Law School Discussion

Why Obama will lose in the fall

Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« Reply #760 on: September 19, 2008, 06:21:54 PM »
As the only true conservative on this board I feel I must say what canít not be said by our partyís leadership: This whole McCain/Palin thing is yet another example of how McCain is not a true conservative. For Christís sakes he nominated a woman for VP. A WOMAN. WTF? Where are the religious right, the base of the party, this is a sin in the eyes of god a woman place is in home caring for the children. Its this kind of mindset and liberal thinking that has ruined the party for me. Now that Strom Thurman is dead, I guess Iíll just have to write in Pat Buchanís name when I vote.  That or Iíll switch back my affiliation to Tory.


While some may see that McCain's choice of Palin is an abomination, it was a masterstroke designed to counter the effect of the true minion of evil, Hillary Clinton. May the world come to an end before that ilk sets foot in the White House again.

And Piggy, command experience is command experience.  While it may not be general officer experience, I will still take it as superior to Obama's demonstrated lack of fitness for the position.

this is weird to me. everyone claims that the media is being sexist in its coverage of palin, but where were all these people when hillary's hair, suits, and tone of voice were fair game to all pundits, conservative or liberal? i was a hillary fan who switched to obama, but after palin got picked in what stephen colbert called a "historic pandering", there is no way i'm trusting mccain's judgment.

We were there, upset but silent.  The democrats didn't exactly rally around that fight.  Makes you wonder which party is more sexist, doesn't it?  It should.  Besides, most of the conservative pundits were talking about bad Hillary policies and history, not what she wore.  Most of the sexism came from the left leaning media.

What I don't get (still) is why the democrats care.  If Palin was such a bad choice, you'd think that the dems poll numbers would be way up and the left would be celebrating McCain's stupidity.  It turns out, the left can't stop talking, thinking, and attacking Palin.  For close to two weeks (or was it three), all the left could do was compare Palin to Obama.  Frankly, Obama's relevant experience is minor compared to Palin's, and Palin is the VP candidate.  At least Palin ran something.  What did Obama run?  And don't say his campaign, because that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.  That means McCain is FAR more experienced than Obama because he's run for President more than once.  It's stupid.  Obama never had to make executive decisions.  He's voted with the party virtually every time he actually chose to vote.  And some of those votes are flat wrong to begin with.  Did you know Obama voted against a bill that would require doctors in Illinois to provide care for babies born alive after botched abortions?  It's true.  Nice decision.  The Obama camp says it's an 'out of context' vote.  Please tell me the context such a vote is acceptable.  Here's the context:  An abortion is attempted.  It fails.  The baby is born alive.  Obama refused to vote to for legislation that would require a doctor to provide care for the very much alive baby.  So a doctor can just let it die slowly, painfully, and horribly in Illinois, if Obama has his way.  A good issue vote for him, don't you think?  

Let's assume he had a problem with some other aspect of the bill - did he introduce another bill that made sure that a botched abortion baby received medical care?  Nope.  He did nothing.

Now I'm no single issue guy, but I will say that like McCain's military experience, it speaks to his character.  The question is - what does it say?

Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« Reply #761 on: September 19, 2008, 06:29:44 PM »
Obama refused to vote to for legislation that would require a doctor to provide care for the very much alive baby.  So a doctor can just let it die slowly, painfully, and horribly in Illinois, if Obama has his way.  A good issue vote for him, don't you think?  

There are entire segments of our living adult populating dying slowly and horribly, not just in Illinois, because of certain social conditions they had no hand in creating.  See, for example, the increased risk of death from all causes for people in poverty and the increased risk of quality-of-life degrading illnesses for people in poverty.  If we're going to care about people, let's care about all people.

(I don't claim to care about people.  I also don't claim to be a leftist or a democrat, and I'm annoyed that you keep calling me one (btw)).

clairel

  • ****
  • 977
  • UChicago 3L
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« Reply #762 on: September 19, 2008, 06:39:00 PM »
As the only true conservative on this board I feel I must say what canít not be said by our partyís leadership: This whole McCain/Palin thing is yet another example of how McCain is not a true conservative. For Christís sakes he nominated a woman for VP. A WOMAN. WTF? Where are the religious right, the base of the party, this is a sin in the eyes of god a woman place is in home caring for the children. Its this kind of mindset and liberal thinking that has ruined the party for me. Now that Strom Thurman is dead, I guess Iíll just have to write in Pat Buchanís name when I vote.  That or Iíll switch back my affiliation to Tory.


While some may see that McCain's choice of Palin is an abomination, it was a masterstroke designed to counter the effect of the true minion of evil, Hillary Clinton. May the world come to an end before that ilk sets foot in the White House again.

And Piggy, command experience is command experience.  While it may not be general officer experience, I will still take it as superior to Obama's demonstrated lack of fitness for the position.

this is weird to me. everyone claims that the media is being sexist in its coverage of palin, but where were all these people when hillary's hair, suits, and tone of voice were fair game to all pundits, conservative or liberal? i was a hillary fan who switched to obama, but after palin got picked in what stephen colbert called a "historic pandering", there is no way i'm trusting mccain's judgment.

We were there, upset but silent.  The democrats didn't exactly rally around that fight.  Makes you wonder which party is more sexist, doesn't it?  It should.  Besides, most of the conservative pundits were talking about bad Hillary policies and history, not what she wore.  Most of the sexism came from the left leaning media.

What I don't get (still) is why the democrats care.  If Palin was such a bad choice, you'd think that the dems poll numbers would be way up and the left would be celebrating McCain's stupidity.  It turns out, the left can't stop talking, thinking, and attacking Palin.  For close to two weeks (or was it three), all the left could do was compare Palin to Obama.  Frankly, Obama's relevant experience is minor compared to Palin's, and Palin is the VP candidate.  At least Palin ran something.  What did Obama run?  And don't say his campaign, because that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.  That means McCain is FAR more experienced than Obama because he's run for President more than once.  It's stupid.  Obama never had to make executive decisions.  He's voted with the party virtually every time he actually chose to vote.  And some of those votes are flat wrong to begin with.  Did you know Obama voted against a bill that would require doctors in Illinois to provide care for babies born alive after botched abortions?  It's true.  Nice decision.  The Obama camp says it's an 'out of context' vote.  Please tell me the context such a vote is acceptable.  Here's the context:  An abortion is attempted.  It fails.  The baby is born alive.  Obama refused to vote to for legislation that would require a doctor to provide care for the very much alive baby.  So a doctor can just let it die slowly, painfully, and horribly in Illinois, if Obama has his way.  A good issue vote for him, don't you think?  

Let's assume he had a problem with some other aspect of the bill - did he introduce another bill that made sure that a botched abortion baby received medical care?  Nope.  He did nothing.

Now I'm no single issue guy, but I will say that like McCain's military experience, it speaks to his character.  The question is - what does it say?

ok, seriously, if we're taking votes out of context like that, we could point to sarah palin inquiring about the process to ban library books OR voting against someone who wanted the city to absorb the cost of rape kits. these are all scare tactics. just as i don't agree with your perception of obama's born alive vote, i also don't buy it when the news media claims that sarah palin voted to make victims pay for their own rape kits. there may be some small nugget of truth in both cases, but they're both blown out of proportion and taken out of context.

i'm not the biggest obama fan ever. i agree with saxby that he will disappoint people who are convinced he's going to create "real change" in washington. i actually really liked and respected mccain in his 2000 campaign because he WAS a maverick. but the john mccain running this campaign has gone so far right that there's no way i can see him as anything else but another bush.

and by the way, i'm hopeful that conservatives will be able to maybe understand why hillary kept talking about media sexism after, and to a lesser extent, during her campaign. i don't condone sexism in any form, whether against hillary or palin. i do have a problem with mccain and palins' issue positions (abortion, drilling in ANWR, teaching creationism, denying global warming is at least exacerbated by humans, and approaches to foreign policy) so i support obama. i do appreciate that you recognize and hopefully take a stand against media sexism toward any female candidate, regardless of their partisan identification; i attempt to do the same for palin.

Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« Reply #763 on: September 19, 2008, 06:42:01 PM »
i agree with saxby that he will disappoint people who are convinced he's going to create "real change" in washington.

but..

but...

by 2012, we'll be wearing red, orange, and blue jumpsuits cruising around the universe faster than the speed of light wondering whether our actions violate the prime directive...

MAKE IT SO!

err.

ok.

it's probably time to go out to the bar.

Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« Reply #764 on: September 19, 2008, 06:50:21 PM »
As the only true conservative on this board I feel I must say what canít not be said by our partyís leadership: This whole McCain/Palin thing is yet another example of how McCain is not a true conservative. For Christís sakes he nominated a woman for VP. A WOMAN. WTF? Where are the religious right, the base of the party, this is a sin in the eyes of god a woman place is in home caring for the children. Its this kind of mindset and liberal thinking that has ruined the party for me. Now that Strom Thurman is dead, I guess Iíll just have to write in Pat Buchanís name when I vote.  That or Iíll switch back my affiliation to Tory.


While some may see that McCain's choice of Palin is an abomination, it was a masterstroke designed to counter the effect of the true minion of evil, Hillary Clinton. May the world come to an end before that ilk sets foot in the White House again.

And Piggy, command experience is command experience.  While it may not be general officer experience, I will still take it as superior to Obama's demonstrated lack of fitness for the position.

this is weird to me. everyone claims that the media is being sexist in its coverage of palin, but where were all these people when hillary's hair, suits, and tone of voice were fair game to all pundits, conservative or liberal? i was a hillary fan who switched to obama, but after palin got picked in what stephen colbert called a "historic pandering", there is no way i'm trusting mccain's judgment.

We were there, upset but silent.  The democrats didn't exactly rally around that fight.  Makes you wonder which party is more sexist, doesn't it?  It should.  Besides, most of the conservative pundits were talking about bad Hillary policies and history, not what she wore.  Most of the sexism came from the left leaning media.

What I don't get (still) is why the democrats care.  If Palin was such a bad choice, you'd think that the dems poll numbers would be way up and the left would be celebrating McCain's stupidity.  It turns out, the left can't stop talking, thinking, and attacking Palin.  For close to two weeks (or was it three), all the left could do was compare Palin to Obama.  Frankly, Obama's relevant experience is minor compared to Palin's, and Palin is the VP candidate.  At least Palin ran something.  What did Obama run?  And don't say his campaign, because that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.  That means McCain is FAR more experienced than Obama because he's run for President more than once.  It's stupid.  Obama never had to make executive decisions.  He's voted with the party virtually every time he actually chose to vote.  And some of those votes are flat wrong to begin with.  Did you know Obama voted against a bill that would require doctors in Illinois to provide care for babies born alive after botched abortions?  It's true.  Nice decision.  The Obama camp says it's an 'out of context' vote.  Please tell me the context such a vote is acceptable.  Here's the context:  An abortion is attempted.  It fails.  The baby is born alive.  Obama refused to vote to for legislation that would require a doctor to provide care for the very much alive baby.  So a doctor can just let it die slowly, painfully, and horribly in Illinois, if Obama has his way.  A good issue vote for him, don't you think?  

Let's assume he had a problem with some other aspect of the bill - did he introduce another bill that made sure that a botched abortion baby received medical care?  Nope.  He did nothing.

Now I'm no single issue guy, but I will say that like McCain's military experience, it speaks to his character.  The question is - what does it say?

ok, seriously, if we're taking votes out of context like that, we could point to sarah palin inquiring about the process to ban library books OR voting against someone who wanted the city to absorb the cost of rape kits. these are all scare tactics. just as i don't agree with your perception of obama's born alive vote, i also don't buy it when the news media claims that sarah palin voted to make victims pay for their own rape kits. there may be some small nugget of truth in both cases, but they're both blown out of proportion and taken out of context.

i'm not the biggest obama fan ever. i agree with saxby that he will disappoint people who are convinced he's going to create "real change" in washington. i actually really liked and respected mccain in his 2000 campaign because he WAS a maverick. but the john mccain running this campaign has gone so far right that there's no way i can see him as anything else but another bush.

and by the way, i'm hopeful that conservatives will be able to maybe understand why hillary kept talking about media sexism after, and to a lesser extent, during her campaign. i don't condone sexism in any form, whether against hillary or palin. i do have a problem with mccain and palins' issue positions (abortion, drilling in ANWR, teaching creationism, denying global warming is at least exacerbated by humans, and approaches to foreign policy) so i support obama. i do appreciate that you recognize and hopefully take a stand against media sexism toward any female candidate, regardless of their partisan identification; i attempt to do the same for palin.

I'm not going to argue over Obama's voting record.  If you are really interested, here's an article about that vote:

http://www.nysun.com/national/clinton-obama-should-vote-no-on-abortion-issue/69700/

It turns out, Palin didn't ban a single book.  That charge was ridiculous too.  I'm glad you saw that.  Sarah Palin didn't vote to make rape victims pay for their own rape kits either, and to date not one single Alaskan has.  Another empty scandal.

As far as the sexism in this campaign cycle, I have always found it irritating.  Now that it is so blatant in the media's coverage of Palin, it is infuriating.  I know too many smart women to accept this notion that we should be teaching them that they can sort of do anything a man can.  My girlfriend may one day become a CEO.  I would absolutely be disgusted if someone superimposed her face on a naked porn stars body as a 'joke'.  I have always believed that women can do anything a man can do.  Some things, they do better.  When Obama ignored Hillary, refused to even consult her on the VP choice, didn't bother to vet her, then selected Joe Biden (there is no evidence he even considered a female), I was astonished.  When McCain chose Palin, I was proud that a woman has an opportunity to serve as VP.  You want a historic election?  We're getting one, no matter who wins.

Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« Reply #765 on: September 19, 2008, 06:52:23 PM »
...I would absolutely be disgusted if someone superimposed her face on a naked porn stars body as a 'joke'...

But...

sometimes superimposing faces actually is funny...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8G9jA-FGGd8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpXKDAPX2Jc

Matthies

  • ****
  • 3677
    • View Profile
Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« Reply #766 on: September 19, 2008, 06:53:37 PM »
Obama refused to vote to for legislation that would require a doctor to provide care for the very much alive baby.  So a doctor can just let it die slowly, painfully, and horribly in Illinois, if Obama has his way.  A good issue vote for him, don't you think?  

There are entire segments of our living adult populating dying slowly and horribly, not just in Illinois, because of certain social conditions they had no hand in creating.  See, for example, the increased risk of death from all causes for people in poverty and the increased risk of quality-of-life degrading illnesses for people in poverty.  If we're going to care about people, let's care about all people.

(I don't claim to care about people.  I also don't claim to be a leftist or a democrat, and I'm annoyed that you keep calling me one (btw)).
Iím totally against abortion in any way, shape or form, its killing babies*

*note this only applies to Christian babies, non Christian babies donít have a soul so they donít count

Matthies

  • ****
  • 3677
    • View Profile
Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« Reply #767 on: September 19, 2008, 06:56:24 PM »
As the only true conservative on this board I feel I must say what canít not be said by our partyís leadership: This whole McCain/Palin thing is yet another example of how McCain is not a true conservative. For Christís sakes he nominated a woman for VP. A WOMAN. WTF? Where are the religious right, the base of the party, this is a sin in the eyes of god a woman place is in home caring for the children. Its this kind of mindset and liberal thinking that has ruined the party for me. Now that Strom Thurman is dead, I guess Iíll just have to write in Pat Buchanís name when I vote.  That or Iíll switch back my affiliation to Tory.


While some may see that McCain's choice of Palin is an abomination, it was a masterstroke designed to counter the effect of the true minion of evil, Hillary Clinton. May the world come to an end before that ilk sets foot in the White House again.

And Piggy, command experience is command experience.  While it may not be general officer experience, I will still take it as superior to Obama's demonstrated lack of fitness for the position.

this is weird to me. everyone claims that the media is being sexist in its coverage of palin, but where were all these people when hillary's hair, suits, and tone of voice were fair game to all pundits, conservative or liberal? i was a hillary fan who switched to obama, but after palin got picked in what stephen colbert called a "historic pandering", there is no way i'm trusting mccain's judgment.

We were there, upset but silent.  The democrats didn't exactly rally around that fight.  Makes you wonder which party is more sexist, doesn't it?  It should.  Besides, most of the conservative pundits were talking about bad Hillary policies and history, not what she wore.  Most of the sexism came from the left leaning media.

What I don't get (still) is why the democrats care.  If Palin was such a bad choice, you'd think that the dems poll numbers would be way up and the left would be celebrating McCain's stupidity.  It turns out, the left can't stop talking, thinking, and attacking Palin.  For close to two weeks (or was it three), all the left could do was compare Palin to Obama.  Frankly, Obama's relevant experience is minor compared to Palin's, and Palin is the VP candidate.  At least Palin ran something.  What did Obama run?  And don't say his campaign, because that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.  That means McCain is FAR more experienced than Obama because he's run for President more than once.  It's stupid.  Obama never had to make executive decisions.  He's voted with the party virtually every time he actually chose to vote.  And some of those votes are flat wrong to begin with.  Did you know Obama voted against a bill that would require doctors in Illinois to provide care for babies born alive after botched abortions?  It's true.  Nice decision.  The Obama camp says it's an 'out of context' vote.  Please tell me the context such a vote is acceptable.  Here's the context:  An abortion is attempted.  It fails.  The baby is born alive.  Obama refused to vote to for legislation that would require a doctor to provide care for the very much alive baby.  So a doctor can just let it die slowly, painfully, and horribly in Illinois, if Obama has his way.  A good issue vote for him, don't you think?  

Let's assume he had a problem with some other aspect of the bill - did he introduce another bill that made sure that a botched abortion baby received medical care?  Nope.  He did nothing.

Now I'm no single issue guy, but I will say that like McCain's military experience, it speaks to his character.  The question is - what does it say?

ok, seriously, if we're taking votes out of context like that, we could point to sarah palin inquiring about the process to ban library books OR voting against someone who wanted the city to absorb the cost of rape kits. these are all scare tactics. just as i don't agree with your perception of obama's born alive vote, i also don't buy it when the news media claims that sarah palin voted to make victims pay for their own rape kits. there may be some small nugget of truth in both cases, but they're both blown out of proportion and taken out of context.

i'm not the biggest obama fan ever. i agree with saxby that he will disappoint people who are convinced he's going to create "real change" in washington. i actually really liked and respected mccain in his 2000 campaign because he WAS a maverick. but the john mccain running this campaign has gone so far right that there's no way i can see him as anything else but another bush.

and by the way, i'm hopeful that conservatives will be able to maybe understand why hillary kept talking about media sexism after, and to a lesser extent, during her campaign. i don't condone sexism in any form, whether against hillary or palin. i do have a problem with mccain and palins' issue positions (abortion, drilling in ANWR, teaching creationism, denying global warming is at least exacerbated by humans, and approaches to foreign policy) so i support obama. i do appreciate that you recognize and hopefully take a stand against media sexism toward any female candidate, regardless of their partisan identification; i attempt to do the same for palin.

I'm not going to argue over Obama's voting record.  If you are really interested, here's an article about that vote:

http://www.nysun.com/national/clinton-obama-should-vote-no-on-abortion-issue/69700/

It turns out, Palin didn't ban a single book.  That charge was ridiculous too.  I'm glad you saw that.  Sarah Palin didn't vote to make rape victims pay for their own rape kits either, and to date not one single Alaskan has.  Another empty scandal.

I have always believed that women can do anything a man can do.  Some things, they do better.  

They are better at the having babies thing, but other than that men rule.

Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« Reply #768 on: September 19, 2008, 06:59:48 PM »
As the only true conservative on this board I feel I must say what canít not be said by our partyís leadership: This whole McCain/Palin thing is yet another example of how McCain is not a true conservative. For Christís sakes he nominated a woman for VP. A WOMAN. WTF? Where are the religious right, the base of the party, this is a sin in the eyes of god a woman place is in home caring for the children. Its this kind of mindset and liberal thinking that has ruined the party for me. Now that Strom Thurman is dead, I guess Iíll just have to write in Pat Buchanís name when I vote.  That or Iíll switch back my affiliation to Tory.


While some may see that McCain's choice of Palin is an abomination, it was a masterstroke designed to counter the effect of the true minion of evil, Hillary Clinton. May the world come to an end before that ilk sets foot in the White House again.

And Piggy, command experience is command experience.  While it may not be general officer experience, I will still take it as superior to Obama's demonstrated lack of fitness for the position.

this is weird to me. everyone claims that the media is being sexist in its coverage of palin, but where were all these people when hillary's hair, suits, and tone of voice were fair game to all pundits, conservative or liberal? i was a hillary fan who switched to obama, but after palin got picked in what stephen colbert called a "historic pandering", there is no way i'm trusting mccain's judgment.

We were there, upset but silent.  The democrats didn't exactly rally around that fight.  Makes you wonder which party is more sexist, doesn't it?  It should.  Besides, most of the conservative pundits were talking about bad Hillary policies and history, not what she wore.  Most of the sexism came from the left leaning media.

What I don't get (still) is why the democrats care.  If Palin was such a bad choice, you'd think that the dems poll numbers would be way up and the left would be celebrating McCain's stupidity.  It turns out, the left can't stop talking, thinking, and attacking Palin.  For close to two weeks (or was it three), all the left could do was compare Palin to Obama.  Frankly, Obama's relevant experience is minor compared to Palin's, and Palin is the VP candidate.  At least Palin ran something.  What did Obama run?  And don't say his campaign, because that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.  That means McCain is FAR more experienced than Obama because he's run for President more than once.  It's stupid.  Obama never had to make executive decisions.  He's voted with the party virtually every time he actually chose to vote.  And some of those votes are flat wrong to begin with.  Did you know Obama voted against a bill that would require doctors in Illinois to provide care for babies born alive after botched abortions?  It's true.  Nice decision.  The Obama camp says it's an 'out of context' vote.  Please tell me the context such a vote is acceptable.  Here's the context:  An abortion is attempted.  It fails.  The baby is born alive.  Obama refused to vote to for legislation that would require a doctor to provide care for the very much alive baby.  So a doctor can just let it die slowly, painfully, and horribly in Illinois, if Obama has his way.  A good issue vote for him, don't you think?  

Let's assume he had a problem with some other aspect of the bill - did he introduce another bill that made sure that a botched abortion baby received medical care?  Nope.  He did nothing.

Now I'm no single issue guy, but I will say that like McCain's military experience, it speaks to his character.  The question is - what does it say?

ok, seriously, if we're taking votes out of context like that, we could point to sarah palin inquiring about the process to ban library books OR voting against someone who wanted the city to absorb the cost of rape kits. these are all scare tactics. just as i don't agree with your perception of obama's born alive vote, i also don't buy it when the news media claims that sarah palin voted to make victims pay for their own rape kits. there may be some small nugget of truth in both cases, but they're both blown out of proportion and taken out of context.

i'm not the biggest obama fan ever. i agree with saxby that he will disappoint people who are convinced he's going to create "real change" in washington. i actually really liked and respected mccain in his 2000 campaign because he WAS a maverick. but the john mccain running this campaign has gone so far right that there's no way i can see him as anything else but another bush.

and by the way, i'm hopeful that conservatives will be able to maybe understand why hillary kept talking about media sexism after, and to a lesser extent, during her campaign. i don't condone sexism in any form, whether against hillary or palin. i do have a problem with mccain and palins' issue positions (abortion, drilling in ANWR, teaching creationism, denying global warming is at least exacerbated by humans, and approaches to foreign policy) so i support obama. i do appreciate that you recognize and hopefully take a stand against media sexism toward any female candidate, regardless of their partisan identification; i attempt to do the same for palin.

I'm not going to argue over Obama's voting record.  If you are really interested, here's an article about that vote:

http://www.nysun.com/national/clinton-obama-should-vote-no-on-abortion-issue/69700/

It turns out, Palin didn't ban a single book.  That charge was ridiculous too.  I'm glad you saw that.  Sarah Palin didn't vote to make rape victims pay for their own rape kits either, and to date not one single Alaskan has.  Another empty scandal.

I have always believed that women can do anything a man can do.  Some things, they do better.  

They are better at the having babies thing, but other than that men rule.

So there isn't really a person in there hiding, huh....
Too bad.

Not. Funny.

Matthies

  • ****
  • 3677
    • View Profile
Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« Reply #769 on: September 19, 2008, 07:08:22 PM »
As the only true conservative on this board I feel I must say what canít not be said by our partyís leadership: This whole McCain/Palin thing is yet another example of how McCain is not a true conservative. For Christís sakes he nominated a woman for VP. A WOMAN. WTF? Where are the religious right, the base of the party, this is a sin in the eyes of god a woman place is in home caring for the children. Its this kind of mindset and liberal thinking that has ruined the party for me. Now that Strom Thurman is dead, I guess Iíll just have to write in Pat Buchanís name when I vote.  That or Iíll switch back my affiliation to Tory.


While some may see that McCain's choice of Palin is an abomination, it was a masterstroke designed to counter the effect of the true minion of evil, Hillary Clinton. May the world come to an end before that ilk sets foot in the White House again.

And Piggy, command experience is command experience.  While it may not be general officer experience, I will still take it as superior to Obama's demonstrated lack of fitness for the position.

this is weird to me. everyone claims that the media is being sexist in its coverage of palin, but where were all these people when hillary's hair, suits, and tone of voice were fair game to all pundits, conservative or liberal? i was a hillary fan who switched to obama, but after palin got picked in what stephen colbert called a "historic pandering", there is no way i'm trusting mccain's judgment.

We were there, upset but silent.  The democrats didn't exactly rally around that fight.  Makes you wonder which party is more sexist, doesn't it?  It should.  Besides, most of the conservative pundits were talking about bad Hillary policies and history, not what she wore.  Most of the sexism came from the left leaning media.

What I don't get (still) is why the democrats care.  If Palin was such a bad choice, you'd think that the dems poll numbers would be way up and the left would be celebrating McCain's stupidity.  It turns out, the left can't stop talking, thinking, and attacking Palin.  For close to two weeks (or was it three), all the left could do was compare Palin to Obama.  Frankly, Obama's relevant experience is minor compared to Palin's, and Palin is the VP candidate.  At least Palin ran something.  What did Obama run?  And don't say his campaign, because that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.  That means McCain is FAR more experienced than Obama because he's run for President more than once.  It's stupid.  Obama never had to make executive decisions.  He's voted with the party virtually every time he actually chose to vote.  And some of those votes are flat wrong to begin with.  Did you know Obama voted against a bill that would require doctors in Illinois to provide care for babies born alive after botched abortions?  It's true.  Nice decision.  The Obama camp says it's an 'out of context' vote.  Please tell me the context such a vote is acceptable.  Here's the context:  An abortion is attempted.  It fails.  The baby is born alive.  Obama refused to vote to for legislation that would require a doctor to provide care for the very much alive baby.  So a doctor can just let it die slowly, painfully, and horribly in Illinois, if Obama has his way.  A good issue vote for him, don't you think?  

Let's assume he had a problem with some other aspect of the bill - did he introduce another bill that made sure that a botched abortion baby received medical care?  Nope.  He did nothing.

Now I'm no single issue guy, but I will say that like McCain's military experience, it speaks to his character.  The question is - what does it say?

ok, seriously, if we're taking votes out of context like that, we could point to sarah palin inquiring about the process to ban library books OR voting against someone who wanted the city to absorb the cost of rape kits. these are all scare tactics. just as i don't agree with your perception of obama's born alive vote, i also don't buy it when the news media claims that sarah palin voted to make victims pay for their own rape kits. there may be some small nugget of truth in both cases, but they're both blown out of proportion and taken out of context.

i'm not the biggest obama fan ever. i agree with saxby that he will disappoint people who are convinced he's going to create "real change" in washington. i actually really liked and respected mccain in his 2000 campaign because he WAS a maverick. but the john mccain running this campaign has gone so far right that there's no way i can see him as anything else but another bush.

and by the way, i'm hopeful that conservatives will be able to maybe understand why hillary kept talking about media sexism after, and to a lesser extent, during her campaign. i don't condone sexism in any form, whether against hillary or palin. i do have a problem with mccain and palins' issue positions (abortion, drilling in ANWR, teaching creationism, denying global warming is at least exacerbated by humans, and approaches to foreign policy) so i support obama. i do appreciate that you recognize and hopefully take a stand against media sexism toward any female candidate, regardless of their partisan identification; i attempt to do the same for palin.

I'm not going to argue over Obama's voting record.  If you are really interested, here's an article about that vote:

http://www.nysun.com/national/clinton-obama-should-vote-no-on-abortion-issue/69700/

It turns out, Palin didn't ban a single book.  That charge was ridiculous too.  I'm glad you saw that.  Sarah Palin didn't vote to make rape victims pay for their own rape kits either, and to date not one single Alaskan has.  Another empty scandal.

I have always believed that women can do anything a man can do.  Some things, they do better.  

They are better at the having babies thing, but other than that men rule.

So there isn't really a person in there hiding, huh....
Too bad.

Not. Funny.

Other than your neurosis Iím the most entertaining thing in this thread