For a politician she's kind of hot…

xyzzy,

Do you find anti-Semitic drawings of Jews to be offensive?
Do you find the cartoons that southerners drew of blacks to be offensive?
Would you distribute such literature? By posting a photoshopped picture of Palin you are doing just that.

Back to lurk mode.

Only southerners drew these demeaning cartoons?

Now now! There is a huge difference between racist cartoons and a photoshopped picture. Let us not lose our sense of proportion here.

[QUOTE=S485122;141245]I do not know if other non US people feel the same as I do. But when I hear the cheering at those political conventions or at other events*, I think of a bunch of hysterical teenagers acclaiming their pop idol, not of people working together to shape a nation. How many in the crowd are paid to be cheering ?

Jacob

* Did you see that infamous Steve Blamer show at a Microsoft convention. It appears ther is more than one, while searching for it I found a compilation [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llaM2Ca3QpM[/url] If one of the directors of the company I work with would do a tenth of that, I am sure somebody would call an ambulance, one half of the crowd would die laughing and the other half would die of embarasment :-)[/QUOTE]


I could tell some funny stories about Steve during his Currier House days...
He didn't have much hair even then. ('73-'77)

[QUOTE=AES;141091]


I don't believe "conservative" and "republican" are interchangeable.
I don't believe "Liberal" and "democrat" are interchangeable.

[/QUOTE]

A nice sentiment. In theory.
To most voters, however, they ARE interchangeable.
Remeber the Ronnie Raygun speech about the Demotwits? "They are liberal,
liberal, liberal". He used it as a dirty word.

[QUOTE=Prime95;140996]Palin was not supposed to deliver a policy speech. Her goal was to introduce herself, some of her accomplishments, and take on the typical VP role of attacking the other party`s candidate so that the head of the ticket can remain above the fray.[/quote]
The problem is, the very lateness of the "introduction" puts pressure on her to tell us a lot more than some cute soccer-mom jokes. All that scrutiny that Obama and the other better-known quantities [mostly the other erstwhile contenders for the two major-party nominations] have endured for over a year must now necessarily be compressed into 2 months. Is it fair? No. Did Team McCain and the GOP bring this on themselves? Yes.

[quote]As to the NY Times editorial, I have only two gripes. They do a great job of listing her problems, but (at least in your excerpt) spend no time listing her accomplishments. But it`s an editorial, they don`t have to be balanced. IMO, they completely miss the boat in calling the choice of Palin a "snap decision". In fact, McCain made a brilliant calculated decision. The pick united [I]and motivated[/I] his base. Prior to Palin there was a significant chance the base would stay home. Palin also brings some of the independent women vote into play. It also brings interest to his campaign. Would any other VP candidate have generated 6 straight days of headline coverage? Would any other VP candidate have brought in 37 million viewers?[/quote]
I disagree with your "calculated" characterization - to me that would imply more than a single phone conversation and brief face-to-face in terms of preannouncement contact between McCain and the would-be running mate. However, it may prove to be a brilliant "snap" decision - sometimes you go with your gut, I can understand that, especially given the other choices available to him. I agree that choosing Mitt Romney or Joe Lieberman as running mate would have almost certainly doomed McCain`s chances, in that any possible boost he might have gotten with moderates would have been negated by the alienation of the Christian Right, who, although they would never dream of voting for Obama, might have just stayed home in large numbers as a result.

[quote]What`s interesting, and somewhat sad, to me is that the press, pundits, and public seem more interested in her family life, her daughter`s pregnancy, whether a mother with lots of children one with special needs can be a VP. They don`t spend much time talking about her real qualifications.[/quote]
Perhaps because her "real qualifications" are woefully thin? Also, I think scrutinizing the family life of those who claim that "family values" is a cornerstone of their politics is eminently fair, just as scrutinizing the personal finances of those who claim to be "for the working class" and "for fiscal responsibility" is fair. It`s a simple test of whether they practice what they preach. Obama [among other things] preaches prosperity through Green Energy initiatives, so it`s fair to examine whether his voting record indicates a commitment to green energy, and whether his jobs-creation numbers are even remotely realistic. Obama says he will end the war in Iraq and bring the troops home, so it`s fair to see whether his proposed timelines for doing so square with what is happening on the ground there. OTOH, Palin says the Iraq War is "A task from God" or some such nonsense - how does one verify that, exactly, or check whether God thinks a cleasrly defined exit strategy is advisable?

[quote]Actual there were a pile of ideas in there - mostly the same old republican ideas from the last two decades. The closest thing to a new idea was a call for energy independence.[/quote]
...allegedly achieved by drilling our way to it. We already know how well that worked with the Alaskan North Slope Oil. Not a single significant mention of he absolute most-viable way of making progress toward that goal, namely conservation. Like you said, same old long-discredited Republican tropes. That`s why I said specifically "actual ideas", I meant that in the sense of "possibly practicable."

[quote]His only other new idea was to vow to veto any bill containing pork that comes his way. I`ve heard that before from politicians and it never seems to happen.[/quote]
I guess McCain doesn`t consider the multi-hundred-billion-dollar housing bailout [a.k.a. "Paulson gets his bazooka"] bill "pork" because he couldn`t even be bothered to vote on that one. Similarly, Palin apparently was a big fan of pork in her town and state until it became politically unpopular to flaunt one's addiction to it. Of course calling her a hypocrite because of her now claiming otherwise would be "blatant sexism" on my part.

[quote]I thought the POW experience was the best part of his speech. Yes, McCain is a war hero. He put up with far more than I could have endured. It is irrelevant whether the Vietnam was just - that`s the President and Congress` job, not the soldier`s. He told how his POW experience changed his thinking and made him the man he is today - all quite relevant to a President`s qualification.[/quote]
And having [or lacking] the judgment to recognize an unjust trumped-up war of aggression is irrelevant? I heard McCain brag loud and long about his backing of the Iraqi troop "surge" as being "the right strategy". Can there really be such a thing in a war which was completely wrong to begin with? All it says to me is that "we planned the war with woefully inadequate troop commitment - now, at long last, after having tried a hundred different things, the first 99 of which failed dismally, we finally figured out what our commanders were telling us along, namely that it`s important to have enough troops to get the job down, and to try to work *with* the real stakeholders, the Iraqi people, to do so." [And if *anyone* deserves credit for the surge it would be - yes, I`m gonna say it - Bush, who pushed it through over the objections of Cheney and the other Neocons - and General Petraeus, who also believed it was the last best chance to succeed there, knew it was a huge gamble, and whose ass was on the line in the actual theater of war as a result.] Yeah, awesome call there, John. Of course just 2 months ago he was mercilessly lacing into Obama for proposing a timetable for exit as being a "cut and run", and guess what? That`s exactly what the administration is doing now.

[quote]Anyway, I`m thrilled. We`ve got an truly interesting election ahead of us. The first black candidate, a "maverick" candidate, the first Republican female candidate. Lots of interesting story lines. The polls are close. Will the youth vote come out for Obama? Can he inspire lots of new voters? How many people will tell the pollster that race doesn`t matter yet change their mind when the enter the voting booth? Can Palin learn national and foreign policy issues in just a few weeks? Will she bring a significant number of females over to McCain? Truly fascinating.[/QUOTE]
Well, at least one thing we agree on. :)

[QUOTE=ewmayer;141466]I heard McCain brag loud and long about his backing of the Iraqi troop "surge" as being "the right strategy". Can there really be such a thing in a war which was completely wrong to begin with? All it says to me is that "we planned the war with woefully inadequate troop commitment - now, at long last, after having tried a hundred different things, the first 99 of which failed dismally, we finally figured out what our commanders were telling us along, namely that it`s important to have enough troops to get the job down, and to try to work *with* the real stakeholders, the Iraqi people, to do so."[/QUOTE]Those who forget the history of WW1 are doomed to repeat it.

Eventually, the generals on both sides realised that week-long artillery bombardments merely gave the enemy a week to prepare for the inevitable infantry charge --- which got nowhere. Thereafter, the artillery shelled (and I classify Stukas as a form of air-borne artillery) for an hour or two to make the enemy keep the head down and [i]then[/i] sent in the infantry and the cavalry (which by then was riding what we now call tanks and APCs instead of horses).

Since then, of course, those who try to re-fight WW2 tend to have a hard time on the battlefield. Blame CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera, satellite phones and the interweb thingy for a large part of that.


Paul

[QUOTE=ewmayer;141466]The problem is, the very lateness of the "introduction" puts pressure on her to tell us a lot more than some cute soccer-mom jokes.[/quote]

Palin is to be interviewed by ABC News and to appear on CBS' "Face the Nation". I've not heard the exact dates. Should be interesting.

[quote]And having [or lacking] the judgment to recognize an unjust trumped-up war of aggression is irrelevant?[/quote]

Very relevant. Obama mentions his superior judgment on this point frequently.

[quote]I heard McCain brag loud and long about his backing of the Iraqi troop "surge" as being "the right strategy". Can there really be such a thing in a war which was completely wrong to begin with?[/quote]

Yes. Once the war was waged and Bush's head-in-the-sand-for-three-years-strategy failed, McCain's judgment that a troop surge was the best way forward was correct. McCain rightly mentions it frequently.

[quote]Of course just 2 months ago he was mercilessly lacing into Obama for proposing a timetable for exit as being a "cut and run", and guess what? That`s exactly what the administration is doing now.[/QUOTE]

Going forward from here, both candidates Iraq policy is almost the same. Both will slowly draw down troops as the Iraqis handle more responsibility.

[quote=Prime95;141480]Once the war was waged and Bush's head-in-the-sand-for-three-years-strategy failed, McCain's judgment that a troop surge was the best way forward was correct.[/quote]"was correct"? Mightn't that opinion be premature? We don't really know the outcome yet. (Compare [I]Bush v. Mission Accomplished[/I])

[quote]Both will slowly draw down troops as the Iraqis handle more responsibility.[/quote]But McCain was [I]against[/I] that before he was for that, wasn't he? (Compare [I]Palin v. B. T. Nowhere[/I])

McCain/Palin: Lying Scumbags
 

First we had the McCain ad that ran over and over during the Olympics, featuring John "Mr. Green Energy" McCain superimposed on a field of wind turbines - the very same kinds of wind turbines which McCain repeatedly voted against providing Government funding for.

Now in the latest blatant-lie ad, we have a voice saying that Sarah Palin was against the Bridge to Nowhere .. without adding the tiny detail that she only flipped her position after it became too much of a political hot potato.

George, it baffles me that an intelligent truth-seeking individual like yourself can find something to like in these lying scumbags.

But based on the latest national polls, a whole lot of our nation appears to enjoy being lied to, especially when the faces doing the lying are attractive white ones. But then again, we already knew that after nearly 8 years of being lied to by the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Greenspan Axis of Incompetence - I had however hoped that after seeing the dire results of all the lies and incompetence, "the average voter" might have developed at least a tiny bit of healthy skepticism. Seems I was wrong.