Normally open July 4th only---the one day a year when partisan politics, religion, etc. are acceptable topics on this Board. (The 2012 window is now closed; thanks for playing.)
lonewolf wrote:I don't know who Jazzcyclist is referring to but I will up the ante. ANYONE on this board is more qualified to be President of the United States and would do less damage than Barach Hussein Obama. There, I said it. No smiley. Gee, that felt good
That may have felt good, but it shows that you have a distinct inability to judge the qualifications for President. I mean, have you actually read some of the stuff posted around here??
Marlow wrote: C'mon, ya gotta admit, he's better than SOME of us!
Nope, I was not a McCain enthusiast and I don't care how you spell his name, electing Obama will prove to be the biggest political/financial disaster in this country's history, or future if it has one.
No smiley..
lonewolf wrote:ANYONE on this board is more qualified to be President of the United States and would do less damage than Barach Hussein Obama. There, I said it. No smiley. Gee, that felt good
Marlow wrote: C'mon, ya gotta admit, he's better than SOME of us!
Nope, I was not a McCain enthusiast and I don't care how you spell his name, electing Obama will prove to be the biggest political/financial disaster in this country's history, or future if it has one. No smiley..
Who would have been your choice since you didn't vote for McCain and you don't approve of the current Commander-n-Chief?
America screwed up royally by not electing Mitt Romney. The MSM influenced the Republican nomination of McCain because he was the weakest/worst possible Republican candidate.
Daisy wrote:[I still wonder what would have happened if McCain had gone with Pawlenty as a running mate.
That would never have happened. Pawlenty is seen by the Right as the future while McCain has always represented a moderate (i.e., troublesome!) past.
Electability is everything in modern politcs. Doing their homework, the GOP concluded (perhaps incorrectly) that there was slim chance of defeating either a black man or a woman (the foreseen Dem candidates) and so--as they did with Bob Dole against incumbent Bill Clinton; incumbents are rarely removed from office if the economy is doing okay and never if we are threatened internationally--the GOP ran a "throwaway candidate." Had MCain won, the party would have pressured him to toe the line, but if he lost, no big deal; the end of the line for a sometimes-thorn in the bigwigs' sides.
But Pawlenty? No way was the party going to saddle this young, handsome up-and-comer with a "loser's tag" by running him with McCain.
Speaking of Pawlenty: The Minnesota gov was recently quoted as saying South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford's adultery has nothing to do with politics and shouldn't be viewed as such.
Excuse me? Timmy, don't you remember, according to your party, Bill Clinton's personal peccadillo was a sign of a character flaw that was going to cause the downfall of all civilized society...? What happened to those "family values"--?
And the political hypocrisy goes on...
Last edited by Brian on Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sarah Palin has been the least qualified VP candidate since Dan Quayle. Not a Satan, just an incompetent ideologue. Any attempt to justify her qualifications is no more than a political spin.
Pego wrote:Sarah Palin has been the least qualified VP candidate since Dan Quayle. Not a Satan, just an incompetent ideologue. Any attempt to justify her qualifications is no more than a political spin.
Dan Quayle was never that bad. Certainly, he was inarticulate, but he did go on Meet the Press for the full hour without incident. Palin avoided Meet the Press like the plague, and if elected, she would have been the first Vice President to be elected without at least one Meet the Press appearance in the history of the show.
Thank you, Brian. Electability. A democratic government bows to the will of the people, theoretically, at the ballot box. (Get to Congress and the democatic effect drops like a boat anchor) Therefore, unlike the hiring of a proven CEO to run a large company, we get a popularity contest that is pulled in a thousand different directions by the desires and fickle sensibilities of the electorate. We are fortunate if the electable one is also the able one.
I have always been uncomfortable with the fact that one must necessarily compromise one's beliefs/ideals/principles/INTEGRITY to be elected or, more commonly, stay in office. Representative government on this scale brings power to the person in office, and that is something very, very few people can handle.
Flawed human nature brings the evil into the necessary evil that is politics. No, I don't have a better alternative, at least on this planet at this time.
Palin's selection for VP by the Republican Party and/or John McCain was a huge Political Blunder. For every Core Republican or Female vote she gained or solidified, she lost well more than that by Independent voters that were anywhere from puzzled to incredulous that she was selected. His age, her inexperience... made a deadly combo.
You thinking Republicans out there ( and there are some) admit it, at least to yourselves.... you blew it with her selection. And she'll run like a dry creek if she tries for 2012.
I dunno, Steve, the D's ran a senile old man as VP and an inexperienced boob in the top spot and it seemed to work out ok for them. Maybe the R's should have switched the order...
gm wrote:I dunno, Steve, the D's ran a senile old man as VP and an inexperienced boob in the top spot and it seemed to work out ok for them. Maybe the R's should have switched the order...
It's delusional to compare Palin to Biden or Obama. As a matter of fact she's not even in Dan Quayle's league. But I hope that the base of the Republican party continues to think that she's fit to be President as you obviously do. Palin is the future of the Democratic party and I hope she dominates Republican party politics for a long time. At least lonewolf chose Mitt Romney as the best choice for leader of the party and I can live with that. But Palin?
Don't put words in my mouth, bubs. I never said any of the four "major" candidates were suitable. Just a comment on the marketing strategy of senile people and boobs.
gm wrote:Don't put words in my mouth, bubs. I never said any of the four "major" candidates were suitable. Just a comment on the marketing strategy of senile people and boobs.
Did you not imply that Palin was as suitable for the Oval Office as Obama and Biden?
gm wrote:Don't put words in my mouth, bubs. I never said any of the four "major" candidates were suitable. Just a comment on the marketing strategy of senile people and boobs.
Did you not imply that Palin was as suitable for the Oval Office as Obama and Biden?
All four were equally unsuitable. Terrible choices.
I always think its kind of laughable to think there's any real difference between the R's and D's. Both are only interested in two things: Power and getting re-elected. They're only interested in helping themselves and their friends. Neither could care less about doing what's right for the country. And both have proven they're not capable of having full control over everything. That's just my opinion.
gm wrote:Don't put words in my mouth, bubs. I never said any of the four "major" candidates were suitable. Just a comment on the marketing strategy of senile people and boobs.
Did you not imply that Palin was as suitable for the Oval Office as Obama and Biden?
All four were equally unsuitable. Terrible choices.
The fact that you would put Palin on the same level as Obama, Biden and McCain says a lot about your judgment.
Hey, you want to vote for incompetent boobs and senile fools, feel free. It's every American's right, and well over 110 million exercised that right last year. Sorry to stomp all over your messiah.
gm wrote:Hey, you want to vote for incompetent boobs and senile fools, feel free. It's every American's right, and well over 110 million exercised that right last year. Sorry to stomp all over your messiah.
gm wrote:Hey, you want to vote for incompetent boobs and senile fools, feel free. It's every American's right, and well over 110 million exercised that right last year. Sorry to stomp all over your messiah.
Would you care to tell us who your messiah was? I doubt it.
gm wrote:Hey, you want to vote for incompetent boobs and senile fools, feel free. It's every American's right, and well over 110 million exercised that right last year. Sorry to stomp all over your **messiah.**
Well, we now know gm's radio listening habits.
:]
But there is an actual cause/effect thing going on here: Compared to the guy in charge the past 8 years, Obama very well may seem like Jesus Christ to some people.
[And some would argue even Daffy Duck would seem so, too, in comparison.]
jazzcyclist wrote:There is a regular poster on this board, who shall remain nameless, who actually said to me in a pm that Palin was more qualified to be President than Obama and John Kerry.
I don't know who Jazzcyclist is referring to but I will up the ante. ANYONE on this board is more qualified to be President of the United States and would do less damage than Barach Hussein Obama. There, I said it. No smiley. Gee, that felt good
Yea, it really is a shame we don't have a President who will go to war just because he feels like it.
gm wrote:Hey, you want to vote for incompetent boobs and senile fools, feel free. It's every American's right, and well over 110 million exercised that right last year. Sorry to stomp all over your **messiah.**
Well, we now know gm's radio listening habits.
:]
But there is an actual cause/effect thing going on here: Compared to the guy in charge the past 8 years, Obama very well may seem like Jesus Christ to some people.
[And some would argue even Daffy Duck would seem so, too, in comparison.]
My radio listening habits? I guess maybe in the peaceful music I tune in to there might be subliminal messages. I'll check next time.
And Pego, in my life there was and is only one Messiah, and He was not a politician.
gm wrote:Hey, you want to vote for incompetent boobs and senile fools, feel free. It's every American's right, and well over 110 million exercised that right last year. Sorry to stomp all over your messiah.
No one brought up anything about the Messiah. This thread is about Sarah Palin, and what I don't understand how anyone can defend John McCain's selection of her the way you have.
gm wrote:I dunno, Steve, the D's ran a senile old man as VP and an inexperienced boob in the top spot and it seemed to work out ok for them. Maybe the R's should have switched the order...
Furthermore, you actually believe that she was as prepared to be President as Obama, McCain and Biden. I would suggest in the future that if you're going to slam Obama and Biden, don't simultaneously defend Palin.
