Obama or McCain or Beemerboy?

[Jumboshrmp]

The original poster is clearly using one of those nasty tricks that republicans use to make their candidates win.

 

He added BeemerBoy to the poll to try and steal votes from Obama!

(kinda just kidding)

 

 

Anyway, I was watching the republican speech thingy last night(just curious), and did anyone else see this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPe_W4RsFjE

Hilarious!

 

I also noticed a huge lack of anyone young at the republican convention.

[Kalepi_Konei]

WOW!!

 

Well, what can I say

 

Just like Obama keeps harping on McCain for saying Middle class is anyone earning under $5 Million ( A joke by McCain, by the way), I can see that the slant against Sarah Palin is still in force

 

As a mayor of a small town, she was acting in the best intrest of her town, that was her focus, tell me you would not do the same thing, Federal polotics was not on her radar at that point, very unfair

 

The bridge to nowhere WAS initially supported by Sarah Palin, the she decided that it was not the best way to spend alot of money, Obama has change position during the presidentail campain, why can't Palin change her position as a governor

 

As for Obama's record, The fact remains, and as wierd as it sounds, Obama HAS written two Memiors, and never wrote or inacted any major law or spearheaded any change to the status quo in washington

 

McCain HAS fought even his own party to change the influence of Big Tabacco, Election finance reform, and many many others, if you take the time to look at his record, you may be suprised, and then you would understand that Obama trying to cast him as the tird term of Bush is not only innacurate is laughably funny

 

As for Palin experience, she has run a state, balanced a budget, negtiated some serous deals for her state with big oil, and the group building the natural gas pipeline, she has delt with serious energy issues, Obama has done none of this, and as one Alaska democrat put is, the polical landscape of Alaska is littered with the people who have underestimated her.

 

The national Guard, she actually went to the middle east and met with her troops from Alaske, so that gives her about as much time over there as Obama

 

This can go round and round, the fact remians, peoples choices are very personal, but the attacks against Palin this past week have seriously been very pathetic, and extremly personal, I applaud her for taking the attacks, the "contibutors" who questioned her ability to be a mother and a VP, she stood up to that and showed them why her approval rating is around 80 to 85%, she is impressive

 

This has got to be one of the best posts in this thread, I completely agree with you on this!

[ParkTrips]

OK I'm voting for McCain, sorry Scott, but until you get Gary Sinise to narrate your films, I'm with the GOP.

[supertrooper]

 

 

I also noticed a huge lack of anyone young at the republican convention.

 

Or black, or hispanic, or gay, or any minority. There were a few, and the cameramen made sure that they found them.

[tntornadox]

That's because young people are sick and tired of the same Republican Party that has sunk our country these past 8 years.

 

This generation remembers when life was better under President Clinton, and how bad it became under Bush and Republican leadership. The difference is night and day.

 

My two cents, anyway.

[RCFreak]

But at the same time when they say "I vote ____ because ___" it could very well be becuase that party more follows what they do believe as a _____, at least at the current time at least. I don't doubt many do vote by what they are told by those closest to them (be it Church, parents, friends, favorite teacher, favorite blog, throwing darts at a board) but to make that generalization is just as bad as the kids who do. It's all misinformation being thrown about. Unless you ask them why being a _____ makes them vote for _____ you can't be sure and you shouldn't assume.

[tntornadox]

^^ Dude, I totally understand, trust me. Here on Rocky Top, things are much the same.

 

I am in a Poli Sci class and the teacher asked on the first day people's party affiliations if they had one, then asked WHY.

 

You hit the nail on the head- 'my parents are ________, so I am a _________'... which is flawed logic, I know from personal experience- my family is staunch Republican, but I am leaning Democrat.

[cosmic hearse]

Yeah my best friend votes republican because 'if its good enough for my parents its good enough for me'. He doesn't even watch or follow anything about politics just does what his parents tell him to do and he's 26 years old!

[tntornadox]

I think alot of young people follow their family political wise until they learn more about it themselves and make a more informed decision as far as what they care about and want to see.

 

It may be the same party as their family, or another. But I think it takes time for them to mature political wise and discover which party is best for THEM.

[AllenA07]

My parents have also voted Democrat, whereas I have, for the most part, voted Republican. So while I agree parents for a lot of people do play a role, not everybody does.

[cherrydrink]

McCain.

 

He is 72. As you say he do not look to healthy. There is a reason for that, he's had melanoma cancer 4 times already. That alone is a statistical blip, he should be dead by now from his cancers. As it stands, it is just a matter of time before it flares up again. Cancers do have this tendency to recur with a vengance. And the final straw really is that he got serious anger issues. His time as a Vietnamese POW have in all probability damaged his psyche to a degree. Given enough pressure he might regress, and act entirely irrational.

 

McCain isn't fit to run anything, let alone the US and its vast military. Not because of his politics per se, but because he is old, sick and mentally unfit. If he was 20 years younger, cancer free and reasonable and cool under pressure, rather than going off on tantrums, then he'd be as good a candidate the republicans could run with.

 

Good point.

[cherrydrink]

Palin recently said that the war in Iraq is "God's task." She's even admitted she hasn't thought about the war much—just last year she was quoted saying, "I've been so focused on state government, I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq."

 

Palin has actively sought the support of the fringe Alaska Independence Party. Six months ago, Palin told members of the group—who advocate for a vote on secession from the union—to "keep up the good work" and "wished the party luck on what she called its 'inspiring convention.'"

 

Palin wants to teach creationism in public schools. She hasn't made clear whether she thinks evolution is a fact.

 

Palin doesn't believe that humans contribute to global warming. Speaking about climate change, she said, "I'm not one though who would attribute it to being manmade."

 

Palin has close ties to Big Oil. Her inauguration was even sponsored by BP.

 

Palin is extremely anti-choice. She doesn't even support abortion in the case of rape or incest.

 

Palin opposes comprehensive sex-ed in public schools. She's said she will only support abstinence-only approaches.

 

As mayor, Palin tried to ban books from the library. Palin asked the library how she might go about banning books because some had inappropriate language in them—shocking the librarian, Mary Ellen Baker. According to Time, "news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire Baker for not giving "full support" to the mayor."

 

She DID support the Bridge to Nowhere (before she opposed it). Palin claimed that she said "thanks, but no thanks" to the infamous Bridge to Nowhere. But in 2006, Palin supported the project repeatedly, saying that Alaska should take advantage of earmarks "while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist."

 

Between McCain and this religious extremist dummy, my head is spinning. Are these nuts really this close to taking control of our country?

[cherrydrink]

^ Once again, all of those things have sold me on Palin. You mention that she has not stated whether or not evolution is a fact, well, in science evolution is still a theory. It is a very well supported theory, but a theory none the less. The original conditions to create Earth have not been completely recreated in specific labs. So when you word it as if she is ignorant in not regarding evolution as a fact, that does not make sense. Still a theory. And I'm not one who likes political, moral, religious debates as it always gets too personal, so I didn't want to take us off on a tangent. Just something I wanted to point out.

 

So you support creationism (ie: religion) being taught in schools as opposed to the more widely accepted scientific alternative? You support going against keeping church and state separate, and instead doing something entirely unconstitutional? You support the banning of books with inappropriate language from libraries (ie: censorship), an action so primitive that is completely unconceivable today. She even opposes educating teens on sex issues.

 

News reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire Baker for not giving "full support" to the mayor."

 

Really? We want to elect a lady who threatened to fire a librarian if she didn't ban choice books? What year are we living in? This same lady referred to the Iraq War as a "task from god" and asked people to pray for a plan to build a $30 billion natural gas pipeline in the state, calling it "God's will." It's time to get real people.

 

Now she may sound great to someone who is religious with the same views, but any practical person knows we don't need someone who has so much faith in an invisible force to lead our country in the same way. Her decisions show that she is an extremist. And she will make irrational decisions if she believes it is right (ie: above). Remember, keeping church and state separate is a constitutional issue. Freedom of press is a constitutional issue. She has done everything to show that she will make decisions that are unconstitutional. I won't let this nut intrude on my life or lifestyle because of her own personal beliefs.

[cherrydrink]

I support both ideas being presented to the students (evolution as a scientific theory and creationism as from Genesis, a historical text in the least). I'm really indifferent about the banning of books. I drop the f- bomb as much as the next person, and I really don't care that much about it. However, the reason she may have wanted to fire her is probably due to a blatant lack of respect for authority from the individual. And about sex education, I could go on all day about that as I actually wrote a research paper for my Freshman English class for abstinence only education. I don't agree with everything she stands for, but I like most of it. And that's more than enough for me to give my vote to her.

 

My argument didn't have as much to do with religion, as it had to do with Palin's intrusion on our constitutional rights. Please re-read. Now the question is, How do you feel about Sarah Palin's blatant disregard for the Constitution and our rights?

 

In addition, I was also trying to illustrate Palin's tendency to make irrational decisions because of her beliefs.

 

Oh, and how exactly did the librarian show disrespect for "authority"? By refusing to ban a piece of literature? I applaud the librarian for sticking up for her rights, because at least she realizes that forcing censorship is illegal. Should Sarah Palin be fired because of her disrespect for the constitution? Let me know what you think, because I think you're missing the big picture.

[cherrydrink]

I don't understand why we would have to continue our discussion privately? Surely our discussion as it relates to the presidential election is valid and within the bounds of this thread's original purpose.

[Wes]

Oy, a political debate that's turning into a religious debate? Yeah, let's steer away from this, please....

[cherrydrink]

Oy, a political debate that's turning into a religious debate? Yeah, let's steer away from this, please....

 

It's not a religious debate. But let me just post what I PMd to CTU, which addresses why Palin's behavior is unconstitutional.

 

The constitution, you must understand is a very literal document. So when someone makes a decision that directly interferes with the constitution (such as extorting a librarian to censor literature, or interfering with church and state separation) it's very clear. It's not a liberal or conservative issue, it's a constitutional issue. And Sarah Palin's beliefs and past actions are clearly unconstitutional.

 

As far as the books she wanted to ban, the titles haven't been released. It is clear though, that she did want to ban certain literature from a library, which is absolutely inexcusable in any circumstance. It doesn't matter what the book is.

 

With that said, I do believe this was a good discussion on Palin, and how her past decisions may affect all of us in the future. This was never a religious discussion. Food for thought. And anyone can jump in with their opinion at any time.

[cherrydrink]

On another note, has anyone seen this? A "9/11 Tribute" played at the RNC, which served only to throw fear into the political discourse and frighten voters. Absolutely new low for the GOP, shameful.

 

Here's a video with their eerie, and sickening video, and comments by Keith Olbermann speaking up for all of us at the sickening images exploited for political gain.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDx80bnFrVs

[ParkTrips]

^ I really think you need to stop posting in this thread. You were asked to step back from the debate and not take it too far, which is something Tyler did voluntarily, and yet you are still going. Please stop.

[Moose]

Oy, a political debate that's turning into a religious debate?

 

Is that really a surprise with how the republican platform is being derived and their VP pick?

[ginzo]

Just to set the record straight a bit, Sarah Palin backed away from her earlier, probably caught off guard, comment on teaching creationism in the schools. Apparently, she doesn't support teaching creationism in the schools as part of the official curriculum.

 

http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/story/8347904p-8243554c.html

 

The volatile issue of teaching creation science in public schools popped up in the Alaska governor's race this week when Republican Sarah Palin said she thinks creationism should be taught alongside evolution in the state's public classrooms.

 

Palin was answering a question from the moderator near the conclusion of Wednesday night's televised debate on KAKM Channel 7 when she said, "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both."

 

This, of course, is pure BS because creationism is religion, not science and therefore has no place in a science class. There is no evolution v. creation debate in science.

 

However, Palin quickly backpedaled with this:

 

In an interview Thursday, Palin said she meant only to say that discussion of alternative views should be allowed to arise in Alaska classrooms:

 

"I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."

 

She added that, if elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add such creation-based alternatives to the state's required curriculum.

 

Members of the state school board, which sets minimum requirements, are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Legislature.

 

"I won't have religion as a litmus test, or anybody's personal opinion on evolution or creationism," Palin said.

 

Palin has occasionally discussed her lifelong Christian faith during the governor's race but said teaching creationism is nothing she has campaigned about or even given much thought to.

 

So, there's not much to worry about on this issue. Apparently, she has little interest in the issue. If she wants to believe in creationism, that's fine. It only becomes a serious problem when they want to teach non-science in the science classroom.

 

As for Palin, she's just the VP candidate and the best course for Obama supporters is probably to ignore her. The more crap she gets along the way the more she can play the victim and "campaign against the press".

[mcjaco]

^ Actually, I thought the Obama crew did a pretty good job of ignoring her most of this week. It was the media (surprise, surprise), that kept it going.

 

It doesn't really matter until the debates get going anyway. We can all sit her and quote factfinder, new clippings, etc, to back our side of the argument. It won't be until the Biden and Palin go head to head where it'll get interesting. Or Obama and McCain.

 

Both parties are twisting the truth to fit their campaigns, and in this day and age I find that somewhat of an insult to the American public, since we can pretty much do fact checking on everything.

 

Just remind me to bring my pencil on election day. Scott, how do you spell you last name?

[Moose]

I agree completely with forget Palin. (Though i doubt she backed off because she made a mistake as to what she believes as opposed to what she thinks people want to hear) She is an absolute trainwreck and is just taking the attention off of John McCain, or as former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge called him, John Bush.

 

As for Mccain. Yes I am a democrat, but i would have considered voting for him back in 2000. Back when he wasnt' always toeing the party line. Back when he wasn't gung ho about repealing Roe Vs. Wade. Back when he wasn't so sure about denying gays rights.

 

I cannot and will not vote for someone who is now for making woman get illegal abortions, and for denying me rights. Yes, I know Obama is not exactly for gay marriage, but he is for federal benefits based upon a gay marriage on the state level.

[ginzo]

It doesn't really matter until the debates get going anyway. We can all sit her and quote factfinder, new clippings, etc, to back our side of the argument. It won't be until the Biden and Palin go head to head where it'll get interesting. Or Obama and McCain.

 

Right, but the MSM/political blogs are pushing the meme that Palin is in favor of teaching creationism in science classes. She has no track record of doing any such thing and has stated that she will not pursue this end. Sure she could reverse her position, but it seems highly unlikely as the woman apparently has little interest in this.

 

As someone who has a background in science, has done scientific research, and is starting science-based professional school next year, I actually give a crap about this particular issue. In fact, if the McCain-Palin ticket does come out in favor of this nonsense, I'll vote for Obama-Biden. And, I'm in Ohio. My vote actually counts.

 

Both parties are twisting the truth to fit their campaigns, and in this day and age I find that somewhat of an insult to the American public, since we can pretty much do fact checking on everything.

 

Very true. But lying and politicians go together like performance-enhancing drugs and cyclists.

[generaleclectic]

I agree completely with forget Palin. (Though i doubt she backed off because she made a mistake as to what she believes as opposed to what she thinks people want to hear) She is an absolute trainwreck and is just taking the attention off of John McCain, or as former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge called him, John Bush.

 

The only reason why I would not agree with a "forget Palin" strategy is simple. We (democrats) in 2004 didn't think that Bush would have a snowball's chance in hell of getting re-elected. Well, here we are 4 years later. Never underestimate the power of the ill-informed and under educated in mass numbers. Most people in this day and age tend to gravitate towards that which makes them feel warm and fuzzy, no matter what the message is. Palin, for whom I will reserve my own derogatory comments, is an excellent public speaker and possesses the power to influence idiots on a colossal level. Hell! She even had getting closer to the TV even though I'm a fairly well educated man an know better.

 

 

I cannot and will not vote for someone who is now for making woman get illegal abortions, and for denying me rights. Yes, I know Obama is not exactly for gay marriage, but he is for federal benefits based upon a gay marriage on the state level.

 

You know... being a gay man myself, I've resigned myself to the fact that "gay rights" will be a long, hard fought battle. The gay community is going to have to rise up in unity and make declaration and notice with one voice. We should all be focused on making sure that we don't set ourselves back 50 years where basic human rights and health is concerned. To declare all abortion to be bad abortion is to revert back to a time prior to Roe vs. Wade where women were going to back alleys and rouge doctors. To deny that sex education needs to be taught in schools is just as bad. Palin is looking/sounding more like an antagonistic & militant Donna Reed every day.