of that came true, and we survived that war with Britain.

Does any of that sound familiar in today's day? We are talking about a time period in which the amount of money used to insure our money in banks with the FDIC is below the minimum set by Congress - the first time in history. And McCain and Palin want to go looking for a fight to "make us secure?" Maybe we need to have that fight, but we are not prepared as a country to do that currently. And making the Bush tax cuts permanent doesn't sound like a good way to get out of the financial mess our government is in now.

And good ole George couldn't use a computer either. So I guess he can relate to both members of the Republican

Then....he did not have a problem with the paid hackers of personal e-mails.

Then....he did not have a problem with the paid hackers of personal e-mails.

He probably wouldn't have used Yahoo for important e-mails anyway.

det

source for "paid hackers of personal emails."???

I would greatly like to see this source. Do share.

If lack of foreign policy knowledge is grounds for not being qualified to be the VP nominee, there are MANY who would never have been chosen. Likewise for the Presidential nominee. FDR and Reagan both had no foreign policy experience before being elected, yet they are both regarded as great presidents. Also, the VP is not responsible for making foreign policy; that is the job of the President and Congress.

I'm not claiming that Palin has any substantial foreign policy, but let's be honest. Obama has zero foreign policy experience, and as Thomas Sowell put it, he's not a heartbeat away from the presidency, his would BE the heartbeat of the president - and he would be the one making foreign policy.

I don't belittle Obama's education, but I do believe that life experience and job experience do count as well. Serving as mayor and Governor, Palin has had experience leading people, and has had to be accountable to the people she serves.

Also, there will always be people who hate America because of what we stand for; I will not choose my president based on whether there will be foreigners waving or burning my flag. I will choose based on who I believe is best for MY country.

Yeah, and look at what Reagan did. -cough-irancontra-cough-

The truth is that historically - the ticket has always been balanced with the VP carrying the foreign policy experience. This election is a little topsy-turvy. McCain is carrying that weight so he essentially used Palin as a different type of pawn. This might hurt him in the long run if Americans pay closer attention to the VP debate than they have in the past. Reason being that Biden is far more qualified - even shows in the polls, not just the experience and voting record - and it will most certainly show in the debate. Obama did what was expected of him historically and sensibly speaking, there's no doubt on either side of the election that Palin was a risky and unusual choice. We'll see how that choice pans out as the election moves on. Thus far she has gone from rockstar to now losing ground in the polls. Not sure what that means or if it will continue, but we'll soon find out!

Obama has zero foreign policy experience

Zero is not actually correct, limited yes, but not zero. He has a degree in International Relations as well as sitting on the Senate Foreign Relations committee, and meeting several heads of state whilst on said committee.

I stand corrected. He has SOME.

Palin does have a minor in Poli-Sci, in case a few of you forgot. It may not be from Harvard, but she does at least have an understanding of the way our government works.

Again, she's not running for President and Obama is.

Again, she's not running for President and Obama is.

Very true. But I'm sure you don't want to compare Palin's experience with Biden's.

I'll wait for the debates. I'm much more concerned about who the Presidential nominees are, anyway.

FedupwithLiberals -

Political Science as a minor discipline JUST EXACERBATES the Palin problem ! All the more she should understand foreign policy. Political Science as a discipline INCLUDES FOREIGN POLICY or how would governments be able to interact with other governments without understanding the creation of foreign poicy and the theories about it ??????????? Unless only the University of Idaho excludes that for all political science students....... Either that or Palin wasnt listening or perhaps she skipped the subject because she already knew she would flunk and she was only meant for small towns near big countries.

Oh yes! I agree with you that McCain chose Palin to steal Clinton supporters, but I'll add that he also wants to appeal to the males hoping they will think Palin is "hot" and vote for his ticket because of Palin. LOL!!! Someone on McCain's strategy team was thinking very very BASIC instinct there!

Grab, what in the world are you talking about? I haven't heard anyone say she doesn't understand foreign policy, just that she doesn't have any practical experience. So basically you're saying she was taught foreign policy, which in turn means she more than likely understands it.

Palin does have a minor in Poli-Sci, in case a few of you forgot.

And this is relevant how? It may have been a while since you were in university, but I am currently a senior minoring in politics, and I can tell that in no way is the education of a minor comprehensive enough to provide even a foundation for foreign policy "experience" or "judgment." Besides, a minor in political science wouldn't really be focused on foreign policy at all...it would pay more attention to domestic policy.

Here's an excerpt of the Political Science minor requirements at University of Idaho:

Political Science Minor
Note: Approved political science seminars may be substituted in this minor.

PolS 101 Introduction to Political Science and American Government (3 cr)
PolS 425 History of Political Philosophy I or PolS 426 History of Political Philosophy II or
PolS 428 American Political Thought (3 cr)
Three courses in American government/policy (only one course may be numbered below 300) (9 cr)
Two courses in international relations/ comparative government (only one course may be numbered below 300) (6 cr)

Also worth noting, most political science classes are theoretical and have nothing to do with policy.

In addition, it has been noted by officials from the University that Palin had no real impact at the school. She was only there for a couple of years, was not involved, and none of her former professors that are left remember her at all. Source.

This to me is what is most troubling. The way you really learn in school is by applying the material in real life experiences. I've applied my minor through internships at non-profits and a think-tank, as well as through on-campus activism on various political issues. However...in no way would I ever purport that this experience makes me somehow qualified to run the free world. That's just freaking scary.

I haven't heard anyone say she doesn't understand foreign policy, just that she doesn't have any practical experience.

Really? What about the Charlie Gibson interview fiasco and Palin not having any clue about what the Bush Doctrine is? Even staunch Republicans think she doesn't "understand" foreign policy enough. Take a look at this excerpt from National Review's Rick Lowery for instance:

The foreign-policy session was a white-knuckle affair. She barely got through it and showed no knowledge more than an inch deep.

Even staunch party supporters are voicing the fact she doesn't have the understanding. Do you really think the rest of the American people are going to let this slide?

My point wasn't that she has VAST experience, it's that she has at least a basic understanding of politics. Which is what I assume YOU will have. Otherwise, why would you bother minoring in it?

I'm sure most of my college professors don't remember me either. Sitting in a lecture with 99 other students, it was a little hard to stand out.

Not if you are good, and contribute something worthwhile, instead of just being another person in a group of people.

fed

Shouldn't she have known what the Vice President's job is? Or at least had the smarts not to have said she didn't know?

Come on Dan! You just may be more qualified, at least you can recognize your weakness and therefore learn from it!!

Dan, apparently the people of Alaska disagree with you.

Really fed? Because, she went from roughly 80% approval rating in her own state to a 60% approval rating in June according to Rasmussen. She has only been a Governor for about 2 years - we can't expect the citizens to have an accurate view of her just yet as she hasn't had enough time on the job to accomplish much of anything.

60%? Compare that with congress. They've had the same amount of time in office.

Fed, that's a rating on an entire group of people - Republicans and Democrats - not comparable at all. However, if you have a member of Congress whose rating you'd care to compare with Palin's as a Governor - I'm game.

Although I'm not sure what the point would be...

Nancy Pelosi 16%-53%
Joe Biden 38%-51%
Barrack Obama 45%-64%
John McCain 44%-61%

These all came from pollingreport.com, which lists all the major polls. I took the highest and lowest ratings from the most recent polls.

My point was that Alaskans seem to think she's qualified to be Governor, as they voted for her (after she had been elected several times locally) and her approval rating is fairly high, especially when compared to Congress.

Alright, Fed. Now which of those politicians you listed have been a Senator for only 2 years?

I'm not quite sure it is fair to compare polls in favor of Palin from Alaska (small population) with the national polls for congress or the other politicians in the race. I seriously think it's different. Just because Alaskans think she's qualified to be governor doesn't mean that the she has what it takes to be VP. To me that's like comparing a pumpkin to a grape. Just my opinion.

Well, arcane, Obama has been for 4 years, although the last 18 months haven't been productive for him in terms of his Senate seat.

Yes, and a State Legislator for 6-7 years. Do we have any ratings for when he was at only 2 years in the Senate?

Newsweek Poll 5/11-12/06

Favorable 31%
Unfavorable 9%
Never Heard Of 50%
Unsure 10%

lol @ 50% had never even heard of him.

Well, that's an accurate poll.

Fed, you might want to grab a poll that assesses his favorability with his state - not the nation. I can show you a national poll right now on Palin and it isn't pretty. It's worse off than the one you just supplied.

Dan, apparently the people of Alaska disagree with you.

Honestly, Sarah Palin might be a fine governor for Alaska. She might be the best thing that's happened to the people of that state in a long time. Her high approval rating might stay high, might get higher. She's had some achievements in her short tenure already, and the people there do seem to like her, for the most part.

But let's not pretend that governing 700,000 people is in any way translatable to being president of the United States. Let's not pretend that being commander of the Alaskan Guard (though it should be noted that she's never given any commands) is relevant command experience. Let's stop trying to make her "executive experience" more than what it really is.

To be fair, Obama hasn't exactly been around the block a ton of times either. That's the major knock on him, but his campaign has never been about experience. It's been about his judgment as a virtual Washington outsider, as someone who hasn't been so indoctrinated in the way that business is done to be unable to change the way business is done. We all know that John McCain has more experience in government, but Obama's platform is that he can make decisions that benefit the country, whereas McCain has been in tow with Bush pretty closely the last eight years, and that hasn't turned out too good.

And if we really want to talk about Sarah Palin's qualifications, real world qualifications and achievements, well, there's not much to talk about. It's telling when the campaign's message about her ability to lead is that she's been in charge of the Alaskan Guard and she's close to Russia. And that's not to say at all that she needs to have a thick resume (though she should avoid attacking Joe Biden's), but that even when we look at who she is and where she's come from, there's no reason to believe that she has even the judgment that would allow her to assess the good and bad of a situation and make a decision for 300 million people. When asked about supporting Georgia if they were allowed to join NATO, she assumed that the US would have to go to war with Russia, when that's not the case. And there's other things that have stuck out about her that make people doubt her ability to really handle the job.

But what's so alarming about Sarah Palin is John McCain. Not only has he spent the last four months picking at Obama's thin resume, but now, the 72 year old POW and four time cancer survivor picks someone with a resume that's even thinner, especially when it comes to national security and foreign policy. The odds that John McCain could wind up not able to meet the demands within his first term are higher than anyone in the GOP wants to admit, and if that happens, he'd be leaving this country in Sarah Palin's not-so-capable hands. That's a scary supposition.

So I hope that Sarah Palin has a chance to be the best governor the great state of Alaska has ever had, and to prove that over the course of many years.

BA, (I haven't tortured you yet today!) I bet you wouldn't want to compare Obama's experience to Biden's, either! :-)

Superman - Again, Palin isnt' running for President. Try comparing Obama's experience to McCain's, not just his age and medical charts.

If you disagree ideologically with the Republican party, that's fine. We have mulitipe parties because we don't agree. You're free to vote for whichever candidate you choose. As am I.

So I guess you didn't read the comment. That's fine, but don't comment on it if you don't know what it says.

Perhaps we should administer IQ tests before every election, even to the voters. How many of us knew what the Bush Doctrine was when Gibson asked her about it? I follow politics very closely, and I didn't know what he was referring to. Has anyone even used that term in the last five years? I'm not basing my opinion of her intelligence on one question. Let's wait for the debates and see how she handles herself. You may be surprised.

I know the Urban Dictionary definition of the Bush Doctrine...

A policy of preemptive strike, as proposed by President George W. Bush.

Yes, but did you have to look it up first???

Fedup: I'm not basing Palin's intelligence on that one question, but on a lot of the questions she's been asked, and her response to them. I just used that one as an example. I'm looking forward to the debates, too.

How many of us knew what the Bush Doctrine was when Gibson asked her about it

How many of us are running for VP?

I actually saw it when I was looking up something else on Urban Dictionary. They've got some pretty funny entries and examples there. For instance, an example for the Bush Doctrine:

If that jerk looks at me one more time, I'm going to Bush Doctrine his face into the pavement.

Edit for Clarity: Urban Dictionary isn't an official dictionary, it's a collection of slang, acronyms, and lingo that has been generated through popular usage. It is by no means an official dictionary in any sense of the term.

However, depending on how it was asked and the tone of voice of the person asking, I bet I could have come up with a definition for Bush Doctrine all on my own.

For what it's worth, I knew what the Bush doctrine is, and I slapped myself in the forehead when she said "In what respect, Charlie?"

Did you facepalm or did you facepalm?

McCain was directly involved and investigated for involvement in the Savings and Loan scandal headed by Keating which cost American taxpayers $124 Billion. Both McCain and his economic and former top campaign adviser Phil Gramm are directly implicated in the deregulation that caused the current financial markets to collapse in what some say are the worst scenarios since the Great Depression.

we can conclude that OBAMA'S JUDGMENT IS TERRIBLE OR HIS IDEOLIGY IS DANGEROUS.

Going to assume here that you have not read the transcripts from Palin's pastor. I am sure if you had then maybe you would not bring the ideology angle into this thread. I will post it for you in a little bit once I track it down.

Incredible how Rev Wright's speech is easy to find and Palin's Pastors sermon isn't. Weird.

Radicals? Sarah Palin IS a radical! What is she going to do in Senate hearings? Speak in tongues when she gets mad and call upon the wrath of God against her opponents? Gimme a break. Quit posting your Republican talking points on here, spreading your garbage falsehoods. If there is anything the American people need to be afraid of it's the potential to have someone as whacked out, far-right, religious fanatical as Sarah Palin anywhere near Washington.

Here is the link to the Palin's pastor. Yeah he isn't a radical...much.

geon, I would have to respectfully disagree with you. Obama met William Ayers through a program he took part in for the community. What William Ayers did happened when Obama was only 8. Seems to me that the guy turned his life around (I can only assume.) Obama isn't found guilty of any wrong doing in the JAILED BUSINESSMAN's case. If he were, Hillary Clinton would've destroyed him first!

Let's be serious here, do we run a background check on every person we meet? Here you are judging the man based on what you heard from biased pundits. I would dig deeper than that, before I make any other assumption.

Michelle,
Thanks for your display of ignorance. Well, actually, no thanks.
Why give up the country to a seven year Senator when you can give it up to a 20 month Governor of a state with a population that is less than 25 major cities.
In regards to the 'crack' comment... well... you're dumb as hell.

Yes! Shake up Washington, McCain & Palin! Pander to those special interests!

BAjunkie, the difference is that we wouldn't be giving it up to a 20 month Governor of a state (whose population, by the way is pretty close to that of Sen. Biden's home state), we would be giving it to a man with almost 3 decades of Senate experience.

Remember, Obama is running for Pres, Palin is running for VP. Apples to oranges, my friend.

fedupwithliberals
we would be giving it to a man with almost 3 decades of Senate experience.

Yes, and voted with Bush roughly 90% of the time or more 7 of the 8 years he was in office. Sounds like just the man I'd prefer wasn't in an elected position.

When the presidential nominee is 72 years old and has had multiple bouts with cancer, those apples and oranges taste the same.

He voted along party lines, much like Obama did (Obama's percentage was 97%). Much like most Senators did. McCain's record of voting with Bush has been as low as 77% (in 2005) and along party lines as low as 67% (in 2001), while Obama's has been as high as 49% with Bush in 2006.

So who should Republicans choose as their candidate? Someone who doesn't represent the Republican platform? At least McCain has shown he's willing to cross party lines and make independent decisions if he feels it's in this country's best interests.

I LOVE BEING A LIBERAL.... YOUR IGNORANCE ISNT GOING ANYWHERE U HATE MONGER

AND MICHELLE, SERIOUSLY, YOU DONT SOUND TOO INFORMED

He voted along party lines and with Bush 90-95% of the time - that means he supported most of his failed policies. I don't care that Obama voted with Democrats - is Bush a Democrat?

McCain's record went below once in the 8 years of Bush's reign, as I said - 7 out of 8 years he voted with Bush roughly 90% of the time or more. Why are you clarifying what has already been pointed out? How is that helping your side of the discussion?

Felya, how am I being a hate monger?

Of course he voted along party lines most of the time. He's a REPUBLICAN. Much like a good portion of the country. And many of the times he did vote agains Bush were ON those so-called "failed policies".

Again, we chose a candidate who supports the Republican platform, but who has shown willingness to cross party lines if needed. Should we have picked a left-wing Democrat as our nominee??? Look up the voting records of anyone in congress; most members vote along party lines the majority of the time.

"Remember, Obama is running for Pres, Palin is running for VP. Apples to oranges, my friend."

Well it would've been apples to oranges like you said, if McCain's health wasn't an issue. His full medical records aren't really known to the public. That "snapshot" look he gave to the media on a friday afternoon is rather suspiscious. So yeah, people have reasons to question Palin's capabilities and "readiness". Obama may not be fully experienced for the job, but he has surrounded himself with people who has enough knowledge of foreign policy and the economy. If something should happen to Obama, Biden is fully capable of taking over. What about Palin? Can she be the leader America needs a deserves if McCain becomes (more) ill?

fedupwithliberals
Of course he voted along party lines most of the time. He's a REPUBLICAN. Much like a good portion of the country. And many of the times he did vote agains Bush were ON those so-called "failed policies".

1. John McCain has voted with George Bush roughly 90% of the time for 7 years. Recently, 95% of the time.
2. John McCain's most important [on the voter's minds] platform issues are in line with Bush's current policies.
3. John McCain has repeatedly and consistantly supported, backed, complimented, etc. George Bush. EXCEPT for when he was running against him and the year after his loss, which is understandable.
4. John McCain voted for the Iraq War and still today supports our occupation - without benchmarks for the Iraqis to meet - "until we win". While "until we win" has been defined in so many different ways, it's hard for me to pinpoint which McCain definition of "winning in Iraq" is the one he stands by.
5. Although John McCain was originally against them - he wants to keep all of Bush's tax cuts AND PRODUCE MORE. 6. John McCain wants to drill baby, drill just like his buddy Bush.
7. John McCain has a weak [the short plan he has written up on his campaign site is also rarely ever discussed] energy policy beyond drilling for oil, just like George Bush. 8. John McCain is pro-life, like George Bush.
9. John McCain is mostly anti-gay rights although he has flip-flopped on the issue in the past decade, like George Bush.
10. Wishes to maintain the "Cuban embargo" [there really isn't one, it's a farce], like George Bush.
11. John McCain is gung-ho on full out Globalization, like George Bush.
12. Against using Diplomacy with "rogue leaders", like George Bush [although Bush has recently reversed his stance].
13. Although once a leader for Veteran benefits, now John McCain is lousy on the issue... Like who? George Bush.
And I just grabbed these points real quick from ontheissues - comparing Bush's profile to McCain's profile.
Do I need to continue? Voting for John McCain is voting for Bush, no matter how you cut it. The differences are minor on the major issues this country is facing today. In fact, on the differences the two have - McCain seems to take a more hard-lined approach than Bush.

Don't challenge me, Fed. I have a whole article I wrote up on all of the failed policies that McCain has been in line with Bush on.

I'm not trying to challenge you. You have your take on things, and I have mine. I guess it depends on what you consider to be "failed policies", and which issues you support or are against (i.e. abortion, gay rights, etc.).

Fed, all you had to say is that you're not a part of the majority of Americans who are "fedup" with Bush. ;]

arcane, I'm not saying I agree with every decision Bush has made. I just don't jump ship and drown because the captain went off course. I don't try to find a ship whose captain I disagree with and who I believe is going in entirely the wrong direction. I select a new captain who has the same goals as me and wants to get us back on course.

Where does McCain's course differ from George Bush's?

lol..."Remember a saying: You become the same kind of person as those with whom you surround yourself"

lol....I guess I dont recall that "old saying". What I do recall though is trying to assinate one's character via guilt by association is what we call, "desperate" and "a dog that aint gonna hunt"

I guess that makes McCain just like king george bush then doesn't it?
The guilt by association thing is a non starter to those who think outside the Republican box.

AZ, all you have to do is look at McCain's voting record to see that he and Bush are pretty much the same when it comes to ideology. Has nothing to do with him actually hanging around Bush.

Am I seeing double or someone is copying and pasting their own post?

Rob/Warwick, I don't think McCain likes Bush very much after Bush did a job on him in elections past but they are of the same political mindset.
I guess I was unclear about guilt by association by which I was implying that you can't convict someone for something someone else does and the I did it myself..........sorry

McCain hired the SAME people who came up with those campaign tactics against him. Amazing.

Then I guess John McCain is the same as George Bush.

Chum your so right
I lost respect for McCain, when he hired all the people that did so much to him, to his wife, his adopted daughter everything they did and now your friends because you want to win at any cost, have some dignity.

(Remember a saying: You become the same kind of person as those with whom you surround yourself.)

What I remember is this same post a few blocks up. At the very least, we expect original drivel.

geon,

You're writing away and all I'm seeing in your thread is blah, blah, blah!

I guess I am an elitist. I want the most intelligent person in the white house. What some are perceiving as folksy, and down to earth I perceive as parochial and dim. In the Gibson interview she did not come off as being too bright. Just as Mr Hagel said, to infer that because you live close to Russia you know something about it is insulting to the intelligence of American people. In fact I feel her obtuse answer speaks to her lack of intelligence.
I am sorry but if you believe that dinosaurs walked the Earth with man, that the Earth is no more than 7000 years old (Chinese history dates back 6000 years for Christ sake!) and that science should be replaced with religion in the schools you are not very intelligent in my book.
we already had eight years of a folksy guy you could have a beer with as president and you can see how swimmingly that has gone. Let's start electing smart, accomplished, erudite and well educated people to run country.
In response to the comment above that maybe we should give IQ test to voters, I only wish!

No. But if you were Sarah and could see some kind of hospital off in the fog, you could step right in and get that ol' heart pumpin' ag'in. Yahoo! errr, oops, leaking there. Ok. Mush! Mission Accomplished!

Alaska is not a true representation of ability to run a nation.

Why is the approval rating80%? In addition to the $2000 that each person receives for the oil subsidy, each person will receive an additional $1200. (could have my figures reversed)

While just about every other state has entered budget crisis mode, Alaska is able to pay their residents to live there.

While Wasila Alaska is the "meth-capital" (lol @ SNL skit) of the state, Alaska does not have the inner-city or rural america problems that just about every other state has.

We do live in a country where children are taught "ANYONE" can be president. However as good parents we also teach them what qualifies a good leader, what bull$hit to look out for, stay away from those riddled with lies and deceit and on and on.

You point is noted but not valid as it pertains to Pale-In.

"Has everyone been living in a world of lies?..."

No, just learning that the truth of America is that everyone _has the chance— to be President or anything else they aspire to be. To say that anyone can be President is somewhat facetious because its not guaranteed. It would do America better if our educational system instilled the idea that this a land of opportunity & that chances abound, but nothing is guaranteed nor automatic.

Aida, the promise that anyone can become president don't preclude one's intelligence, experience, etc.

We also teach Little Timmy he can become a heart surgeon. But if Little Timmy isn't doctor material, the kind thing to do for Timmy and his future patients is lovingly steer him into a different career path.

Apparently the people that keep electing Palin don't agree with you that she's on the wrong path.

A Harvard Degree is impressive; I would never say Obama's not intelligent. But I know many highly intelligent people that never went to college.

"I was always thought we live in a country where ANYONE can be president."

Nobody takes that to mean the girl at the checkout counter might be tapped for the Presidency next week. There's zero chance that my mailman will be our next Secretary of State.

Buckeye for VP!

Well, Buckeye, if the checkout girl got a college education, ran for and won a seat on the City Council, won the Mayoral election and served two terms, then ran for Governor and won, then perhaps she may have a chance to be VICE President as well.

I was always thought we live in a country where ANYONE can be president.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but no not anyone can be President. There are guidelines set in place that each candidate must meet.

Hope this helps you out a little.

The reason most small towns have term limits is that the incumbent mayor can continue to get elected over and over simply because most people don't really care who is mayor. The only way most small town mayors loes their jobs is they screw up so bad they are lucky to stay out of jail.

When she was first elected she garnered 616 votes, the second time she got 909, in most places dog catchers can get that many votes. What I am trying to say is being elected mayor of a town of less than 7,000 is not that big a deal. Most people don't want the job, and really don't care who gets it.

She has not run for reelection as governor yet, have to wait to see what happens.

terrance, anyone CAN be president, as long as they meet age/citizenship requirements. Palin meets all the guidelines...so what's your point?

Fedup,

Try reading the first post in the thread that my reply was too. Or better yet even the quote in my own post is good jumping off point. If you gonna reply to a thread block atleast read the first post in that block.

The whole point was that no not anyone can be President and I don't think I ever said Palin wasn't qualified. But it is easy to see why you would make an assumption like that.

And yes anyone that meet the requirements can be PreZ , but that doesn't mean they should be Prez or Vice Prez for that matter.

fedup,

Does it bother you at all, each time you tout Governor Palin's Mayor credential, that while she was elected twice, after she went in and fired the people who weren't deferential enough--and that apparently was a lot of firings for one small town--and replaced them with people who owed their jobs to her and would reliably toe her line, she was pressured by the Republican Party into hiring a City Administrator to do enough of the Mayor's job so that the good townspeople would back off on their recall election plan?

It sounds like she had to convince the town that elected her that she wouldn't have her hands on enough of the administration work to do any more damage before they were satisfied with her. How much of a rousing recommendation is that? It doesn't seem like a sterling qualification for executive experience.

Dharma, not at all. I challenge you to name any politician who doesn't bring in his/her own people, at least in some of the positions. Do you think if Obama gets elected, Condi Rice keeps her job? Or any of the other cabinet members?

As an elected official, you have the right to surround yourself with the personnel who support your ideas and values, who treat you with the respect due your position, and who work with you, not against you. It's not illegal or unethical. It's practical.

terrance, I did read the whole thread (hence the posts I made ABOVE yours). I was replying to your post #14.8 - maybe you should do a little reading yourself.

Then in that case Fed you question was just dumb. I never mentioned Palin in my statement and was pointing out that no NOT everyone can be President.

I was always thought we live in a country where ANYONE can be president.

Anyone can. Look at the imbecile that we have now. Who woulda thunk it.

Anyone can. Look at the imbecile that we have now. Who woulda thunk it.

okay good point

Yes anyone can be president IF THEY PREPARE TO BE PRESIDENT! The saying means that if you work hard and get the proper credentials and know what you are talking about then YES you could be president. The problem is that unqualified, biased, corrupt people should not be president. This woman is all of those things. I mean would you trust this woman to keep America safe. If that 3am call comes would you rather have the guy with the Harvard Law degree or the person that barely made it through college after six schools and who mismanaged her hometown into 26mil in debt. She is guilty of corruption and cronyism. The saying does not mean we should start picking people at random. It doesn't mean that if you screw up and do dumb things and don't study and barely make it through school that someone could PICK you to be president. One guy picked her then everyone got fired up, but imagine Palin running on her own. Would you still vote for her over OTHER Republicans? Really? I mean if it was between Pawlenty and her for President instead of VP I'm sure you would pick Pawlenty. Now think Olympia Snowe. Now think a ton of other people that in fact would be better. I bet Sarah Palin comes pretty close when compared to all other QUALIFIED Republicans to dead last. PERIOD. Really think about that and don't hold all these other Republicans in too harsh a light for not trusting the most powerful military in the world to a woman that needs ON THE JOB training. Would you want a nanny to experiment on your kid? Then why let an obviously unproven person experiment on our government? Thats like experiment with all our children's lives. I hope the rest of the conservatives wake up and realize that this is grasping at straws. I know you guys want to win, but please don't make a big mistake again. We did it with GWB twice and now we are socialists basically. How bad do we want this country to get? Sometimes you really do have to put your country first, before racism, before party, before preconceived notions. I know I'm not saying all people voting for McCain are racists, but some are. In all fairness I just ask you REALLY think about your vote and the impact it will have. Remember the mistakes we made with Bush and please don't make a worse one. Its our children's future.

The problem is that unqualified, biased, corrupt people should not be president.

Then why is dubya?

fedup, SHE was forced to hire a whole new POSITION--City Administrator--TO DO THE JOB SHE HAD BEEN ELECTED TO DO, because the town was organizing a recall over all the firing she did, as well as other issues. I don't know if THEY thought it was illegal or unethical, but they thought she should be recalled.

She couldn't keep the job unless the town was positive she wouldn't be doing most of it. That was the point, which I emphasized. No wonder people think you don't read the posts.

They liked the part where she hired a lobbyist to be sure they got more Federal pork per capita than the people in any other state. But everyday, NORMAL Mayoral duties--THAT she had to hire someone else to do. That is NOT a recommendation for how well she held that Executive position. It is basically a bribe. With money she says she is responsible and frugal with. OUR money.

I hear that, Angry American. As I've stated before, and will again (and I can't even recall if it was in this thread...) At least Obama chose a running mate whose strengths match his own weaknesses. The country stated they were concerned that Obama didn't have enough foreign policy experience. So, for his running mate, he selected Biden. It was stated in an article back in January of 2007 that "Biden, first elected to the United States Senate in 1972, would be at the top of my list of candidates running for president in 2008 who knows what he is talking about when he discusses foreign policy and international relations." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-guttman/bidens-foreign-policy-cr_b_38144.html

McCain's choice... Well, if all he was looking for was a female Republican governor, there are only three currently serving. One of them was the governor of CT, who signed the bill there which gave homosexual couples the civil-rights benefits equal to marriage. The other was rumored to be a lesbian, herself. (Whether or not it was true, I have no opinion one way or the other.) I suspect a Google-based vetting process.

Obama is not a Muslim.

Michelle:

It's painfully obvious you don't know what you're talking about. Are you by any chance voting for Palin...I mean McCain?

Obama is a Muslim

Michelle, girl, quit lying.

Michelle, besides Muslims who else do you hate? I learned long ago that people will find "facts" that support their position. I see your position but I don't see the facts.

Michelle, you are despicable!!!
First of all you are a damn liar
Fecond, you need anti-psychotic med because you are delusional

Its fine to support mccain\palin but dont give us this bull@!$%# about william ayers and muslim and other crap..... just admin that you are a racist and a bigot and we'll leave you alone

Obama\Biden - Never Give Up, Never Surrender =)))))

Why do you all debate the Michelle's of the post. The statement is at worse inflammatory and at least of no value. Get rid of her! Spend your time with INFORMED posters not those who prove they are ignorant by choice or intentional trying to incite for whatever reasons. The (!) exists for people like her. I used it, please feel free to do so as well.

Yes, Jen...by all means, let's get rid of freedom of speech! Read the post right above yours from Felya. Is that any less obnoxious than Michelle's?

fedup...
Actually, your argument about freedom of speech is a common fault. You don't actually have the freedom to say whatever you want where ever you want. The only freedom guaranteed to you by the Bill of Rights, in that respect, is to not have your speech abridged by the Government. Private entities can regulate it any way they want to.

BA, yes, I know I can't yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater (unless, of course, there actually IS a fire). I realize that although this is a public forum, there are rules about how you can post. However, I didn't read anything in her post that was so offensive it needed to be removed (unlike Felya's, which is still visible).

Ignorance, or being uninformed, shouldn't be a measure for censorship. It's just interesting that liberals are always crying about freedom of speech, yet if someone says something they don't like, it's inflammatory"hate speech".

However, I didn't read anything in her post that was so offensive it needed to be removed

You didn't read the same post that I did then. It was just this side of slander and added nothing to the debate. It is no different than a post claiming that John McCain is a Chinese puppet, carefully programmed by his torturers in Vietnam.

And yes, I would vote to collapse a comment that made that false accusation as well. Both are nothing more than an incitements to flame and add nothing of substance to the discussion.

Furthermore, the comment was only collapsed, not deleted. The curious can easily expand it and read it if they so desire. You can even then vote it up in an attempt to undo the collapsing, if you think it was done in error.

You're right, Jen. I have no idea why I keep responding to Michelle Davis. She doesn't seem to want to refute the points I make backed up by sources. =[ Must be too truthful.

Pesky truth, again.

Michelle should check out Grizzly Ground Swell!

They seem to have a better handle on lies and misinformation.

During the 2004 campaign, after watching Bush II and Kerry "debate" on a childish note, I caught one of the talk shows with Joe Biden and Chuck Hagel. I said to myself why couldn't we have a debate like this instead of the one I just watched with Kerry & Bush. It was so much more civilized, on a higher plane and was a gentlemen's disagreement on issues. I could have voted for either Hagel or Biden for president and felt good about it.

I am very curious as to what Hagel and Biden debated about? Is there anything that Hagel disagrees with Biden on?

Hagel for president? He is the last person that should be president. He can only make a decision after a poll of the media.