McCain Chooses Palin as Running Mate

The other day everyone on here was complaining about people from outside of the USA getting involved in US elections, and now you want the Brits to get involved?
I know they're the 51st state, but that's a bit hypocritical.;)

Also, once again it's an example of people discussing the people rather than the policies. I know it's not my election but this really really ticks me off. In the case of Hugo it's not too bad as he's making a joke, but looking through the website it seems the rest of the Times is doing the same thing (not that the Times is a particularly worthy newspaper to read, mind you)
 
dougkeenan said:
What about late night comics? Do we consider Leno and Letterman "right" or "left?"
Click to expand...

I don't know. I never watch them. I occasionally see clips people send me. What would you think?

Completely off-topic, I do know quite a bit about one particular aspect of Leno's personality, but that's because we both have a raging infection of car-craziness, American-style.
 
Urwumpe said:
Isn't that the same as heart-bleeding liberal? :cheers:
Click to expand...

Actually, not. An analog of Leno/Letterman who is a card-carrying agent of the bleeding-heart leftist media would be this fellow:

http://www.billmaher.com/

My wife forces me to watch him often. It's excruciating.

Maher and I do share the same view on one major policy issue, though. He's an outspoken advocate of nuclear power, which causes him no end of grief from his fan base. The little tiny shred of respect i have for him is based on this.
 
GregBurch said:
Actually, not. An analog of Leno/Letterman who is a card-carrying agent of the bleeding-heart leftist media would be this fellow:

http://www.billmaher.com/

My wife forces me to watch him often. It's excruciating.

Maher and I do share the same view on one major policy issue, though. He's an outspoken advocate of nuclear power, which causes him no end of grief from his fan base. The little tiny shred of respect i have for him is based on this.
Click to expand...

I caught a few minutes of Bill Maher after Obama's acceptance speech. He took a break from gushing over Obama to complain about the media gushing over Obama, then went back to his own gushing over Obama.
 
GregBurch said:
Actually, not. An analog of Leno/Letterman who is a card-carrying agent of the bleeding-heart leftist media would be this fellow:

http://www.billmaher.com/

My wife forces me to watch him often. It's excruciating.

Maher and I do share the same view on one major policy issue, though. He's an outspoken advocate of nuclear power, which causes him no end of grief from his fan base. The little tiny shred of respect i have for him is based on this.
Click to expand...

It is sometimes amazing how much difference a small ocean between can make. He would be pretty average in the German media, especially regarding the fact, that German public-funded broadcasters have even more and better satire around. OK, we also have almost no true conservative comedy around. The most conservative comedians I remember instantly, would be Dieter Hallervorden and Loriot.


Just compare Bill Maher to that:
 
pattersoncr said:
I caught a few minutes of Bill Maher after Obama's acceptance speech. He took a break from gushing over Obama to complain about the media gushing over Obama, then went back to his own gushing over Obama.
Click to expand...

You know, I've been thinking about the absolutely unbridled revulsion that the left has felt for Bush and the utter lack of restraint they exercised in expressing it for eight years. Of course, it was all justified, I know, since Bush suspended the Constitution, instituted a police state theocracy and launched a war for oil based on lies to profit his puppet master Dick Cheney. We all know these things to be true, so of course the way the left talked about Bush was completely justified.

Setting that aside, I wonder if the folks on the left can even imagine how people who don't agree with them might perceive Obama at a gut level. I wonder if they can empathize with the way he makes some people's skin crawl with his self-righteousness. Just as Bush's biography as a crappy businessman in the oil business and the son of a wealthy Republican politician makes the left want to puke, there are people who have a reaction to Obama that is similar -- his career as a "community organizer," i.e. director of grievance theater, his wriggling, slithering rise up the Chicago political machine ladder, his association with the most outrageously anti-American people ...

Can they make that leap of imagination, to put themselves in someone else's position, I wonder.

I've been talking to my friends and associates who feel this way, encouraging them to NOT express these feelings; to try as hard as possible to be better than the people who infuriated us with their shallow, ill-informed, bigoted caricatures for eight years. It probably won't work, but it's worth a try.
 
Last edited:
GregBurch said:
Setting that aside, I wonder if the folks on the left can even imagine how people who don't agree with them might perceive Obama at a gut level. I wonder if they can empathize with the way he makes some people's skin crawl with his self-righteousness. Just as Bush's biography as a crappy businessman in the oil business and the son of a wealthy Republican politician makes the left want to puke, there are people who have a reaction to Obama that is similar -- his career as a "community organizer," i.e. director of greivance theater, his wriggling, slithering rise up the Chicago political machine ladder, his association with the most outrageously anti-American people ...
Click to expand...

Well, lets start answering this question with a European estimate of the republican view (which is very likely wrong, but it is better, if I am wrong, than a US citizen):

I would expect people to be worried about what would come after he became president, as he made many promises and already indications who is going to pay the bill.

Also, he does not fit into the scheme. A presidency is usually the crowning achievement of a political career, and Obama is pretty much the opposite: He is a young up-start, with a short national political career, who as pretty much his political life in front of him. If you are conservative, he really is too young for the job. That is also a real problem among democrats, I think, and thats also why his selection of Biden was so important. It not only gives the democratic party a slight feeling of safety to have one of their veterans on his side, but should also calm some fears among the voters.

His complexion could make conservative people feel uneasy, who are not openly racist, but might feel, that things are happening a bit too fast for them. But on the other hand, it should not be too hard for at least calming the fears of many of them.

And his wife, which has even a stronger political opinion to bear has McCains wife, might also disturb conservatives stronger as democrats,who prefer a more classical role model of the women. But a strong first lady is also not the worst for many of them, as long as it is no Hillary.

But as summary, except his pretty short career and his young age, there is on a objective scale only little which makes him a bad president. I think for both camps, it is important to have a candidate around who can also restore lost trust in the world and the US population into the US government. Which is possible with both candidates.

BTW... what can be more anti-american as supporting separatist movements inside Alaska? ;)
 
Urwumpe said:
Well, that was the first echo, i wouldn't be surprised when the video message she send would appear in the web.
Click to expand...

Given the ravenous appetite for anti-Palin material, I would have expected to see it by now if it had anything damaging in it.

This phenomenon is something unique to the big, western states that came into the Union after the Civil War, and even more so (by a lot) in Alaska, because of the HUGE amount of land in these states that is owned and controlled by the federal government. The balance of power between state and federal governments upon which the original conception of the US Constitution was based is perceived by many in these states as skewed far too heavily toward the federal government.

You don't have to be an extremist, a "whacko" or anti-American to hold some of these political sentiments in places like Montana and Wyoming and, especially because of how late it came into the Union, Alaska. Actual secessionism, on the other hand, is an entirely different matter. Because of the extremely federal nature of the US Constitution, arguments about "states' rights" is an issue that has been and will inevitably continue to be a major theme of American political life. But that little unpleasantness between 1860 and 1865 pretty well decided the question of secession once and for all, for better or worse.

There's an interesting (and debated) footnote to this about Texas -- which arguably has a right, because of the agreements made at the time it became a US state, to secede and then be readmitted as four or, depending on who you talk to, five states. I haven't looked into it, but it wouldn't surprise me if these Alaska states rights people might be making some sort of similar argument. (Not least of which because there's a "bigness" and "uniqueness" rivalry between Texas and Alaska ...)

EDIT:

This might be of interest to our non-American friends:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/webl...Sep/05/small-town-residents-boo-media-mccain/

The paper is a Murdoch outlet, so conclude what you will. I would direct attention to the reader comments. Not particularly literate, but interesting ...
 
GregBurch said:
Maher and I do share the same view on one major policy issue, though. He's an outspoken advocate of nuclear power, which causes him no end of grief from his fan base. The little tiny shred of respect i have for him is based on this.
Click to expand...
He's an outspoken opponent of the Drug War which I understand you are also. Adding one more little tiny shred FWIW.
 
Urwumpe said:
BTW... what can be more anti-american as supporting separatist movements inside Alaska? ;)
Click to expand...

On the contrary, what could be more "pro-American" (actually pro-liberty) then supporting seperatist movements?

Thomas Jefferson said:
When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature'sGod entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.

WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness -- That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness....

...WE, therefore, the Representatives of the UNITED STATED OF AMERICA, in GENERAL CONGRESS, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the Rectitude of our Intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly Publish and Declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be, FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES; that they are absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political Connection between them and the State of Great-Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which INDEPENDENT STATES may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with afirm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
Click to expand...

Of course, Greg may tell me that since this was written so long ago it no longer applies (just poking fun at you, Greg ;-)

I find it very ironic that the South Ossettians, who declared independence from Georgia and were, so far as I know, living in peace, got no support from the US when the Georgian government started bombing and killing them, but then again, this is post-Civil War America I live in, where the central authority is always presumed to rule supreme over the "little people".
 
GregBurch: I think far too much people in the USA associate Deep Throat with hard pornography.

I wonder really, what they expect from their media... If they really want quality journalism, they should start paying for it, instead of hoping that one blog in ten thousand takes journalism more serious as the media outlets.
 
BTW, while on business to Los Angeles a few years back I got a free ticket to attend the taping of Bill Maher's TV show at the time, Politically Incorrect. Although, like Greg I despise Maher, for largely the same reasons, I went anyway just for the novelty. Interesting experience. Upon entering the studio they make you empty your pockets and go through a metal detector, and while you in the studio (which is WAY smaller than it looks on TV!) a nobody stand-up comedian comes out to entertain you and keep you from getting bored in between taping segments. If you do not applaud when the sign comes on, you may get ejected, although I doubt that rarely happens.

Maher still sucked, even live. If I have to watch a raving leftist comedian, my pick would be Lewis Black. At least he's funny.
 
dougkeenan said:
He's an outspoken opponent of the Drug War which I understand you are also. Adding one more little tiny shred FWIW.
Click to expand...

You're right. He's a smart guy, actually, but he's got a terminal case of BDS.

He's also Arianna Huffington's boyfriend. That's too disgusting to even think about ...

Andy44 said:
Of course, Greg may tell me that since this was written so long ago it no longer applies (just poking fun at you, Greg ;-)
Click to expand...

No -- it's a really fascinating legal issue; too bad we can't really talk about it after the Unpleasantness.

Most Americans don't realize it, but just as important as the Unpleasantness were a series of Supreme Court cases dealing with very mundane commercial matters in the 1870s through about 1900 that pretty well gutted the original intent behind federalism. It's hard to get people interested in the subject, because the subject matter of the cases isn't sexy, and their impact was slow and subtle over time. But the overall effect was to significantly undermine the Jeffersonian concept of "laboratories of democracy" inherent in the original structure of the Constitution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

RGClark
News Heavy hitters at International Space Development Conference(ISDC) 2014.
Replies
0
Views
5K
RGClark
RGClark
Back
Top