McCain Chooses Palin as Running Mate

[Messierhunter]

If the same would have happened to a liberal candidates daughter, the conservative reaction would be shouting "A lack of morals! And this bunch of people want to lead the country?". If it happens to a conservative... "Oh, the poor kid" (As if you can regard it a kid from this point on). Bigots.

Wrong! Did conservatives make a big deal out of Al Gore's kid getting arrested for reckless driving and drug possession? NO! I have news for you, conservatives don't go after the personal lives of family members. You can't even give a specific example and so you have to resort to pretending it would happen. If you're going to call me a "bigot" I expect you to do it with hard facts, not mindless speculation.


-----Posted Added-----

I would be wasting my time and energy since you believe what you believe

Or you just refuse to since you can't prove that the swift boat vets were ineffective at their job and war criminals to boot, which is what you would have to prove in order to prove that what they said was "all lies."

Labels again. I don't get the penchant for our culture to want to reduce everything down to sound bite "no-brainer" labels.

If the shoe fits, wear it. You sound like you're reading from a "moveon" script half the time. Don't like the label? Don't parrot radical websites.

"Feudalism, a term first used in the early modern period (17th century), in its most classic sense refers to a Medieval Europe political system comprised of a set of reciprocal legal and military obligations among the warrior nobility, revolving around the three key concepts of lords, vassals, and fiefs. "

I recall that you called American a feudal theocracy - it's not even close to the definition. It's just a popular rant among radical liberals. If you want to prove me wrong you can kindly take it back.

I couldn't agree more, insulting a little girl who chose to risk getting herself knocked up is nothing

Actually, I think spreading vicious and verifiably wrong conspiracy rumors about the lineage of a downs syndrome little boy and involving his teen sister as the "secret parent" takes the cake, both as the stupidest theory ever to be proposed, and as the most vicious lie ever to be told in politics. For anyone who still clings to this bitter theory, I suggest you take a look at this trisomy 21 prevalence vs maternal age graph and then tell me who is the likely mother, the 17 year old Bristol or the 44 year old Sarah:

 

[replicant]

wow

Prove me wrong because I am soooo right? Nyah Nyah Nyah? wow.

I never called America a feudal theocracy, I said it is becoming one, and am advocating stopping it, please pay attention.

Parroting? You sound like a rebroadcasting station for Rush. Your rants and insulting labels also sound like a Junior High auditoruim.

If I wrote a book filled with every detail and every urination and every heart beat moment of the swift-boat vets, it wouldn't matter, you are already convinced. I'm sure they were not perfect, but then again, who is?

Ineffective war criminals? The same could be said for the current administration. Unless you define effectiveness by how much profit you make, or how many troops it takes to maintain order.


-----Posted Added-----


By the way, I never suported or bought the idea that the down's kid was the daughter's, only that the 17yo is currently pregnant. Please don't lump my quote in with that.

 

[Urwumpe]

Well, from another opinion I lately got McCain reduced his chances for presidency not by Palin, but by pleasing the religious right too much, including having too many Bush people in his election campaign (for example he employ the same guy, who made sure he never became president years earlier). This makes him less attractive for undecided voters or liberal republicans.

 

[replicant]

Distraction

The pregnant daughter is a distraction, lets look beyond that shall we? Lets look at Ms. Palin herself.

If I understand correctly from watching the convention last night(yes I did watch it, as it is my duty as a patriot to hear from all sides) They are selling her as the true agent of change, a real "reformer"

She has currently had to retain a lawyer to defend herself in a lawsuit after firing the DPS commisioner after he refused to fire her ex brother-in-law. I believe the label here is nepotism.

She is now being scrutinized for accepting campaign money from the same fundraising scheme that led to the indictment of Sen. Ted Stevens. Accepting the money was not illegal, and yes, Obama and others do the same thing, but that is my point:

Never seen the likes of before steadfast woman of God maverick reformer?

sounds like the same old same old to me


-----Posted Added-----


One more point, and I can't believe I missed it. If we are true Americans and love our constitution as I most definitly do, the the burden of proof is not on me to prove the swiftboaters innocence, but on you to prove their guilt sir.

I mean real proof, not the Rush home page, or anything titled "swiftboatscumbags.com" or anything similar. Preferably something credible, Snopes at a minimum, or better yet AP

 

[Urwumpe]

She also has some small problems because she "hacked" a computer in her time as mayor... actually blown out of proportion. She was ordered by the assistant attorney general of Alaska to do that to locate evidence of corruption, in a case where another guy on the same board as she was leading, was working together with the Oil industry.

Well, does not stop her from switching sides this time...

 

[Messierhunter]

I never called America a feudal theocracy, I said it is becoming one, and am advocating stopping it, please pay attention.

"Stop the feudal theocracy NOW!" Hmm, anything in this statement about america BECOMING a feudal theocracy... nope! You just said to stop it, not to prevent it. Stop equivocating, it's pathetic.

Parroting? You sound like a rebroadcasting station for Rush. Your rants and insulting labels also sound like a Junior High auditoruim.

I call them like a I see them. I didn't realize that junior high schoolers use the word "liberal" as an insult. Rush has also done little to nothing to counter the Palin conspiracy nuts with cold hard facts like I have done here.

I'm sure they were not perfect, but then again, who is?

Whoa, this isn't just equivocating, it's outright backpeddling. You said everything they said was a lie, now it's just "imperfect"? Sounds like moving goalposts to me.

Ineffective war criminals? The same could be said for the current administration.

So you admit you think they were ineffective war criminals just like the bush administration then?

By the way, I never suported or bought the idea that the down's kid was the daughter's, only that the 17yo is currently pregnant. Please don't lump my quote in with that.

You originally said you don't care if they lie about her. That's just as bad.


-----Posted Added-----

The pregnant daughter is a distraction, lets look beyond that shall we? Lets look at Ms. Palin herself.

No, we won't, until those here who have been spreading lies admit they were wrong.

She has currently had to retain a lawyer to defend herself in a lawsuit after firing the DPS commisioner after he refused to fire her ex brother-in-law. I believe the label here is nepotism.

Wow, way to show some ignorance. Here's some facts for you: her ex brother-in-law made a death threat against her father if her sister chose to retain a lawyer to divorce him. Her ex-brother-in-law also used a taser on his own child. Now if that's not good enough to get him fired, what is? I'd do the same thing if I were governor in that situation, and so would anyone who cared about the basic safety of those who would otherwise have the misfortune of being "protected" by this creep.

One more point, and I can't believe I missed it. If we are true Americans and love our constitution as I most definitly do, the the burden of proof is not on me to prove the swiftboaters innocence, but on you to prove their guilt sir.

Are you nuts? YOU accused them of lying about everything, the burden of proof is on YOU sir. YOU must prove they were war criminals, YOU must prove they were ineffective, because in order to be liars about everything they said against Kerry, those things would have to be true.

 

[replicant]

"Stop the feudal theocracy NOW!" Hmm, anything in this statement about america BECOMING a feudal theocracy... nope! You just said to stop it, not to prevent it. Stop equivocating, it's pathetic.

Let's look at what else is not there, "America". What feudal theocracy does that refer to? I stated stop the feudal theocracy in the abstract. Nowhere in any statement I have made is there "America is currently a feudal theocracy". Stop giving your meaning to my words, it's disgusting.

"Whoa, this isn't just equivocating, it's outright backpeddling. You said everything they said was a lie, now it's just "imperfect"? Sounds like moving goalposts to me.

No. I said they as a group of humans are imperfect, I said nothing about their lies. Sounds like misrepresentation to me. Even if they gave a perfect set of lies, they were still by definition imperfect for lying. Paradox? Yes. Backpeddling? No.

"So you admit you think they were ineffective war criminals just like the bush administration then?

Now who is nuts? You said that I would have to prove they were ineffective war criminals to to make my case. What is there to admit? Besides, I said one could also make the same statement about the Bush administration. Calling the Bush administration war criminals does not imply calling anyone else war criminals. By the way, has anyone considered that none of them were war criminals? Maybe they were just a bunch of guys payed a boatload of money to tell lies about John Kerry, who was in fact the one maligned.

"You originally said you don't care if they lie about her. That's just as bad.

Really. That's as bad as telling the lies? Was I supposed to stand and defend her? I'll let her mother's no doubt expensive lawyers handle that. My country is in trouble and I have other things to worry about.


-----Posted Added-----

"No, we won't, until those here who have been spreading lies admit they were wrong.

Kudos to you. Again the whole burden of proof thing. That burden is not on you to prove her innocence, but on her accusers to prove guilt. I have never accused the 17yo of being the disabled child's mother, therefore, no burden to me. Therefore I choose to look at other things.

"Wow, way to show some ignorance. Here's some facts for you: her ex brother-in-law made a death threat against her father if her sister chose to retain a lawyer to divorce him. Her ex-brother-in-law also used a taser on his own child. Now if that's not good enough to get him fired, what is? I'd do the same thing if I were governor in that situation, and so would anyone who cared about the basic safety of those who would otherwise have the misfortune of being "protected" by this creep.

First of all, I have not once insulted you or your intelligence directly. You do not make much of a case in a debate with insults and labels. I am willing to admit error on this one, but PROVE to me the statement about the Brother-in-law is true. From a credible source. And yes, the burden here lies with you since Palin hiring the lawyer and the case against her for abuse of power is true. The accusation here is against the Brother-in-law.

"Are you nuts? YOU accused them of lying about everything, the burden of proof is on YOU sir. YOU must prove they were war criminals, YOU must prove they were ineffective, because in order to be liars about everything they said against Kerry, those things would have to be true.

John Kerry was himself a swiftboater. You appear to be a firm believer in lumping everything together, all or none. Therefore, if you call the swifboat veterans war criminals, then you call John Kerry a war criminal. In addition, the only accusation I was concerned with to begin with was the one calling John Kerry a war criminal.

To defend John Kerry's war record, I don't have to prove ANYTHING about the lying swiftboaters. If I were to call John McCain a squirming coward who ratted out his fellow POWs(which I am not and would not do) then by DEFAULT everything I say would be a lie until proven true. YOU have to PROVE Kerry was in fact a war criminal, or else everything negative stated about his record, was by default, lies.

 

[n0mad23]

It seems that McSame's call for bipartisan hand-holding is going well, as evidenced by the development of this thread. I'm wondering if it was such a wise move to have Dubya compare critics of his administration to the VC after-all.

But that's beside the point. After watching the convention last night, the thing that I was most struck by was the overwhelming lack of passion in the audience. Lot's of silly hats and subdued excitement. I'm wondering if this isn't because the passionate ones are off at the Ron Paul convention instead.

 

[Urwumpe]

I'm wondering if this isn't because the passionate ones are off at the Ron Paul convention instead.

No, I think the passionate ones are just not invited. Just the old guardian council of the true faith. To make sure MC Cain does not rap to the wrong beat.

 

[replicant]

If the shoe fits, wear it. You sound like you're reading from a "moveon" script half the time. Don't like the label? Don't parrot radical websites.

This cracks me up. Lets analyze this shall we?

FOR THE RECORD, I do not visit radical left or right websites. I have never even read a moveon script. I do something extremely radical in this day and age, I absorb the information from news, people and culture around me and then draw my own conclusions. I DO NOT let pundits do my thinking for me.

Admittedly, some of what I say probably matches these things. Just as when I say that I believe that education, firearm ownership, and an unregulated media are the insurance against tyranny, I am sure that is all over someone's website somewhere. I didn't get those things from a website, they are from a lifetime of absorbtion

If that is all over the killmom website, does that make me pro matracide?

By your logic, if a pedophile's website had a whole dissertation on being anti-abortion, and someone stated that dissertation pretty coincidentally (with over 4 billion people on earth that is not only possible but probable) then they would be a pedophile.

Now given, if they state everything from that site %100, then they probably are one? but what about less than %100? At what magic percentile does one tip one way or the other and become the absolute of "With them or against them?"

At what magic percentile does the "shoe fit?"

It must be too many Superfriends cartoons

 

[GregBurch]

It seems that McSame's call for bipartisan hand-holding is going well, as evidenced by the development of this thread. I'm wondering if it was such a wise move to have Dubya compare critics of his administration to the VC after-all.

Comrade Nomad: stop calling John McCain "McSame." Just try it. You'll be glad. Do you REALLY know much about John McCain's legislative record? Is it really a legitimate thing to do to use that epithet, when the intention is to parrot the DNC's line that "a vote for McCain is a vote for Bush."

Yes, McCain was aligned with Bush on the war in Iraq. So were a lot of other people who don't share many of the other views that Bush has on other issues. On a number of important domestic issues, McCain and Bush were not aligned. The list of those issues is extremely long. I know you must be aware of that.

 

[dougkeenan]

I'd like to see such a list. Link?

 

[Urwumpe]

Yes, McCain was aligned with Bush on the war in Iraq. So were a lot of other people who don't share many of the other views that Bush has on other issues. On a number of important domestic issues, McCain and Bush were not aligned. The list of those issues is extremely long. I know you must be aware of that.

But he is also not far away from Bush, especially when you look at his election campaign staff. And do you think, the Republican party will not do theirs to ensure, the candidate does the right things?

 

[replicant]

RNC

Let me preface this by saying that I have had family serve in many wars, and I do believe in country first, I myself went to Marine Corps OCS in Quantico, and I have no problem whatsoever in killing the right enemy for the right reasons.

However, did it seem to anyone else that the things have shifted from :

"Make love not war" to "Make love to the war?"

 

[n0mad23]

Pundit Greg,

Name calling = Bad taste? The ways the McCain and Bush differ is fairly extensive, but I'm quickly coming to the conclusion that the latter actually has more backbone than the nominee. McCain should never have back-peddled on the torture issue, and I suspect he capitulated on Palin as well.

However, considering the upcoming election (shudder) there's no doubt that McCain's presidency would resemble the current administration far more than an Obama presidency would.

What's Rove's involvement with the RNC at this stage, anyway? Sure has been out of the limelight.

Guess I'll turn back to alternative news sources to see if this intuitive leap correct.

 

[dougkeenan]

"extremely long" "fairly extensive" Why does McCain think Bush is wrong so much? :rofl:

 

[GregBurch]

I'd like to see such a list. Link?

For crying out loud -- this stuff is easy to find:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/31673.html

Look at McCain's "tilt ranking" -- the guy's been scaring the far right of the Republican party for two decades.

Sorry for the frustration -- it's just amazing to me that this "Bush's third term" idea could get ANY traction. The only way it can is if the facts are ignored. McCain's the least ideological candidate in Republican presidential politics since Bush Sr.

But he is also not far away from Bush, especially when you look at his election campaign staff. And do you think, the Republican party will not do theirs to ensure, the candidate does the right things?

Really, honestly, do you have any knowledge about how internal party politics works in the US? Do you think there's a "smoke-filled room" of party bosses who control the candidates? That image might have been true, oh ... 70 years ago in the US. But it hasn't been since then ...

 

[dougkeenan]

For crying out loud -- this stuff is easy to find:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/31673.html

Look at McCain's "tilt ranking" -- the guy's been scaring the far right of the Republican party for two decades.

Sorry for the frustration -- it's just amazing to me that this "Bush's third term" idea could get ANY traction. The only way it can is if the facts are ignored. McCain's the least ideological candidate in Republican presidential politics since Bush Sr.

No sweat, these are frustrating times. Same site says: "McCain rejects Bush's foreign-policy tactics, but embraces his goals." I can see how that could be interpreted by some as a "third term."

 

[GregBurch]

No sweat, these are frustrating times. Same site says: "McCain rejects Bush's foreign-policy tactics, but embraces his goals." I can see how that could be interpreted by some as a "third term."

Yes, that's true -- because the typically cowardly breed of standard-issue politicians -- on the Republican side -- have been running for cover for the last four years, terrified that they'll be identified with a foreign policy that has become the most misrepresented element of American policy of any kind in the last 150 years. McCain didn't do that, even though it was the "politically saavy" thing to do. He -- like Lieberman -- agreed with the over-all goals of US foreign policy since 911, and both of them stood up for what they believed in, to their great political detriment.

Now, McCain DISAGREED with Rumsfeld's and Bush's tactics from day one, and he said so very loudly. He was an advocate of the surge before Bush was. And he was right.

I was listening to the Beeb World Service this morning on the way to the airport. They were doing a story on conditions in Basra. Their reporter was twisting and turning and doing everything in his power to paint the picture with dark spin -- but he couldn't hide the fact that things are much, much better there. Did you hear that the coalition turned over control of Anbar province to Iraqi security forces two days ago? Anbar province -- the absolute hell-hole crucible of the "Sunni triangle" -- lost without hope of redemption two years ago. If you didn't hear that news, it wouldn't surprise me, since objective analysis of news coverage of Iraq over the last six months demonstrates that it has become a back-page item. Funny how that happened ... As soon as things started going well there, it stopped being news.

When your guys own up to having said that the surge wouldn't work, I'll give them credit for guts. Not till then.

 

[Brad]

Now, McCain DISAGREED with Rumsfeld's and Bush's tactics from day one......

....Did you hear that the coalition turned over control of Anbar province to Iraqi security forces two days ago? Anbar province -- the absolute hell-hole crucible fo the "Sunni triangle" -- lost without hope of redemption two years ago. If you didn't hear that news, it wouldn't surprise me, since objective analysis of news coverage of Iraq over the last six months demonstrates that it has become a back-page item. Funny how that happened ... As soon as things started going well there, it stopped being news.

When your guys own up to having said that the surge wouldn't work, I'll give them credit for guts. Not till then.

I have always been a fan of the "Powell Doctrine." For those unfamiliar with it... always, and I mean ALWAYS use overwhelming force when attacking the enemy. None of this half-way stuff. Now if the powers that be, or will be, can translate to Afghanistan we'd be set. Doing anything half-way has always led to trouble.