McCain Chooses Palin as Running Mate

Andy44

owner: Oil Creek Astronautix
Addon Developer
Joined
Nov 22, 2007
Messages
7,620
Reaction score
7
Points
113
Location
In the Mid-Atlantic states
Hey -- I said something nice about Hillary. See if you can think up something nice to say about Maverick. Take it as a creative writing challenge ;)

LOL, funny to call him Maverick, when his Navy pilot career was less than successful. I have visions of a South Park episode in which McCain tries to bomb the Democrat convention in Denver but gets shot down and tortured by Cartmann....and then perhaps rescued by Tom Cruise.

I warned all my Republican friends that if they didn't nominate Ron Paul I would punish them by supporting Hillary in the general election. Alas, Hillary also lost the nomination, so I can't keep my promise.
 

n0mad23

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
1,078
Reaction score
17
Points
0
Location
Montesano
Website
soundcloud.com
Hey -- I said something nice about Hillary. See if you can think up something nice to say about Maverick. Take it as a creative writing challenge ;)

He's old and irrelevant? I no longer live in his home state? You've got more chutzpah than me, Greg as I've got nothing nice to say about Hillary.

Both candidates are embarrassing at best, and I cringe to think what the Europeans are saying about us (again). Why is the media able to shove worthless candidates down our throat again and again?

Seriously, it's time to consider writing on the ballot - "no confidence!"

Anyone with me?

:mad:
 

ryan

That guy
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
1,605
Reaction score
4
Points
0
Location
Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
I read in John Glenn's memoir he said the him and McCain were very close and that Glenn had many times that he could of been chosen as vice predisent. If Glenn was still in office i would choose Glenn, give a whole new meaning that politicians are out of this world.
 

GregBurch

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
977
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Space City, USA (Houston)
Well well, this IS certainly an interesting election year. Truth be told, I was very much waiting for the McCain running mate to be Not Another White Male (sounds like a horrible movie, doesn't it? :p). But here we are. I'm going to have to do some reading on her, I've never heard of her until today, sadly. Should be interesting to see where she stands on the issues.

To people in the loop: How strongly does the consensus say this strengthens the McCain ticket?

The political rags are all pretty much falling into line on the idea that this strengthens McCain's right flank, which frees him up to play to his personal strength in the center. Palin will keep the bible-thumpers happy, so McCain can be Maverick.

But, to people outside the party rank and file, Palin will have symbolic value and help to defray the "McCain's too old to be president" line of attack, by showing that he can do something wild and crazy.

Meanwhile, the nutroots are already testing out lines of attack like "She's another Dan Quayle," "She's a NASCAR mom," "She's a rube from the sticks" ... they'll test those missiles by launching them from places like Daily Kos and DU and Media Matters, let Olberman try them out and, if they get traction, run them from the official Obama team.

I cringe to think what the Europeans are saying about us (again).

You really need to get over that, buddy. Really. They really aren't smarter than us, and their politics really isn't more sophisticated than ours. Really.

LOL, funny to call him Maverick, when his Navy pilot career was less than successful.

Yes -- if you took his flight record up to his stay in the Hanoi Hilton as his only record, you could very honestly say that Shrub was a far better pilot: He had just as much stick time in a far more demanding aircraft and never lost one, while McCain's punch out over Hanoi was his THIRD.

But you should look into his flying career after he came home. You'll be surprised.
 

Messierhunter

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
488
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Palin is a strong pro-lifer, and most feminists are not, particularly in Hillary's camp.
A) She doesn't just talk the talk, she walks the walk. It takes a strong person with deeply held convictions and character to actually follow through with that when you know you're going to be having a down syndrome child. There's a reason down syndrome prevelancy is as low as it is today: people are aborting them. Over 90% of the time, in fact - modern day eugenics. Palin didn't even hesitate to keep the baby, she put her foot down on further testing once it was discovered that her son would have down syndrome. I think she's beyond reproach on that issue no matter what you wish to believe.

B) Not all Hillary supporters are pro-abortion, even the feminists. Now I know I'm talking about the minority, but it hits close to home for me since one of my best friends is a feminist woman who supported Hillary (now supports obama) but is strongly pro-life in all circumstances. I have her voice rather loudly in my ear all the time, so she is the personal face of feminist democrats to me. My point is that they come in all kinds, and some may not have a problem with her pro-life stance, some will respect it even if they disagree because of how she lives it.
 

Arrowstar

Probenaut
Addon Developer
Joined
May 23, 2008
Messages
1,785
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Something that surprises me from what I've been reading in the news is everyone's apparent surprise (or perhaps annoyance) of Governor Palin's lack of national security knowledge. I fail to understand this for two reasons. First, as a governor, she is constitutionally prohibited from having anything more than a basic relationship with foreign powers. As the governor from Alaska, I can see her working with Canadian officials and perhaps Russian officials here and there, but really, that's why we have the Department of State. Second, John McCain is the national security expert of the duo hands down. While there's no harm is reinforcing that, it could be argued that bringing in different expertise and different experiences would be more beneficial in the long run.

I'll going to do more poking around tomorrow and I'm eager to see what Ms. Palin actually brings to the table....
 

Bullethead

New member
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
212
Reaction score
3
Points
0
Location
Wakefield, LA
Website
www.stormeaglestudios.com
FWIW, I've known which side I was going to vote for in 2008 since 1984, my 1st time to pull the lever. I've heard it said that if you're not a liberal when you're 20, you have no heart, but if you're not a conservative by 30, you have no brain. I guess I've never had a heart, but I've never missed it. :)

As a result of this outlook, I've paid exactly zero attention to the 2008 campaign. It was all academic anyway by the time of the Lousy Anna primary and neither side is going to change my mind. Come November, my guy will either win or lose. I'll do my part to help him win, but if he doesn't, well, people deserve the governments they get. Kharma...

Anyway, I'd never heard of Palin before today, myself. I only heard about it because I was in the waiting room of my orthopaedic surgeon when it happened, so I got to see her speech live. I was impressed. In fact, I came away with the impression that this was about the slickest political move I've seen in my voting life. Palin about covers all the bases for the undecided.

I'd really hoped Rice would run. I'd have voted for her in a heartbeat, even as a redneck white male. But this Palin chick seems pretty damn good. And she's hot :)
 

Torgo

Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2008
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Another thing she brings to the table is that she totally undercuts Obama's 'talk' of change. Obama talks change constantly, but has no record of change, and his VP is a die-hard Washington insider.

McCain has his name on some reform laws, and Palin has a documented history of enacting change. In her short career, she already took down the Alaska GOP chairman on ethics violations in the oil commision there. She took out a sitting republican governor in a primary, then a former dem governor in the election.

She really solidfies the south for McCain, and does a good job of closing the gender gap.

With the polls so close right now, even the smallest swing can become a huge difference.

Besides, in terms of experience, I'd think that after being the mother of 5, Vice-President is almost a demotion!
 

GregBurch

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
977
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Space City, USA (Houston)
I'd really hoped Rice would run. I'd have voted for her in a heartbeat, even as a redneck white male. But this Palin chick seems pretty damn good. And she's hot :)

Definitely agreed on both counts. I was an early and vocal proponent of a Rice candidacy. My dream move would have been Cheney stepping down "for health reasons" two years ago and Shrub making Rice his veep, to give her a launching platform. (Naturally, the Bush-haters would never believe that this could have happened, since they're sure that Cheney's been in charge all along. Some day, I may post here why I KNOW this isn't true, but things like the fourth paragraph of this item could conceivably convince an open-minded person on the other side.)

But it turns out that Rice is genuinely, personally averse to the idea of running for office. Strong efforts were made to try to change her mind, but it turns out she's just not that kind of person.

As for the second point ... no doubt about that ...

And, as for Palin's lack of national scale experience, well, you have to forget about Harry Truman to think this is a per se disqualifier. Of course, the elites thought Truman was a hick from the sticks, too.
 

fort

Active member
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
1,018
Reaction score
20
Points
38
Both candidates are embarrassing at best, and I cringe to think what the Europeans are saying about us (again).

Concerning the opinion in France, through what I read in the newspapers, much are interested in your election, would wish a victory of Obama. Even if many fears that the current success of Obama could be a little identical to that of Ségolène Royal at the end of 2006 with a reversal, at a few weeks of the vote, in May 2007, in favour of its opponent.

All regards, here, the public rather is intrigued and interested by this event.

To note, our position, here, majority, counters the form of the engagement in Iraq and Afghanistan.

If nobody really believes in a deep change in this respect with the possible election of Barak Obama, much, all the same, wait and hope.
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
37,660
Reaction score
2,380
Points
203
Location
Wolfsburg
Preferred Pronouns
Sire
oh yeah ... that solid support The One has in Europe is a Big Plus here.

Of course. If you have studied European politics (After all, we have a few centuries more experience with that kind of nastiness :rofl:), you would know why we appreciate politicians with a good standing far far away from us.

When we get tired of him, we can always promote him away to a distant country. ;) Worked with Schröder, who is now too busy to mess with German politics.

You can't do that with politicians who are only mildly appreciated at home - that's why Kurt Beck could never become German chancellor. But Steinmeier could get send quickly to the UN...
 

Andy44

owner: Oil Creek Astronautix
Addon Developer
Joined
Nov 22, 2007
Messages
7,620
Reaction score
7
Points
113
Location
In the Mid-Atlantic states
fort said:
Concerning the opinion in France, through what I read in the newspapers, much are interested in your election, would wish a victory of Obama.

Europeans love Obama? Shocker.
 

Bullethead

New member
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
212
Reaction score
3
Points
0
Location
Wakefield, LA
Website
www.stormeaglestudios.com
But it turns out that Rice is genuinely, personally averse to the idea of running for office. Strong efforts were made to try to change her mind, but it turns out she's just not that kind of person.

All the more reason she should get the job.

The vast majority of people who actively seek public office do so because they desire power over other people's lives and property. With most of them, having such power is an obsession, and they will do whatever it takes to acquire and keep power. They are, therefore, exactly the wrong sort of person to be entrusted with that power.

Good, hard-working people who mind their own business and don't want other people minding it for them only rarely seek public office. They instead go do something useful. For the most part, the only people attracted to politics are scumbags who can't hold down a real job but have a burning desire to tell everybody else how to live their lives. It's no coincidence that so many politicians are lawyers, and I say that as a recovering (as in non-practicing) lawyer myself :dry:.

As a result, I've never thought democracy was a good idea. It's always going to devolve into essentially a semi-hereditary ruling class of scumbags intent only on staying in office for life. You can't stop that with pre-election competency testing, term limits, low pay, no perks, or whatever, because the scumbag majority of whatever party can change the rules any time it feels like it. That's how we got to the state we're in now.

IIRC, some Frenchman said in the late 1700s that US democracy would work just fine until Congress realized it could vote itself a free ride. He was right.

Problem is, I can't think of anything that would work any better. But IMHO that's all the more reason to force non-politically oriented people to serve under duress ;).

And, as for Palin's lack of national scale experience, well, you have to forget about Harry Truman to think this is a per se disqualifier. Of course, the elites thought Truman was a hick from the sticks, too.

I'd say Palin's got considerably more practical experience in any field you care to name than the Obamination. Plus, she's at least on the US side in the current war.....
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
37,660
Reaction score
2,380
Points
203
Location
Wolfsburg
Preferred Pronouns
Sire
Plus, she's at least on the US side in the current war.....

Wow! Does that mean she does not pilot planes into the Pentagon? Or dress her five kids in C4? Snipe US soldiers for Youtube?

Isn't it funny how not having enough lead flying around the head can make it hard to see the enemy? :dry:

And honestly: Being a worse commander than GWB is hard to achieve. Most of the current problems in Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan just come from the fact, that the USA needed to invade Iraq without a reason and before having defeated the real enemy first. Bin Laden is not caught yet. And I doubt a president Bush will be in office when he gets caught.

But well, maybe some people here rate military success in the number of wars started during a presidency and not in the number of wars ended successfully.
 

fort

Active member
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
1,018
Reaction score
20
Points
38
Andy44,

Love? All depends on what one wants to say by love.

I speak, moreover, only of what I read in some French newspapers, among the reactions of the readers to the articles devoted to Barak Obama.The newspaper Le Monde, mainly. For the European people, i do not know.

What to say?

1/ The campaign of BO was the subject of more articles, in particular relating to the campaign for the primary's with H Clinton, that that of Mc Cain. What does not show anything (after all, comments could be there, as well, ascerbes), but...

2/ I believe that we preserve this pride of us to be opposed in the terms, at the war in Iraq through J Chirac and D de Villepin. Pride which grows blurred (estomper) little by little in ratio with the policy perceived like disordered of our current president, and rather Atlantist. In any case in favour of a return to NATO, even if, in fact, we never ceased being active there, in the commands.

3/ In one moment when much, in the hearts at least, there is little still, wished Europe and was smelled little by little to become Européens as much as nationals.

4/ In one moment when the image of JWB and his team is far from shining with highest, here, and where, considering by far, seen from France, its possible successor, J Mc Cain, is not regarded very differently as its double.

5/ However there is not here and much less than yesterday of anti-Americanism as the opinion gets information, with time, more finely, and learn that there is not one America (in spite of the fact thayt it's not a news), but multiple opinions, and to simplify, and pure less, one preserving camp,conservative, and a camp looked like progressist. It east can be the history which carries out each one to understand that, and that of the United States, these last years, in the radicality of its management/governement with can be accelerated this comprehension.

6/ It appears clear that the recent question of Ossetie with probably revived at each one, of the feelings of aversion towards this one or that one, but the greatest complexity of the international relations, or, at least, the increase in the visible number of the suceptibles speakers/nations to make move these relations reduced the attitudes and the reflexions block against block. Nobody here, for example,is very trustful in the Iranian intentions, but little would see like exit a second, third (?) face (front) to open against this population. I do not believe that it is tepidity (tiedeur), molesse or cowardice. Of course, people want to be able to deal of them, their future and purchasing power to them (which drop), this safe from conflicts, still, here or there.

But it is is I believe as much, without to say that the French, Europeans, are soft humanistic a little out of the realities of the world, I believe well that our territorial proximity with these areas ( Middle East ) and our common history (even if, after all, the American people are also made descendants of the old Europe)... this proximity makes us look at them differently than on the other edge of the Atlantic, or of Extrem East. Nothing really original in my comment here.

It east can be a question of interest, energetics, inter alia, but not less glance about than one would wish civilization in the world present.

Without neglecting to keep did the opened eyes, I appreciate the speech of J Kerry, a few days recalling in Denver all that the government had said that it would not make here still a few months (withdrawal of Iraq, making contact with the Iranian authorities...) and what it seems (operation electoralist ? has to see...) to start to regard as possible. After all, there is the right to change when a situation appears to us to develop. But nevertheless...

Here. I would not make too the praise of Obama. Initially because it does not deserve it as much as that, even if, being American, my vote would be probably for the democratic party and those which represent it today. J Kerry, inter alia.

But i'm not. And how to imagine when you have never lived here or there.

I would not make too the praise of Obama, then, for what one says that a too strong support of a candidate on your premise, coming from Europe, could to more harm him that another thing. I mean : deserve him. Obama does not seem too much to have dropped in the surveys after its speech of Berlin and its rapid visits here, but one says that J Kerry to rather lost voices with being plebiscite by Europe that it gained

Bonne chance with you of it and that the most qualified, responsible, carry it.

My isn't English famous not?

I use, as I can my own knowledge and hyperwords.

fort
 
Last edited:

Linguofreak

Well-known member
Joined
May 10, 2008
Messages
5,038
Reaction score
1,275
Points
188
Location
Dallas, TX
Besides, in terms of experience, I'd think that after being the mother of 5, Vice-President is almost a demotion!

And, really, her experience in government is actually more applicable to the job than McCain's, Hill's, Obama's, or Biden's. The rest are all legislators. Palin is an executive. Her experience is at a lower level of government than the others, but it is in the same branch of government.
 

Eagle

The Amazing Flying Tuna Can
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
1,105
Reaction score
3
Points
0
The biggest thing the choice of a vice president shows is what kind of president the person at the top of the ticket will be. I don't think VP influences the President, so much as the President reveals what they want in their choice.

VP Cheney, worked for the first Bush and worked in the private sector and some neocon think tanks during the Clinton years. I would characterize the current administration of supporting neoconservative ideals, and definitely pro-business.

Joe Biden (at least in recent years) has been relatively close to the party lines in most respects. So I would expect Obama to stay rather close to the party line (at least initialy).

Palin appears to hold traditional conservitive ideals. Maybe a few liberitarian ideas regarding the role of government. Difficult to know from a short career. I guess the insight is that McCain chose someone whose vision matches his?

I would have written a shorter post, but I did not have the time.
 

Bullethead

New member
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
212
Reaction score
3
Points
0
Location
Wakefield, LA
Website
www.stormeaglestudios.com
And honestly: Being a worse commander than GWB is hard to achieve. Most of the current problems in Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan just come from the fact, that the USA needed to invade Iraq without a reason and before having defeated the real enemy first. Bin Laden is not caught yet. And I doubt a president Bush will be in office when he gets caught.

You seem to have forgotten how things really happened.

Iraq:
You might recall that Iraq was subject to being invaded again ever since the end of my war in 1991. The war actually never ended--all that "No Fly Zone" enforcement, which most folks never heard about. Anyway, there were UN resolutions passed in 1991 to that effect. More recently, Saddam was showing every indication of being back in the WMD business, so MORE UN resolutions were passed authorizing an invasion of Iraq if Saddam didn't come clean on the WMD issue. These actually weren't necessary because the 1991 resolutions covered this case, but Bush went to the trouble of getting fresh resolutions to make everybody happy. Saddam didn't comply, so we invaded, with the full authority of the UN.

The UN then immediately claimed we'd acted on our own, in a typical display of UN moral bankruptcy. And of course, the Germans, French, and Russians played leading roles in that. Turns out this was because of the massive "Oil For Food" corruption scandal that was lining UN and Euro leaders' pockets, and removing Saddam would end this sweet deal for them. Says wonders about the character the UN, Europe, and Russian, doesn't it?

As it turns out, there weren't any WMDs in Iraq, but it wasn't just the US that thought there were. That was a widely held belief, and many folks still say the things got shipped to Syria before the invasion, although I'm not so sure. However, it was because the believe was widely shared that the UN passed the resolutions at all. And besides, why would Saddam pretend he had them, risking invasion, if he didn't have them?

As for Iraq's sectarian troubles, that's the fault of the people (mostly Brits IIRC, but all Euros of some sort) who carved up the Ottoman Empire after WW1. They drew arbitrary lines on the map creating artificial countries without regard for ethnic territories. Thus, they created the whole of today's Middle East problems.

But anyway, Iraq seems to be coming to a successful conclusion. And you can't argue that the world's worse off without Saddam in it, even if he didn't have any WMDs.

Iran:
You can't blame this one on Bush at all. That place went nuts in the 1970s under the Carter administration, and hasn't changed since except to want to be a nuclear power. Which Russia is aiding and abetting, instead of trying to prevent, while at the same time threatening to invade Poland if she deploys a missile defense system which in part would protect Poland from Iranian missiles. Gotta love the Russians for that.

Pakistan:
This place has been in turmoil ever since the Brits bailed on India. You can't even blame this on the US, let alone Bush.

Afghanistan:
IIRC, this place was systematically smashed from end to end by the Russians back in the 1980s and nobody (not the US, not Europe) cared enough to patch the place up afterwards. So it reverted to anarchy and brigandage, and a home for the likes of Bin Laden. We're trying to fix that now, with some very grudging help from a few other folks. And the only reason we get any help there at all is because Afghanistan wasn't filling crooked UN and Euro politician pockets with billions in oil graft money.

Bin Laden:
It would be nice if he was dead, but for the past few years he might as well have been. We've totally smashed his organization and completely removed him from a position to do us harm. However, there are a bunch of other crazies willing to fill his shoes. We've taken down a lot of them, too.

The fact of the matter, however, is that all these crazies exist due to governments like Syria, Iran, and Saddam's Iraq willing to arm, train, and equip them. The only way to stop that is to change those governments, because decades of finger-wagging and half-hearted UN sanctions have completely failed to make a difference. Which is as good a reason as any for invading Iraq, bringing us full circle.

Summary:
Seems to me ALL the problems in that whole part of the world are the result of decades, if not centuries, of European and/or Russian imperialism, meddling, bungling, outright criminality, and failure to face up to the consequences thereof. And now that we're trying to clean up your mess, you say the whole thing is our fault. Specifically, the fault of Bush. It's disgusting. How can you all look at yourselves in the mirror?
 
Top