McCain's Choice for Running Mate

[Starman]

I don't think it's a good idea, because the VP pick seems more about strategies for winning the election than about doing the job well should the McCain/Palin ticket win, though I'm sure the thinking is that they can't do the job if they don't win. This is the sad state of politics in the United States.

On the other hand, I like the idea of a women in the Whitehouse.

She's also hot, and I especially like that commercial in which she's shooting an assult rifle.

[seeker5]

It's obvious that McCain picked Paulin because she's a woman. That's the only reason she was picked really - it seems he wanted to shake things up by having a woman on and he looked for the best one that he could put on. That's the only explanation for him having picked someone with so little experience after he spent so many months talking about how much experience matters so much.

That's unfortunate. With Hillary - she got the support she got not because she was a woman, but because of who she was. Although, on the other hand, at least Paulin got to where she got without relying on her husband's career - she did it by being her own woman. Whereas Hillary would never have gotten known had her husband not being elected President in the first place.

Although, on the other hand, had Hillary not being so close to winning the Democratic nomination, I bet McCain would never have considered Paulin for his ticket.

For McCain to pick someone as VP who:

• He has has only met once?! --

Well, Clinton only met Al Gore twice before picking him as VP Candidate. His pick proved to be very beneficial.

Hilariously inept. I was literally laughing out loud about it all day yesterday.

Remember though, you're not a swing voter being targeted, so while you may find it funny, Palin may be able to add the 2-3% points needed in some battleground states to push McCain to win. The two campaigns are now targeting in part those who don't pay much attentions to politics - those who decide with very minimal information at the last minute.

When I read McCain's pick, I immediately thought to myself "Damn, McCain just won the election".

But man, that's one hot and attractive looking vice president candidate!

[Eric Revelin]

Originally Posted by NightSpirit

I think it's the most important thing to the person who is being aborted. Low taxes, good health care and foreign policies don't mean much if you are dead. It's not just a political viewpoint and I know it's debatable but people who vote against unrestricted abortion rights really think a person is dying when a woman has an abortion. I guess people who think it's okay don't think it is a person. At least I hope no one is thinking it's a baby and killing it anyway or voting to allow it.

It may sound callous, but we can't save every life, born or unborn. And the other side of the argument is that the system that saves the unborn doesn't provide for them when they're here. George Carlin once joked that pro-life is actually pro-death because ultimately the children that aren't cared for or educated end up in the military because they can't do anything else. The sad part is that it's often true. Too often, in fact.

Now, I'm not for unrestricted abortion rights, but we've got much bigger issues to contend with. Morally it's a gray issue and I think the better approach is to forget legality and remedy the circumstances that make abortion an appealing option. IE, take care of the children we already have, the ones who are naked and neglected, poor and starving, and then when we're taking care of them and we can handle newborns that would otherwise be aborted, we restrict legal abortion to cases where the mother risks life or injury if she births the child naturally.

The scenario I'm talking about only works in utopia. I don't think we're going to have utopia even if we all agree to get along and start working together. However, issues like abortion distract us from other important issues, and they convince people to vote against a candidate that may be better suited to the job overall. Furthermore, we can get a lot more done if we spend less energy perpetuating circular debates and we focus on avenues that would lead to a good solution for all of us. It's unlikely that humanity as a whole will ever reach a consensus on abortion, but I think we can all agree that taking care of our kids is a big priority, and if we put plans into motion to better the lives of our young ones, we can hail the virtues of adoption (and many who would otherwise be poor will be in a position to take care of their child, thus they would never consider abortion) and lessen the number of abortions that way.

Frankly I don't think moral issues and personal issues should be decided by the federal government, period. I think it would be better to leave abortion up to the states, and for the government to butt out of marriage altogether, gay or straight. This country is too large and diverse to impose one form of morality on everyone.

I know it's pointless to make arguments for how things should be when they aren't that way and probably won't ever be that way, but I've said what I've said to remind us that the government only gets to decide those things because we, the people, clamor for them to get involved in our lives. I feel that that's the biggest issue in modern day America. That's why I'm not voting for either of the so-called "historic" candidacies: they're both going to increase the size of government in ways that are undesirable. We need to stop imposing our wills upon other segments of the population, we need to stop demanding absolute adherence to the way we think things should be, and we need to start looking for solutions that may not be ideal but act as a middle ground between warring factions. It's time for the human race to grow up.

[Dan.Linehan]

These videos basically sum it up for me.

YouTube - Kerry - Harsh Remarks About McCain & VP

YouTube - GOP VP pick Sarah Palin laughs at cancer surviving senator being called a "♥♥♥♥♥"

YouTube - Palin has security experience b/c Alaska is close to Russia


Palin is a simply ludicrous pick. Still hilarious.

And now babygate too.. lol.

[Barcs]

Originally Posted by Eric Revelin

It may sound callous, but we can't save every life, born or unborn. And the other side of the argument is that the system that saves the unborn doesn't provide for them when they're here. George Carlin once joked that pro-life is actually pro-death because ultimately the children that aren't cared for or educated end up in the military because they can't do anything else. The sad part is that it's often true. Too often, in fact.

Now, I'm not for unrestricted abortion rights, but we've got much bigger issues to contend with. Morally it's a gray issue and I think the better approach is to forget legality and remedy the circumstances that make abortion an appealing option. IE, take care of the children we already have, the ones who are naked and neglected, poor and starving, and then when we're taking care of them and we can handle newborns that would otherwise be aborted, we restrict legal abortion to cases where the mother risks life or injury if she births the child naturally.

The scenario I'm talking about only works in utopia. I don't think we're going to have utopia even if we all agree to get along and start working together. However, issues like abortion distract us from other important issues, and they convince people to vote against a candidate that may be better suited to the job overall. Furthermore, we can get a lot more done if we spend less energy perpetuating circular debates and we focus on avenues that would lead to a good solution for all of us. It's unlikely that humanity as a whole will ever reach a consensus on abortion, but I think we can all agree that taking care of our kids is a big priority, and if we put plans into motion to better the lives of our young ones, we can hail the virtues of adoption (and many who would otherwise be poor will be in a position to take care of their child, thus they would never consider abortion) and lessen the number of abortions that way.

Frankly I don't think moral issues and personal issues should be decided by the federal government, period. I think it would be better to leave abortion up to the states, and for the government to butt out of marriage altogether, gay or straight. This country is too large and diverse to impose one form of morality on everyone.

I know it's pointless to make arguments for how things should be when they aren't that way and probably won't ever be that way, but I've said what I've said to remind us that the government only gets to decide those things because we, the people, clamor for them to get involved in our lives. I feel that that's the biggest issue in modern day America. That's why I'm not voting for either of the so-called "historic" candidacies: they're both going to increase the size of government in ways that are undesirable. We need to stop imposing our wills upon other segments of the population, we need to stop demanding absolute adherence to the way we think things should be, and we need to start looking for solutions that may not be ideal but act as a middle ground between warring factions. It's time for the human race to grow up.

Wow, you said exactly what I was going to say. Thanks for saving me the time!

The whole thing about abortion is that it is purely based on a belief. A belief that A) the baby has a soul as soon as it is conceived, and B) that if a baby is aborted they automatically go to heaven or hell, and not get another chance. Both of these are unproven, so how can they be written into law? It is practically appeal to magic, which is a fallacy. Also, wouldn't an all loving, all powerful benevolent god, simply put the baby's soul into a different baby? That makes far more sense.

Why should all of America have to conform to one set of beliefs? THAT is the part that doesn't make sense to me. Compare the people in NYC with the people in Arkansas or Texas. You will find huge differences, in both political beliefs and religious beliefs. Why should both vastly different cultures have to conform to one or the other? This is why it should be the local governments who deal with abortion. It should not be a deciding factor in a presidential election. This is America, the land of the free. All religions should have equal rights, and not be forced to follow one set of ideals, simply because it is one man's (the president's) belief. So, if you are against abortion, don't get an abortion. If you aren't, then get one. It's really that simple.

[NightSpirit]

I started a new thread to answer because this is a sensitive issue and I didn't want someone to have to think about things that may be painful by accident. Here's the link. Abortion rights and voting

[Trustme]

Originally Posted by Niki

If I was an American I went out there and voted for Obama. It's just so obvious from here.

I second that.

[jokerman]

Here's a haiku to express my feelings about Palin...

Way unqualified
McCain must be quite horny
Republicans suck

[pkeod]

Originally Posted by jokerman

Here's a haiku to express my feelings about Palin...

Way unqualified
McCain must be horny
Republicans suck

You're missing a syllable on the second line :P

Twenty million debt
Left to those before in snow
Four more years of fail?

[coollikeme]

Way unqualified
What has he done
Dems are wrong as always

[MariaIsabel]

I am upset by this choice. Very, very upset. I thought that perhaps in this election there might be actual discussion of issues-there are so many pressing ones-, but again it's about personality. I thought it was a cynical ploy designed to get votes from a certain constituency, one that believes but doesn't think too much. I'm sorry to say this. Belief is very important but so is logical, careful consideration of the facts. It disturbs me that she believes in creationism- that biblical stories should be a part of science class. There is nothing wrong with the Bible, but Genesis does not belong in science class. It disturbs me that she doesn't believe that young people should be aware of ways to protect themselves from unwanted pregnancy and STDs-abstinence is great, and should be encouraged for young people who are not emotionally prepared to have sex, but if young people do have sex, which they do, they should have ways of protecting themselves from undesired consequences.

The way she has her family on display disturbs me. I do not think it's good to get married and have children at 17. I think it's preferable that young women should go to college. The odds are against a girl who makes such a decision. Some succeed but most do not. Why do they act like this is such a fantastic thing, say it's a private affair, but then flaunt it in front of everybody! Whatever happened to good taste?

The same old talk about "Washington elites" disturbs me. The way she bashes the journalists bothers me. I am tired of the "liberal press" mantra. I believe journalists go to school to learn how to report the facts as acurately as humanly possible. The people need information if they are to form correct opinions and function in a democracy. Again we see the attack on facts and reason. I am so tired of that.

I understand that her "standing up to big oil" was really about getting more money for her state, not about any kind of move to protect the environment or move away from dependancy on fosil fuels. She supports drilling in the wildlife reserve. I thought McCain was supposed to be an environmentalist. I hate this drill more mentality. I think there is an interesting parallel between being a dinosaur oneself and depending on fosil fuel. One of the reasons Russia is able to invade Georgia is because we finance them with petrol dollars. Is there really enough oil in ANWAR to make a dent immediately? Wouldn't it be smarter to put our money into a renewable alternative? Hell, even Israel is setting up an electric car network run on renewable energy. It isn't some pie in the sky thing: it starts next year!

There is so much more. I feel like the country is tilting more and more toward mediocrity. FDR wanted the best and the brightest to run the country. Whatever happened to that? It also bothers me that fundamentally these people don't really believe the government can do anything, so why are they running for government? They are fantastic at winning elections but when it comes to running things, they suck. I also hate this no taxes thing they always spout. Nobody likes paying taxes, but it's also pretty lousy to be caught on a collapsing bridge or to have lousy schools, no medical research, no scientific research, no investment in our nation's future. There's no such thing as a free lunch. Someone always has to pay the piper. Restructuring the tax code so that the very rich kick in more sounds like common sense to me.

I am very upset, in short, because I think the choice speaks volumes about winning an election, and it seems that this is all that matters to some, and being mean to people that they call "liberal".

[Still Growing]

Maria,
I agree with most of what you said however if you think the Dem's are any different...

I do not believe that I've seen her family really anymore than I've seen Obama's.

Also the conservatives (which I'm not one) constantly talk about liberals much in the same fashion that Dems talk about conservatives. Not all Democrats are extreme liberals and not all Republicans are extreme conservatives.

As an outsider to both parties who sometimes vote Democratic and sometime Republican based upon the office, the person, etc. its my opinion that you are just as one sided in your post as the conservatives are.

I don't mean to be offensive or argumentative. I basically agree with your critical observations of the Republican party except that the Dems don't do the same things in their own way.

[Still Growing]

Originally Posted by jokerman

Here's a haiku to express my feelings about Palin...

Way unqualified
McCain must be quite horny
Republicans suck

I hope you're joking because the "Republicans suck" is against the forum rules.

[coollikeme]

One of the reasons Russia is able to invade Georgia is because we finance them with petrol dollars.

--So if we drilled for are own oil maybe just, maybe we would not have to finance any other country.

Wouldn't it be smarter to put our money into a renewable alternative?

--US needs to have every form of energy at its disposal. Renewable alternative energy. We have from wind power to solar power and there is no plan to even make that work. Clintons and Bushes had 16 years between the both of them and there is no plan. Dems went on vacation when it was time to vote on an energy bill, and Bush lifted the ban on drilling for political reasons. There is no plan its plain and simple and its going to get ugly.

Here is the solution. Drill, solar, wind, hydro, gas and any other you can think of. Use them all its that simple.

[Still Growing]

So true cool.

[JMan]

Originally Posted by coollikeme

Here is the solution. Drill, solar, wind, hydro, gas and any other you can think of. Use them all its that simple.

...which is much like the plan McCain has been proposing: John McCain 2008 - John McCain for President

[MariaIsabel]

Curiously enough, American ground forces entered Pakastani soil for the first time yesterday. What are we talking about? Governor Palin and the "culture wars" once again.

[MariaIsabel]

Thank you, Still Growing, for your reply to my post. I do not criticize the Republican party in my post. I criticize certain positions the Republican party takes.

It is true that Barack Obama puts his family on stage, as all pols do, I suppose to show that they are human. What I find objectionable is that in this case, whether it is the intention of Gov Palin or not, her daughter, as well as her son with downs syndrome, are held up as, or are taken to be, points in a political position: i.e. the "pro-life" stance. It is not merely that I say this, I have seen this in the media time and again. "Look, she's someone who talks the talk and walks the walk." It's great for her family that she could make that choice and that it works for her, but I object to the political position she holds that abortion should be criminalized and that there should be no public funding for sex education or birth control, therefore making it impossible for other people to choose what works for them and their own families.

I do not care if people are Republican or Democrat. I was excited this election because I thought John McCain was going to be a different kind of Republican candidate. I thought he was going to stand up to the more extreme elements of his party and bring a more sensible, middle-of-the-road approach to governing that everyone could live with. Yet it seems that he needs the extreme ends of the party to get elected, hence his choice of Gov Palin, who I am sorry, holds extreme positions on many of the issues.

Your "tu quoque" arguments about the Democrats really isn't an argument about the issue. If the Democrats do the same thing then we should be more demanding of our political system as a whole, should we not? And that's another thread that I'd be glad to participate in. In the meantime, I make the point that I disagree with the choice of Gov Palin as the Vice Presidential candidate.

[MariaIsabel]

Originally Posted by coollikeme

One of the reasons Russia is able to invade Georgia is because we finance them with petrol dollars.

--So if we drilled for are own oil maybe just, maybe we would not have to finance any other country.

Wouldn't it be smarter to put our money into a renewable alternative?

--US needs to have every form of energy at its disposal. Renewable alternative energy. We have from wind power to solar power and there is no plan to even make that work. Clintons and Bushes had 16 years between the both of them and there is no plan. Dems went on vacation when it was time to vote on an energy bill, and Bush lifted the ban on drilling for political reasons. There is no plan its plain and simple and its going to get ugly.

Here is the solution. Drill, solar, wind, hydro, gas and any other you can think of. Use them all its that simple.

This is true, but I believe drilling should be limited and controlled by environmental standards set by science and a responsible government not by industry. Conservation is missing from your equation, as well. But I tell you, it would send a strong message, indeed, and would be a boon to our economy if we could see some serious investment in alternative and renewable fuel sources and ways to use the existing energy sources more efficiently and affordably.

[Dan.Linehan]

Originally Posted by coollikeme

--US needs to have every form of energy at its disposal. Renewable alternative energy. We have from wind power to solar power and there is no plan to even make that work. Clintons and Bushes had 16 years between the both of them and there is no plan. Dems went on vacation when it was time to vote on an energy bill, and Bush lifted the ban on drilling for political reasons. There is no plan its plain and simple and its going to get ugly.

Here is the solution. Drill, solar, wind, hydro, gas and any other you can think of. Use them all its that simple.

Didn't McCain vote against all the things you mention?

In 2005, for example, McCain voted against a series of amendments to an energy bill that set higher goals for the use of renewable energy. One proposal required refineries to use 8-billion gallons of renewable fuel by 2012 and another required 10 percent of electricity sold by utilities by 2020 be produced by renewable energy. Both passed and were included in the final bill, which McCain voted against.

[Dannyboy1]

She has no experience. She's younger than Obama. Those were the two things McCain was using to attack Obama and now he can't use them. Biden is going to crush her in debate. She has no chance against him. If McCain dies, no one is going to want her to run the country and forget about foreign policy. She wanted Alaska to secede from the union, her teenager is pregnant... I don't know what the McCain camp was thinking but I'm glad they did it.

[Dan.Linehan]

Originally Posted by Dannyboy1

I don't know what the McCain camp was thinking but I'm glad they did it.

This doesn't seem like a McCain camp decision as much as a reactionary choice by McCain himself.

[coollikeme]

Biden is going down in this debate. Miss Palin is smart and quick as a whip. Her speech was hard hitting and tenacious. She only had 30 minutes, so she did not have the chance to get into the specifics of her standpoint on all issues. Biden will be a poodle, when she get through with him. For Biden it will be hard to attack someone you don't know. Obama, what was his biggest accomplishment can someone enlighten me?

[Dannyboy1]

Originally Posted by coollikeme

Biden is going down in this debate. Miss Palin is smart and quick as a whip. Her speech was hard hitting and tenacious. She only had 30 minutes, so she did not have the chance to get into the specifics of her standpoint on all issues. Biden will be a poodle, when she get through with him. For Biden it will be hard to attack someone you don't know. Obama, what was his biggest accomplishment can someone enlighten me?

Read my post two up from yours. That's my response.

[Dan.Linehan]

Originally Posted by coollikeme

Biden is going down in this debate.

We'll see. I don't think Palin knows her stuff (how could she?) and it will show if she doesn't. But we'll see.

Palin seems to have a severe, severe lack of judgment. That's my main concern. Like saying last night that terrorists shouldn't have rights? That's a statement clearly lacking in judgment, clearly lacking in historical and legislative understanding, clearly founded in prejudice. Every human has rights, it's what our nation was founded on.

Every human being has a right to a fair trial. Otherwise the war on terrorism becomes nothing more than a witch hunt, one where people can be thrown into jail or murdered for doing nothing provable wrong.

Originally Posted by coollikeme

Obama, what was his biggest accomplishment can someone enlighten me?

• Elected Harvard Law Review president over 18 others.
  
  
• Passed up myriad lucrative offers after his law school graduation to work in the Chicago inner city.
  
  
• Been involved with over 800 Senate bills on a variety of topics.

But again, despite all of Obama's experience (and there are decades worth, despite what anyone says) it really comes down to judgment.

As in, not making rash decisions, truly working for middle ground and for the public best interest, not trying to appeal to the worst in human nature (fear and xenophobia) etc.

[Barcs]

every human has rights, the right to a fail trial for example.

I know you meant fair trial, but these days, that statement above is much more true! Sorry, I got a good chuckle thinking about that. George Bush would be the first to have a "fail" trial. hehe.

[Dan.Linehan]

Originally Posted by Barcs

I know you meant fair trial, but these days, that statement above is much more true! Sorry, I got a good chuckle thinking about that. George Bush would be the first to have a "fail" trial. hehe.

Corrected it.

I chuckled too when I saw that.

[MariaIsabel]

Did anyone see/hear the Sarah Palin speech? Oi veh.

[frajilthunder]

Originally Posted by Dannyboy1

Read my post two up from yours. That's my response.

Yeah, I can't wait for the VP debate. When all this was going down in Georgia, the Georgian president called Biden himself to visit. Dude is on first name basis with the leaders of countries that Palin couldn't find on a map.

[coollikeme]

Obama, what was his biggest accomplishment can someone enlighten me? Please tell me there's more than that Dan? Obama's experience sounds very limited to me.