Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: John McCain's VP Selection is a Complete Disaster For The Republicans  (Read 11348 times)

SwEep

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 330
    • View Profile
Re: Is John McCain's VP selection a disaster?
« Reply #40 on: September 07, 2008, 03:20:58 AM »
truth be told, i've been a Republican all my life up until recently. I think I reached age of reason fairly late, but it's better than never.

I just can't see how you can be a grown up modern person and still support the Republican party.

It's easy--I want the government to be smaller (not larger); I want the deficit to be smaller (not larger); and I want my paycheck to be larger (not smaller).

I don't want to give 50% of my hard-earned money to people who don't have the desire to do for themselves--because under Obama the government will do for them.  The United States is a government of the people, by the people, & for the people--and I mean everyone--not just those who make less than $75k.

As a fairly conservative (in the libertarian/free market sense) person, I don't feel that the Democrat's policy are worse than the Republicans. 

1) The belief that Republicans are small government is problematic.  Clinton reduced government and balanced the budget.  In the past 30 years, the deficit only became overwhelming troublesome during the 8 years of Reagan and the 8 years of W. Bush.  Unfortunately, recent Republican administrations have shown zero adherence to small market principles.

2) While Republicans still tend to advocate lower taxes and larger pay checks, this hasn't necessarily translated into increased personal financial welfare.  As long as the cost of living increases while consumer confidence diminishes, our slightly greater paychecks do not go as far. 

Therefore viewing this traditional conservative statement: "It's easy--I want the government to be smaller (not larger); I want the deficit to be smaller (not larger); and I want my paycheck to be larger (not smaller)." --> Previous Republican led governments have in actuality promoted larger governments, larger deficits, and diminished standards of living.

I am actually for programs that increase the welfare of the lower-middle to middle class.  The rational is not derived from some bleeding heart ideology, but due to my adherence that the best way to promote large businesses such as an electronics store is NOT to reduce their taxes creating an often times negligible economic stimulus - but to increase the portion of the population that can afford and are willing to buy a television.  Best Buy will be more likely to hire additional employees when they experience a higher volume of costumers - not because they can afford more employees.

So, I believe in small government, lower deficits, and allowing those to rot who refuse to work.  I just don't think modern day conservatives do much to promote this standard.

well said cash.

did u seriously read all that *&^%? dude time to lay off the internet and make more friends.

jeffislouie

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 413
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Is John McCain's VP selection a disaster?
« Reply #41 on: September 07, 2008, 12:03:55 PM »
This is exactly how I know the democrat ticket is in real trouble.
When they picked Biden, conservatives mostly laughed because it invalidated much of Obama's campaign (washington outsider, against the iraq war, bi-partisan future efforts, experience doesn't matter - all destroyed with a single decision).  We didn't go on the attack, no personal attacks against Biden were made, and life moved on.
But something about Sara Palin scares liberals so much that they just can't stop talking about her. 
Why should they care who we put on the ticket?  It's OUR ticket!  If they really thought it was such a bad idea, they would be celebrating, not trying to find dirt, writing nasty misleading cover blurbs, and attacking her through the media.  Palin has had more questions and accusations about her children than Obama has had about his relationship to Bill Ayers.  Yeah, the media swears it isn't biased....

So libs - if our choice is so bad, why aren't you celebrating and ignoring us?  Is it because the choice was excellent and you are terrified?
Justice is tangy....

Miss P

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 21337
    • View Profile
Re: Is John McCain's VP selection a disaster?
« Reply #42 on: September 07, 2008, 01:31:24 PM »
This is exactly how I know the democrat ticket is in real trouble.
When they picked Biden, conservatives mostly laughed because it invalidated much of Obama's campaign (washington outsider, against the iraq war, bi-partisan future efforts, experience doesn't matter - all destroyed with a single decision).  We didn't go on the attack, no personal attacks against Biden were made, and life moved on.
But something about Sara Palin scares liberals so much that they just can't stop talking about her. 
Why should they care who we put on the ticket?  It's OUR ticket!  If they really thought it was such a bad idea, they would be celebrating, not trying to find dirt, writing nasty misleading cover blurbs, and attacking her through the media.  Palin has had more questions and accusations about her children than Obama has had about his relationship to Bill Ayers.  Yeah, the media swears it isn't biased....

So libs - if our choice is so bad, why aren't you celebrating and ignoring us?  Is it because the choice was excellent and you are terrified?


Biden's a career politician - his history is basically an open book by this point.  Palin's as close to a political mystery as a VP candidate could be.  Her vetting is coming through the media.  What is there new to say about Biden that hasn't been said in the past half decade?  Thus, Palin is a MUCH bigger story than Biden so you should expect to see a lot more ink spilled about her that her countermate.  I've found the overwhelming majority of what's written about her to be very positive.  While the news about her daughter was front page, most of the commentary argued that it really doesn't matter at all. I think conservatives are getting very defensive about nothing. 

Indeed.

ETA: And what fodder is there for these phantom personal attacks on Biden that the Republicans so graciously avoided?  His despicable treatment of Anita Hill during the Thomas confirmation?  A few impolitic remarks about Obama or Indian-Americans (which everyone, including the purported targets, seemed to believe had been blown out of proportion)?  A few parroted lines in a primary debate in the 1980s?  Frankly, I don't think the GOP candidates have much of a leg to stand on in any of these areas.  Joe Biden has been more thoroughly vetted over the years than even John McCain.  Let's try to focus on the issues instead of these absurd mise-en-abime arguments about what one side said about what the other side said about what one side said . . .

ETA2: And when is Palin going to appear on the Sunday morning shows?  I would like to hear her answer some questions about her record and plans.
That's cool how you referenced a case.

Quote from: archival
I'm so far from the end of my tether right now that I reckon I could knit myself some socks with the slack.

SwEep

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 330
    • View Profile
Re: Is John McCain's VP selection a disaster?
« Reply #43 on: September 07, 2008, 08:27:35 PM »
truth be told, i've been a Republican all my life up until recently. I think I reached age of reason fairly late, but it's better than never.

I just can't see how you can be a grown up modern person and still support the Republican party.

It's easy--I want the government to be smaller (not larger); I want the deficit to be smaller (not larger); and I want my paycheck to be larger (not smaller).

I don't want to give 50% of my hard-earned money to people who don't have the desire to do for themselves--because under Obama the government will do for them.  The United States is a government of the people, by the people, & for the people--and I mean everyone--not just those who make less than $75k.

As a fairly conservative (in the libertarian/free market sense) person, I don't feel that the Democrat's policy are worse than the Republicans. 

1) The belief that Republicans are small government is problematic.  Clinton reduced government and balanced the budget.  In the past 30 years, the deficit only became overwhelming troublesome during the 8 years of Reagan and the 8 years of W. Bush.  Unfortunately, recent Republican administrations have shown zero adherence to small market principles.

2) While Republicans still tend to advocate lower taxes and larger pay checks, this hasn't necessarily translated into increased personal financial welfare.  As long as the cost of living increases while consumer confidence diminishes, our slightly greater paychecks do not go as far. 

Therefore viewing this traditional conservative statement: "It's easy--I want the government to be smaller (not larger); I want the deficit to be smaller (not larger); and I want my paycheck to be larger (not smaller)." --> Previous Republican led governments have in actuality promoted larger governments, larger deficits, and diminished standards of living.

I am actually for programs that increase the welfare of the lower-middle to middle class.  The rational is not derived from some bleeding heart ideology, but due to my adherence that the best way to promote large businesses such as an electronics store is NOT to reduce their taxes creating an often times negligible economic stimulus - but to increase the portion of the population that can afford and are willing to buy a television.  Best Buy will be more likely to hire additional employees when they experience a higher volume of costumers - not because they can afford more employees.

So, I believe in small government, lower deficits, and allowing those to rot who refuse to work.  I just don't think modern day conservatives do much to promote this standard.

well said cash.

did u seriously read all that poo? dude time to lay off the internet and make more friends.

"all that"?  You're going to love law school.

uhh reading an entire encyclopedia for a class to get an A is not the same as reading endless political rant written by some schmuck online. and yes i do well in school and will do well in ls as well, thanks.

bloomlaw

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 891
  • Welcome to the Monkey House
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Is John McCain's VP selection a disaster?
« Reply #44 on: September 07, 2008, 09:00:11 PM »

uhh reading an entire encyclopedia for a class to get an A is not the same as reading endless political rant written by some schmuck online. and yes i do well in school and will do well in ls as well, thanks.

Please don't start/incite political discussions if you don't feel like reading a logical argument about the topic. This isn't an argument/discussion that can be had in a series of one liners, which it seems all you are capable of producing.

Holden Caulfield

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Is John McCain's VP selection a disaster?
« Reply #45 on: September 07, 2008, 10:49:43 PM »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjGhy8LVwAo



I'm sure you all have seen this. Do you agree or disagree with Newt?

SwEep

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 330
    • View Profile
Re: Is John McCain's VP selection a disaster?
« Reply #46 on: September 07, 2008, 11:33:14 PM »
Hmmm... How would you know that it is an endless political rant by a schmuck if you didn't read it?

i can observe generally how long the rant is.

jeffislouie

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 413
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Is John McCain's VP selection a disaster?
« Reply #47 on: September 08, 2008, 12:29:14 AM »
This is exactly how I know the democrat ticket is in real trouble.
When they picked Biden, conservatives mostly laughed because it invalidated much of Obama's campaign (washington outsider, against the iraq war, bi-partisan future efforts, experience doesn't matter - all destroyed with a single decision).  We didn't go on the attack, no personal attacks against Biden were made, and life moved on.
But something about Sara Palin scares liberals so much that they just can't stop talking about her. 
Why should they care who we put on the ticket?  It's OUR ticket!  If they really thought it was such a bad idea, they would be celebrating, not trying to find dirt, writing nasty misleading cover blurbs, and attacking her through the media.  Palin has had more questions and accusations about her children than Obama has had about his relationship to Bill Ayers.  Yeah, the media swears it isn't biased....

So libs - if our choice is so bad, why aren't you celebrating and ignoring us?  Is it because the choice was excellent and you are terrified?


Biden's a career politician - his history is basically an open book by this point.  Palin's as close to a political mystery as a VP candidate could be.  Her vetting is coming through the media.  What is there new to say about Biden that hasn't been said in the past half decade?  Thus, Palin is a MUCH bigger story than Biden so you should expect to see a lot more ink spilled about her that her countermate.  I've found the overwhelming majority of what's written about her to be very positive.  While the news about her daughter was front page, most of the commentary argued that it really doesn't matter at all.  I think conservatives are getting very defensive about nothing. 

"Palin's as close to a political mystery as a VP candidate could be."

And Obama is as close to a political mystery as a Presidential candidate could be, yet he's still a mystery.  I guess the media only does vetting on VP picks....
Of course, she's not a mystery to anyone, unless you only care about conservatives who have embarrassed themselves....

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,288722,00.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/19/us/19juneau.html?fta=y
http://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/davidpostman/2007/09/alaska_governor_is_more_than_just_new_face_of_gop.html
http://dwb.adn.com/opinion/comment/story/9076682p-8992663c.html

There are literally thousands on news items about her. 

While the right has been hot to point out the missives and attacks, they haven't been overly defensive - they've been as outraged as feminists should be at the way she's been treated by the media.  NOW came out an embarrassed themselves, proving that they aren't really an organization for women - only for women who agrees 100% with their liberal agenda.

Once again, if she's such a bad pick, why are they giving her the full court press?  She was a great pick for VP and energized the party.  That's a good thing, especially in light of the fact that the campaign is focusing on getting back to the old conservative party - the one that shrinks government, reduces spending, increases efficiency, and puts more money in everyone's pockets.
Justice is tangy....

Miss P

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 21337
    • View Profile
Re: Is John McCain's VP selection a disaster?
« Reply #48 on: September 08, 2008, 12:51:45 AM »
That's a good thing, especially in light of the fact that the campaign is focusing on getting back to the old conservative party - the one that shrinks government, reduces spending, increases efficiency, and puts more money in everyone's pockets.

::snarfs::

Which "conservative party" is that?  The one that had the presidency for twenty of the last thirty years, or the one that was in control of one or both houses of congress for eighteen of the last thirty years? 

Newsflash: your candidates are not running on their party's record these days.
That's cool how you referenced a case.

Quote from: archival
I'm so far from the end of my tether right now that I reckon I could knit myself some socks with the slack.

jeffislouie

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 413
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Is John McCain's VP selection a disaster?
« Reply #49 on: September 09, 2008, 05:01:59 PM »
Jeffislouie, I know you that you know one cannot favorably compare the level of scrutiny the two have received over the past few years.  You really can't believe the media's going to uncover anything about Obama that hasn't already come to light. I think he was only about 4 years old when the U.S. army was driving swift boats around nam...

I respectfully disagree on this point.  The media has never been interested in investigating Obama's past, often choosing instead to either spin the stuff they do find, ignore it completely, or simply refusing to look into anything at all.

Why haven't they looked into his history as a community organizer?  Why no success stories from those good old days?  Why no features where the media discusses Obama's success as a lecturer for U of C's law school?  Surely at such a prestigious law school there were a few people who were left with a favorable (or unfavorable) impression of him.... Why no investigation from the Chicago Tribune or Sun Times about the Chicago Annenberg Challenge?  Obama ran it and sat on the board, working hand in hand with Bill Ayers?  By all accounts, the Annenberg Challenge was a waste of time, money and effort that resulted in little to no measurable effect on Chicago schools?  Why does a reporter from the New Republic get the scoop when the local rags have the competitive advantage and contacts at the University that oversaw it?  Why no questions about how Obama could be a member of Trinity United for so long without storming out of one of the many, many racist, seperatist, anti-american ravings by Jeramiah Wright?  I know he (finally) distanced himself from that church after much pressure, but why doesn't anyone ask him how the potential leader of the free world could attend such a place with his children and not realize that Wright is a raving nut?  Why hasn't the media truly investigated the connection between Rezko and Obama?

I don't believe that there isn't anything for them to look into - I believe they want Obama in office so badly that they want to ignore anything negative.  My observation of the news cycle has been that right wing media outlets report on an Obama related scandal, which the MSM ignores, glosses over, or spins, until enough right wing news sources make enough of a big deal about it that the MSM is FORCED to investigate, and often do so while making excuses.  The media's job isn't to influence political elections, but to present the material in as unbiased way as possible - a job they are failing at.  For almost 8 years, we've been hearing that the media is not to be trusted from the left.  In a sense, I've agreed with them.  Traditional media tends to be sloppy and underesearched.  But now, I see puff piece after puff piece on Obama and it makes me feel a great sense of sorrow for the state of our media.

There is PLENTY to find.  What we need is someone without an agenda to work hard and find it, then report it in a fair way so the voters can decide.  Otherwise, we allow the media to choose.  That's far too dangerous for either party.
Justice is tangy....