Palin real change!!

[coollikeme]

How many would rather have Palin for president?BBC NEWS | Americas | Palin takes battle to Democrats

[Akashic_Librarian]

four words my friend.

She is a Creationist.

End of story.

[frajilthunder]

It would scare me to death (or at least to Canada) to have Palin as president. She's not giving interviews right now beacuse she doesn't know foriegn policy. Joe Liberman is teaching her foreign policy as we speak. If McCain is elected and gives up the ghost, the military/industrial complex will have their way with her. She was selected as VP to shore up the evangelical base and to attract feminists who are stupid enough to vote for her just because she is female.

[frajilthunder]

Originally Posted by surferboy

What upsets me the most is that the media never asked Obama "the tough questions" and he is running for president. The media are dying to dig their claws into her like a dog in heat, but they have not questioned Obama about his relationship with William Aires even after it has come out that BarryO was more than just an acquaintance with the known terrorist.

Well, he was questioned about that, on live TV, during a debate, months ago. I'm guessing what upsets you the most is that the story never grew legs. Also, I was under the impression that Aires was a mere casual acquaintance with Obama. Would you mind citing your claim?

Also, when you pick someone with almost zero national exposure and seemingly little vetting, of course the media is dying to find out more about her. Palin refusing to hit the Sunday morning talk circuit this week should give voters pause. If she's not ready for Meet the Press, she's not ready to be VP.

[Liveformx64]

Originally Posted by Akashic_Librarian

four words my friend.

She is a Creationist.

End of story.

And what exactly is Obama, professing to be a Christian?

You guys and your Obama, or Palin colored Glasses only chose to see what you want to see. There is a million conspiracy theories to support whatever you want to believe.

At the end of the day, know the facts, and vote with your heart. The more you meddle in threads like this the more clouded your judgment becomes.

[Barcs]

"Palin real change"

Where do you see change in her? She is documented as saying that the war in Iraq is "god's plan". She believes creationism should be taught in SCIENCE class and is against teaching safe sex. What is she trying to change? Please give me a rundown of them, because to me she seems more like "stay the same, or even go backwards". Separation of church and state is necessary, and this lady is going to destroy that if she ever gets in. Yes, I will consider moving to Canada as well if she ever becomes president. McCain is at least somewhat tolerable and is virtually guaranteed an improvement over Bush, but Palin could actually be worse.

And what exactly is Obama, professing to be a Christian?

You guys and your Obama, or Palin colored Glasses only chose to see what you want to see. There is a million conspiracy theories to support whatever you want to believe.

At the end of the day, know the facts, and vote with your heart. The more you meddle in threads like this the more clouded your judgment becomes.

I think you misunderstand the word "creationist". It's not one who believes in creation. It's one who believes creationist science (which is not science) should be taught in schools. Read a creationist website and learn what they actually teach and believe. It's not just believing that god exists. It has to do with ignoring evolution and believing ridiculous "scientific" points like "The great flood was caused because god made a huge sheet of ice surrounding the earth. He melted it when he wanted to cause the flood". Imagine stuff like that being taught in a science class!

[coollikeme]

Maybe that's what we need, is someone that does not have the same old thoughts on foreign policy. Maybe we need to look at are foreign policy from someone, other than the old administration. Because it is definitely not working, the way it is now. What we need now is someone that won't have, that old guard thinking.

[Barcs]

We don't even know Palin's stance on foreign policy yet, so we can't make assumptions about it. All we know is that she is pro war and thinks it is god's plan. The last thing we need is another leader justifying war with "god's plan" or similar nonsense. We already had that for the last 8 years. Obama is at least willing to sit down and speak with leaders who might oppose us, and negotiate. Bush refuses to even speak with them. We definitely need change as far as that's concerned, but I'd still like to see why you think that Palin is going to bring change.

[jokerman]

Here is the end of the story, as I see it…

Obama wins decisively, as no amount of Republican machination and spin can distort the obvious:

1. Obama is a young, incredibly bright and compassionate public servant with a strategic and pragmatic running mate in Joe Biden, who is a great consultant on foreign policy, especially in the Middle-East.
-1. McCain is approaching senility and death and is a prideful warhawk (a bad combo if you ask me), and has a running mate from whom he can learn nothing of importance on a global level, and who is simply not ready to step in as president if something happens to him.

2. Obama is a social progressive, meaning he will base his policies on rational thought in service of the greatest good for the greatest many, even transcending national and religious divisions.
-2. McCain has already reneged on some crucial social positions to appease the extreme right, and Palin is an extreme social conservative. Their policies will reflect many archaic notions that rational thought easily dismisses as absurd.

3. Obama/Biden belong to the same party as Clinton/Gore, who oversaw a time of great economic prosperity in this country and relatively astounding peace, as well as increased environmental awareness and technical innovation.
-3. McCain is following in the footsteps of the most bungled presidency in the history of the country--an excruciating 8 years in which Bush/Cheney/etc. failed to prevent a terrible terrorist attack they were forewarned was coming, turned the surplus into enormous debt, severely weakened the economy, turned a blind eye to global warming, pursued tragically ill-conceived military action leading to thousands of lost innocent lives, continually lied to its own constituency and transgressed the law in the name of executive privilege, even going so far as to alienate a large contingent of its own party. And they couldn't even get Bin Laden!!!!!!!

4. Lastly, Obama is a representational pioneer, in a time when status and race is still extremely divisive. Not only is he black, but he is bi-racial. Not only is he smart and a family man, but he came from poor beginnings in a single-parent household. He has transcended many barriers on his path, and that serves as an inspiration to people.
-4. McCain crashed a bunch of planes then got caught. And now he's old. I, for one, am not inspired.

## I will give McCain this: he is better than Bush. I would have much rather had him as president the last 8 years than Bush. I would even have preferred Palin to Cheney, as at least she would have been ineffectual on a global level instead of ineffectual AND endangering.

[Liveformx64]

Here is the end of the story, as I see it…

Obama wins decisively, as no amount of Republican machination and spin can distort the obvious:

underestimation of the opposition, and the American public could be the downfall of the Obama/Biden ticket.

[jokerman]

Originally Posted by Liveformx64

underestimation of the opposition, and the American public could be the downfall of the Obama/Biden ticket.

As with Kerry four years ago, I think their downfall could be overestimation of the American public. I don't think they underestimate the lengths the Republicans will go to to get elected, but I do question their ability to "play the game" as ruthlessly as them, which might be necessary. We'll see...

[jokerman]

Of course the swing states are all important. However, even the overall polls show a close race (some polls slightly favor one or the other, and some show a dead heat).

No doubt it will be a hard-fought battle. My point is it should be a slam-dunk for Obama if the populace votes rationally, which is the big IF that will decide the election.

What it CANNOT come down to, under any circumstance, is underhanded tactics, such as voter disenfranchisement. If the election must be close, then the process must be totally transparent and non-controversial (unlike the travesty of 2000).

Here's hoping that the swing state voters take their responsibility very seriously and make the right decision for the country + world as a whole, and not just themselves.

[Liveformx64]

real change will start in our government with the breakup of the two party system. Then, and only then will any REAL change begin to happen.

Until then. Those in power will do whatever necessary to stay in power.

[Fullcrum]

If you read wikipedia, it clearly states that Palin supports the teaching of Creationism in schools and that Obama does not. If you read their websites, it states the same thing.

This is one reason why I would not support them, as I believe that form of education does not belong in a public and secular school system.

I'm sure McCain and Palin are fine people. They look nice enough to be sure. I wouldn't judge them as people. And they are products of their culture - McCain being in a military family who served with one son about to serve and one who had already, and Palin with her own Alaskan culture. They are quite distinct people. Just like Obama, actually.

But will these people aid the economic prosperity of our country with their policies? Will they make our citizens more intelligent, more conscious? Will they increase the amount of choice and freedom we as citizens have? I think not. Think about abortion - they wish to overturn Roe v. Wade and leave it up to the states to decide. Then, they want to eventually phase abortion out of existence all together. This is the policy stated on McCain's website. Do you think this could result in a mass migration of young women to states that allow abortion if worse comes to worse? Maybe, just maybe. Even if that were not to occur, it would decrease the amount of choice citizens have. You might say "But if each state can decide, then there is definitely more choice!" I would point out that today, everyone has the choice. It would not be limited to certain states.

It seems, to me at least, that Obama would allow people to make more conscious decisions and be better for our country. But if anyone can prove me wrong, I am open to it.

[Liveformx64]

I would say the biggest point for the McCain party is National Security. Not that it is necessarily true. But I think the base level connection is made between him and his time in service.

How does an Obama supporter speak for his competence in this area? I am not sold on either side, but I do find myself saying, without national security we don't have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of.

I find it hilarious that on an otherwise very civil and mellow message board that promotes understanding and tolerance has a dark side of rhetoric and punditry. It seems most of the pundits who throw out the one liners stick to the world affairs section, like a drunkard at their local watering hole.

Have any regulars noticed this?

[Jonathan Browne]

Joe Biden is a formidable choice of vice president compared to palin. If you read his memoir you realize he has an intimate knowledge of international relations. Bush used to actually call him for advice and invited him to brief him personally about international diplomacy before and after 9/11. It wasn't until the neoconservative ideas of Cheney, Rove, Rice etc. won over bush that he started on the completely destructive international policies that have led us to where we are today. Donald Rumsfield was a republican internationalist whereas Cheney and his crew are neoisolationists.

The neocons are the primary problem here. There's actually could be a lot of good in a truly conservative approach (for instance, Ron Paul). However right now the republican party is under the control of the neocons and it's quite clear they are behind the scenes of the John Mccain and Sarah Palin campaign.

With Barack Obama and Joe Biden you have a combination of an extremely charismatic, highly conscious, patient, highly intelligent leader with a fresh perspective (barack) and an extremely experienced politician with a deep understanding of both domestic and international issues, who's actually on a first name basis with many international figures (joe biden).

This is such an obvious choice. The Obama ticket offers real change, and much more intelligent leadership. The Mccain ticket offers mostly the same as the last 8 years, along with a woman whom not even the Mccain campaign knows very well. A woman who may be a skilled politician but is clearly not very knowledgeable about her responsibilities, the issues, or international affairs.

What is it you dislike about to Obamas stances on the issues? I'd love to hear an intelligent criticism about his plans.

[Still Growing]

Johnathan,

To compare Biden's Int'l Relations experience and say its greater than Palins is a reason to vote for Obama is a failing argument because McCain has more Int'l Relathions experience than Obama and he is the one running for President.

What I'm saying is that I think the Dems are falling into a trap. The Reps are secretly smiling everytime the media attacks Palin's lack of experience because then it will only highlight Obama's lack of experience over McCain.

I'm not saying that McCain will win as a result only that it doesn't help your cause to argue over Palin's experience. Its a trap.

If you want Obama to win then you should attack Palin's conservative positions and hope the Independents see that.

Another good argument is that the world is routing for Obama and our USD is weak right now. We need the int'l investment community to start transferring money back into US investments.

[Love]

The possibility that Sarah Palin would become president if McCain is elected (and dies) is frightening. I don't support McCain's policies, but I would not truly be frightened, per se, to have him as president. Palin seems to me just overzealous. I feel like she would become a dominatrix if pushed to presidency.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Still Growing

To compare Biden's Int'l Relations experience and say its greater than Palins is a reason to vote for Obama is a failing argument because McCain has more Int'l Relathions experience than Obama and he is the one running for President.

Here's what McCain said in response to a question from Larry King:

"What area of American international policy would you change immediately as president?"

McCain's reply? "I'd institute a policy that I call 'rogue state rollback.' I would arm, train, equip, both from without and from within, forces that would eventually overthrow the governments and install free and democratically-elected governments."

His first impulse, his first international relations plan as president is military aggression. This is not the the kind of person I want as my country's leader.

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by Love

The possibility that Sarah Palin would become president if McCain is elected (and dies) is frightening. I don't support McCain's policies, but I would not truly be frightened, per se, to have him as president. Palin seems to me just overzealous. I feel like she would become a dominatrix if pushed to presidency.

The idea of Palin trying to stare down Putin, or Ahmadinejad, or any world leader scares me. In fact, it has pushed me from generally apathetic to terrified about this election. McCain, despite his protestations about his health, could die or become unfit any day. In fact, the odds of that over a 4 year span are significant. To ensure that such an event doesn't devastate the country, he chose... Palin? Really?

Forgetting the fact that we didn't have a clue who she was before the announcement, she just doesn't have anything redeeming that she's shown. It seems that McCain chose her in order to get elected. She energizes his base, grabs values voters and brings them to the polls, pulls some disaffected Hillary supporters, and gets him in the media spotlight. But she's unproven, at best.

Obama, being a black man, will have some extremist white supremacist groups hunting for him. The odds of an assassination attempt are not insignificant. To ensure that such an event doesn't devastate the country, he chose... Biden. A guy with significant experience, chairman of Judiciary and Foreign Relations committee, and a proven asset to the country.

[Still Growing]

Originally Posted by Angela

Here's what McCain said in response to a question from Larry King:

"What area of American international policy would you change immediately as president?"

McCain's reply? "I'd institute a policy that I call 'rogue state rollback.' I would arm, train, equip, both from without and from within, forces that would eventually overthrow the governments and install free and democratically-elected governments."

His first impulse, his first international relations plan as president is military aggression. This is not the the kind of person I want as my country's leader.

You are using my quote out of context. Where did I say I wanted McCain as President?

I said that going after Palin's lack of experience is not a winning argument when Obama has less experience than McCain. You are jumping to conclusions that this means I'm for McCain. I went on to say (clearly) that Obama supporters would be more affective in going after their positions such as you outlined above.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Still Growing

You are using my quote out of context. Where did I say I wanted McCain as President?

I said that going after Palin's lack of experience is not a winning argument when Obama has less experience than McCain. You are jumping to conclusions that this means I'm for McCain. I went on to say (clearly) that Obama supporters would be more affective in going after their positions such as you outlined above.

Who is jumping to conclusions? I didn't say anything about you, your positions, the logic of your argument or what it means. I'm not arguing with you; just stating how I feel about this issue. Why so defensive? What I said has nothing to do with you personally.

I was responding to your remark that McCain has more international relations experience than Obama does, as part of your argument. It triggered for me the response that the "experience" McCain has is harmful experience, not helpful, and I won't support his arguments that he's the better candidate because he's got more experience when I can't see that it's going to do anything positive for the world.

[Still Growing]

ThoughtAddict,

I am not for most of Palin's positions because she is a conservative Republican however I don't see that she would have any more trouble than Obama to "stare down" other world leaders as you put it.

Unproven? As governor she has more actual managerial experience than McCain, Obama and Biden.

I think the liberal media first tried to attack her because her daughter was pregnant and they quickly saw that even Obama was having no part of this. Now they are digging and digging try to find something..... anything.

This is politics as usual and its rediculous.

I don't understand why people just don't focus on the positions alone. I guess thats boring.

And the positions are soooo different. With the Republicans we'll get more waring and larger deficit due to the military spending. With the Democrats we'll get more spending put on making the gov't larger than it is today with more social services.

I think we'll loose either way. I'm thinking right now that Obama would be the better vote for our economy but to sit and argue who can stare down someone or who has more experience is fruitless. Lets look at their positions. There's plenty to go after there IMO.

[JMan]

Originally Posted by Still Growing

ThoughtAddict,


I think the liberal media first tried to attack her because her daughter was pregnant and they quickly saw that even Obama was having no part of this. Now they are digging and digging try to find something..... anything.

This is politics as usual and its rediculous.

I agree - they (TV media) spotlighted Palin's daughter, but didn't latch on to Biden's son and Biden's brother, who are being sued for fraud: Biden's Son, Brother Named in Two Suits - washingtonpost.com

Why go after one VP candidate, and not the other? And which issue is criminal?

[coollikeme]

seems to go after women candidates, they went after Hillary Clinton, and it worked!! She loss!! Not that I wanted Hillary to win anyway. I guess Palin is next, but as a man that really belives in equal rights. I will cast my vote for Palin because I am tired of this Liberal bull****. They did not hesitate to go after her in a viscous way.

[Fullcrum]

Wait, are you voting for Palin because she is a woman and you believe in equal rights? What do you mean?

[Brutha]

Joe Biden is a formidable choice of vice president compared to palin. If you read his memoir you realize he has an intimate knowledge of international relations. Bush used to actually call him for advice and invited him to brief him personally about international diplomacy before and after 9/11. It wasn't until the neoconservative ideas of Cheney, Rove, Rice etc. won over bush that he started on the completely destructive international policies that have led us to where we are today.

Biden hasn't exactly a trackrecord of being against the Iraq war. He was one of the people that pushed for it.

I would say the biggest point for the McCain party is National Security.

Acutally that party is called the Republican party.

Not that it is necessarily true. But I think the base level connection is made between him and his time in service.

He still can't tell Sunni and Shia apart.
I think that knowledge in general is something that a president can get very fast by reading relevant intelligence reports and getting good advicers.
It much more important whether someone is interest in truth when it comes to foreign relations.

Iraq didn't went wrong because of politicans not having enough foreign policy experience.
It went wrong because those in power weren't interested in what really happened and didn't practiced crititcal thinking.

Rove is one of the primary people who are responsible for that way of making politics during the Bush administration and McCains lets Rove do his campain.

One of the worst foreign policy decisions in the next years could be to start a war with Iran. Militarly it would be a lot harder to fight that war than to fight the Iraq war.

Experience also doesn't help you to anticipate the big issues.
9/11 wasn't anticipated by anyone with experience.

I don't understand why people just don't focus on the positions alone.

Because what politicans actually do after they get elected into office doesn't entirely depend on positions. New issues come up constantly and it's important to know the politicans form his positions on new issues.

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by Still Growing

ThoughtAddict,

I am not for most of Palin's positions because she is a conservative Republican however I don't see that she would have any more trouble than Obama to "stare down" other world leaders as you put it.

Unproven? As governor she has more actual managerial experience than McCain, Obama and Biden.

The "more experience" line strikes me as disingenuous. Experience as Governor of Alaska doesn't trace experience as the head of the world's remaining (and waning) superpower. That line is a lot of spin, but little substance when you talk about foreign relations. Compared to the Senators who, y'know, hear foreign intelligence briefings and vote on foreign affairs matters, being a governor helps little, it at all.

What I was talking about, more than experience, was a record of doing positive things. It would be nice if the people who want us to elect her (i.e. Palin herself) would give some examples rather than rhetoric. Oh, and honest ones. No more "bridge to nowhere" lies.

I don't understand why people just don't focus on the positions alone. I guess thats boring.

That's exactly what I'm saying. Palin wasn't chosen for her effectiveness, or for having brilliant ideas. She may have them, but we simply don't know... and it seems that McCain doesn't either. She was chosen for the election, not for governing.

If you'd like, I can go point by point over the views she has that I dislike. I could do the same for Obama, Biden and McCain. But my critique here is not a critique of her. It is a critique of McCain and his choice of world leader in the event of his demise. She may be a decent leader, but signs indicate the contrary. But McCain had better choices. He chose the one that would best help him win the election, not the one best suited for the job.

[JonathanBrowne]

Actually, no brutha, that's not the case. Joe Biden did not support the Iraq war. Read his memoir. He has one of the most rationale voices out there on these issues.

As for why I focused on him and not barack, that's because this threads topic is how Palin is going to be "real change".

You know what's absolutely hilarious? The idea that these neoconservatives are trying to run on a platform of change. They aren't going to change a thing, and you all know it, even his supporters know it. They are simply fooling themselves by promoting to others that this ticket offers change. What they really want is more of the same, because they aren't willing to accept they made a bad descision with Bush. They aren't willing to accept that their ideas about 'the liberal media' are ludicrous. They aren't willing to accept that most of Fox News (they do have a few pundits that actually attempt some semblence of being 'fair and balanced') is clearly a shill for the republican party, from the ownership down. They don't want to accept that they made the wrong choice, that they were duped. That their descision for president is what led us to the recession the economy is currently in.

It's not that it's the end of the world or our way of life either way. It's quite simple. You choose Mccaine and you can expect another 4 years of a terrible housing market, low optimism, weak dollar etc. You choose Obama and you can expect high economic optimism, a strengthened dollar, a housing market on the upswing etc.

His policies and careful approach will lead us there. Mccaine feels the economy is fundamentally sound. What he means is that it's still easy to make massive profits if your in the right position. It's still possible to make a lot of money if you know how to or have money to invest. It's easy for the rich to get richer. It is however, much harder than it was 8 years ago for many americans to sell a house, to get a good paying job, and to manage debt. Obama understands these issues, which is the first step to change. Mccaine barely acknowledges their existance.

[Dannyboy1]

Obama New World Leader!