The Official VP Debate Thread

[LL2]

I think more people will watch this VP debate than any other. Sarah Palin brings that "it" or intrigue factor. Most VP debates have little or no bearing on who wins the presidency, but I think this one will be different. I will go out on a limb and say that this debate will give McCain one more boost in the polls prior to election day. If I'm wrong I will get one of these from :roll: PIP, or worse one of these from :lol: Tyrone, but unlike Tyrone at least I will not be afraid to admit I'm wrong down the road. Hey, if she is going to be a game changer tonight is her chance.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Hey, if she is going to be a game changer tonight is her chance.
+1

This is it for her. If she can bring it tonight she'll get a lot more respect and it may start to move things towards McCain.

[texaspackerbacker]

Speaking as OBJECTIVELY as I can, McCain did very little to distinguish his views and positions from Obama's. Palin WILL spell out a large and obvious distinction between her views, values, and positions, and those of obama/Biden. For better or worse, the people watching this debate--and there is every indication that there will be a lot of them--will have a clear choice.

(Now leaving OBJECTIVITY MODE), I've been saying all along, McCain/Palin--PARTICULARLY Palin are MUCH more in tune with the vast majority of America. Assuming she articulates her positions well, that will be proven by polls in days to come, and especially on Nov. 4.

[Jimx29]

I'm confident that the debate will be many times funnier that "The Office" that's it's interrupting......

[MadScientist]

She's likely to do well enough to stop the bleeding for McCain, but she won't reverse things. Now that the hoopla of the conventions and selections are over, the changeable votes may vote against a VP,but it's the top of the ticket that the'll vote for.

[Kiwon]

Hey, if she is going to be a game changer tonight is her chance.
+1

This is it for her. If she can bring it tonight she'll get a lot more respect and it may start to move things towards McCain.

It's 2 against 1 with Gwen Ifill on stage asking the questions so if Sarah Palin does well then it will be a significant accomplishment.

But, no matter what happens we know the chattering class will spin it for Obama/Biden.

For example, like clockwork, every day USA Today's front page has at least one headline article promoting Obama and one headline article diminishing McCain. Every day.

Often the McCain story really doesn't have that much negative in it, BUT the writer chooses the negative part to fashion into the featured headline. The result is that the casual reader (the majority of readers) who don’t read the inside story for the context only reads the negative headline. Mission accomplished by USA Today.

This election is largely about the arrogance of the media who believe that they are kingmakers. Obama/Biden and the Democratic Party are their friends and they are calculatedly in sync to see them in power.

Journalism is an honorable profession but journalists of this generation have wedded themselves to a far-left ideology and this election is as much of a referendum on them and their influence as it is anything else.

[HowardRoark]

The first words out of Katie’s mouth after the debate; “the headline tonight is that Sarah Palin did not embarrass herself.”

Hopefully the headline soon will be:

Katie Couric finally fired at CBS; a miserable failure and waste of money

[texaspackerbacker]

Well, the media seems to be saying good things about her.

I thought she was OK. Like McCain, she played to the nation, not so much to the conservative base. I suppose that's why I'm not more enthusiastic.

Two times, she had the opportunity to confront the horrors of liberalism, and she did not. One was when Biden was so dogmatic about the cause of global warming--she passed on arguing the point. The other was when Biden actually bragged about Borking Judge Bork and promoting sinister judicial activism--having the GALL to oppose Republican judicial appointees on partisan political grounds. I REALLY wish she had chastized Biden severely for that.

It's kinda like when you really want your team to go for it on 4th down, and then they don't--and you end up winning the game.

Sarah Palin was aiming at moderates and undecided voters. I guess that's a good thing. I'm just a little bit disappointed--like when it's 4th and 1 at mid field and the punter comes out.

[Kiwon]

It was a good debate. Both did okay.

Fortunately, Ifill was on her best behavior.

Other than Sarah Palin giving a pass to the government for the current financial mess, she did very well.

I predict the vilification of her will increase now that she's 2 for 2 in making a speech on the national stage.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Wow. Who knew Mac and Palin were populists. :oops:

I heard Palin is Tom Joad's first cousin on her mom's side.

[HowardRoark]

Wow. Who knew Mac and Palin were populists. :oops:

Let's see....average Americans vs. Elites, hmmmm, I guess everyone but you knew this.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I thought both of them did a very good job overall. This was labelled to be a "gaffe fest" before it started but I really didn't see anything major on those during the debate. Palin said too many slogans instead of answers at times. That would really be my only criticsm of hers. Biden was really reigning himself in and you could tell he wanted to just keep going. He seemed stilted with his answers at the end of some questions on occasion because of that.

Neither candidate did anything to hurt their party. For the VP debates, that's the best you can hope for.

[MadScientist]

Wow. Who knew Mac and Palin were populists. :oops:

Let's see....average Americans vs. Elites, hmmmm, I guess everyone but you knew this.
Your comparison only makes sense if your are looking at intelligence. I'll take the elite brains of Obama and Biden over the average (or below) of McCain and Palin.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Wow. Who knew Mac and Palin were populists. :oops:

Let's see....average Americans vs. Elites, hmmmm, I guess everyone but you knew this.

Yeah, you are right. I'm sure the corp fat cats contributing to Mac are thrilled by this. :oops:

[HowardRoark]

Wow. Who knew Mac and Palin were populists. :oops:

Let's see....average Americans vs. Elites, hmmmm, I guess everyone but you knew this.

Yeah, you are right. I'm sure the corp fat cats contributing to Mac are thrilled by this. :oops:

Do you live under a rock? Obama gets the Fat Cat money AND the Elite Hollywood money.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Who is this brave General Mcclellan leading us in Afghanistan?

It's a serious situation, a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Afghanistan/Iraq border.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Wow. Who knew Mac and Palin were populists. :oops:

Let's see....average Americans vs. Elites, hmmmm, I guess everyone but you knew this.

Yeah, you are right. I'm sure the corp fat cats contributing to Mac are thrilled by this. :oops:

Do you live under a rock? Obama gets the Fat Cat money AND the Elite Hollywood money.

Right. The 160 plus lobbyist working for Mac came from Acorn!!

You might wanna check your facts. Top ceo's give 10x more to Mac.

from the Hill:


The top executives of America’s biggest companies are more willing to open their wallets for John McCain than his Democratic rival, donating 10 times as much to the Arizona senator’s campaign as to Barack Obama’s.

From the WSJ (your bible):


According to an analysis of fund-raising data released Thursday by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, Sen. McCain raised more money in June and July from larger donors in 15 of the top-donating 25 industries than did Sen. Obama.

The Republican nominee drew more donations from executives at oil and gas, real-estate, securities and investment and insurance companies, the data showed. He raised $22.3 million from the top 25 industries in the two-month period, compared with Sen. Obama's $19.9 million.

Facts all come with points of view
Facts dont do what I want them to
:oops:

[HowardRoark]

The Republican nominee drew more donations from executives at oil and gas, real-estate, securities and investment and insurance companies, the data showed. He raised $22.3 million from the top 25 industries in the two-month period, compared with Sen. Obama's $19.9 million.

Roughly 10% more....got me!

But let's focus on Fannie and Freddie, where Obama clearly has taken more. But wait, that's not enough! Let's get those crackerjack CEOs on my "Economic Team" too!

And when talking about Populism, I see that more of an Elitist of thought issue anyway.

That's all....I am going to go cling to my gun and Bible.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

The Republican nominee drew more donations from executives at oil and gas, real-estate, securities and investment and insurance companies, the data showed. He raised $22.3 million from the top 25 industries in the two-month period, compared with Sen. Obama's $19.9 million.

Roughly 10% more....got me!

But let's focus on Fannie and Freddie, where Obama clearly has taken more. But wait, that's not enough! Let's get those crackerjack CEOs on my "Economic Team" too!

And when talking about Populism, I see that more of an Elitist of thought issue anyway.

That's all....I am going to go cling to my gun and Bible.

It wasnt' a got me type..you just love to pretend.

Economics: Right. Mac doesnt' have a clue. And, he is relying on Gramm...who definitely contributed mightily to this problem. Yep, no vested interest by advising him and working at UBS. :oops:

Fannie/Freddie/lehman, etc.: This is the biggest joke of them all.

1. When they talk about big corporate donations, I realize a $500 or so contribution to the Obama campaign gets lumped in as "big corporate XXX (pick your choice) firms" since the donor puts down their employer. Funny to think they are trying to peddle influence in the next administration. The same goes for Lehman/Fanny/Freddy employees. They have money given the nature of their jobs and therefore they give in support of political views. Does this mean that each low level trader is buying influence? I'd like to know what goes through Lehman PACs or from the bigwigs as bundlers -- that is a completely different measurement and you're confusing apples and oranges.

2. Notice the investment banks are all largely (or used to be before the past few weeks and what will happen the next few) centered in NYC? The districts on the Upper West Side (many, many bankers) voted for Kerry about 90%-10%. It happens to be that these banks draw employees from some of the most liberal areas in the country. What a surprise..New Yorkers giving to a dem. :roll:

This does not equate to trying to buy influence.

3. Obama seriously outraised McCain, Clinton, etc. from almost all sectors. He reached 2,000,000 donors back on August 14th. His fundraising was simply amazing. Of course he'll have a money edge. But his policies clearly aim to disfavor those same wealthy interests. Go figure.

It's not the employer of his contributors I care about. It's their ability to influence the administration. And I just dont see it.

[Joemailman]

Wow. Who knew Mac and Palin were populists. :oops:

Let's see....average Americans vs. Elites, hmmmm, I guess everyone but you knew this.
Your comparison only makes sense if your are looking at intelligence. I'll take the elite brains of Obama and Biden over the average (or below) of McCain and Palin.

Every time I hear someone call Obama an elitist I'm thinking "Good! After 8 years of Bush, we could use one." This country was founded by elitists. Do people think Washington, Adams and Jefferson were millworkers? They were the elite of the elite. It will take someone of elite intelligence to fix the mess left behind by the guy who everybody wanted to have a beer with.

[Kiwon]

Wow. Who knew Mac and Palin were populists. :oops:

Let's see....average Americans vs. Elites, hmmmm, I guess everyone but you knew this.
Your comparison only makes sense if your are looking at intelligence. I'll take the elite brains of Obama and Biden over the average (or below) of McCain and Palin.

Every time I hear someone call Obama an elitist I'm thinking "Good! After 8 years of Bush, we could use one." This country was founded by elitists. Do people think Washington, Adams and Jefferson were millworkers? They were the elite of the elite. It will take someone of elite intelligence to fix the mess left behind by the guy who everybody wanted to have a beer with.

Well, at least you're being honest.

But Obama? Biden? Smartest people in the room?

BTW, in Korea, the mailmen are the smartest people because most communities existed before city planning and mailmen are the only ones who know exactly where everyone lives.

[th87]

Wow. Who knew Mac and Palin were populists. :oops:

Let's see....average Americans vs. Elites, hmmmm, I guess everyone but you knew this.
Your comparison only makes sense if your are looking at intelligence. I'll take the elite brains of Obama and Biden over the average (or below) of McCain and Palin.

Every time I hear someone call Obama an elitist I'm thinking "Good! After 8 years of Bush, we could use one." This country was founded by elitists. Do people think Washington, Adams and Jefferson were millworkers? They were the elite of the elite. It will take someone of elite intelligence to fix the mess left behind by the guy who everybody wanted to have a beer with.

AMEN. I never get the mentality, "I love Palin/GWB! She/he's just like us!" Why would you want someone like you? Wouldn't you want someone with more expertise? What if I ran the Packers? The team would suck. So why would I want "someone like me" running the country?

[TheCheese]

Wow. Who knew Mac and Palin were populists. :oops:

Let's see....average Americans vs. Elites, hmmmm, I guess everyone but you knew this.
Your comparison only makes sense if your are looking at intelligence. I'll take the elite brains of Obama and Biden over the average (or below) of McCain and Palin.

Every time I hear someone call Obama an elitist I'm thinking "Good! After 8 years of Bush, we could use one." This country was founded by elitists. Do people think Washington, Adams and Jefferson were millworkers? They were the elite of the elite. It will take someone of elite intelligence to fix the mess left behind by the guy who everybody wanted to have a beer with.

It's funny you think being an "elitist" automatically means that person has "elite intelligence". Come on now, you know better than that.

Back to the debate, my favorite part was the very beginning where the two candidates shook hands, apparently this is the first time they have ever met, and Sarah said "Nice to meet you, is it okay if I call you Joe?" I don't know why but I got a kick out of it.

[HowardRoark]

Wow. Who knew Mac and Palin were populists. :oops:

Let's see....average Americans vs. Elites, hmmmm, I guess everyone but you knew this.
Your comparison only makes sense if your are looking at intelligence. I'll take the elite brains of Obama and Biden over the average (or below) of McCain and Palin.

Every time I hear someone call Obama an elitist I'm thinking "Good! After 8 years of Bush, we could use one." This country was founded by elitists. Do people think Washington, Adams and Jefferson were millworkers? They were the elite of the elite. It will take someone of elite intelligence to fix the mess left behind by the guy who everybody wanted to have a beer with.

It's funny you think being an "elitist" automatically means that person has "elite intelligence". Come on now, you know better than that.

Sorry if I ever gave the impression that "Elitist of thought" meant they were really smart people. It's that they THINK they are really smart people.

We are all but sheep who need the shepherd, The One who we have been waiting for....cue the choir.

[hoosier]

Sarah Palin was aiming at moderates and undecided voters. I guess that's a good thing. I'm just a little bit disappointed--like when it's 4th and 1 at mid field and the punter comes out.

Aiming at moderates? I think all she managed to do was appeal to her base. The punter analogy is brilliant, Tex. When does a coach do that? When he has no confidence in the offense. :lol:

[sheepshead]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOSvfh9q_NA

[Kiwon]

Back to the debate, my favorite part was the very beginning where the two candidates shook hands, apparently this is the first time they have ever met, and Sarah said "Nice to meet you, is it okay if I call you Joe?" I don't know why but I got a kick out of it.

I thought the same thing.

I don't know if she knew the mikes were on but it was a genuine moment. Very unpolitician-like

[HowardRoark]

Who is this brave General Mcclellan leading us in Afghanistan?

Not sure Ty, but I am sure Joe is checking this AM to see if he can help out the "Bosniacs."

[Cheesehead Craig]

Who is this brave General Mcclellan leading us in Afghanistan?

Not sure Ty, but I am sure Joe is checking this AM to see if he can help out the "Bosniacs."
I thought that was funny too. My first thought was if they were related to this guy:

http://biografie.leonardo.it/img/bio/h/Hulk_Hogan.jpg

[mraynrand]

AMEN. I never get the mentality, "I love Palin/GWB! She/he's just like us!" Why would you want someone like you? Wouldn't you want someone with more expertise? What if I ran the Packers? The team would suck. So why would I want "someone like me" running the country?

The "She's just like us" mentality comes from her background, which is much like that of a majority of Americans. Folks who went to prep schools over public schools and took the path through East Coast Universities on their way to getting that law degree tend to be more in the 'elitist' category than folks going through their local public schools and universities. Palin is anything but ordinary, though. Ordinary people don't become mayor and governors, and develop reputations as reformers.

I agree though TH87, that if you ran the Packers, they would suck, as they would if I ran them. If you're trying to equate that with Palin, then it's a bad analogy. She's like the successful NFL coach who wants to move up to be a GM, or like a winning college coach who wants to coach in the NFL. She's been great at everything she's done, and now she has to expand her knowledge base and take on a bigger challenge. But to try to suggest that she lacks experience or expertise, like a football fan to a GM is absurd. I wouldn't want 'someone like you' running the country either, but 1) hopefully Plain won't have to run the country until 2013 and 2) again she's someone like you in her 'working class' 'Average American' background and upbringing, but she's well above average in ability and accomplishment.

[mraynrand]

Economics: Right. Mac doesnt' have a clue. And, he is relying on Gramm...who definitely contributed mightily to this problem.

Don't you have any shame, sir, at all? You always refer back to this specific de-regulation: the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Note it is Gramm-Leach-Bliley. The act was passed in 1999 (1999, that's right, 1999). The Senate voted the 90-8 for it and Bill Clinton signed it. Chuck Schumer, John Kerry, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Dick Durbin, Tom Daschle and Barack Obama's running mate, Joe Biden. ALL VOTED FOR IT. The "Leach" in the legislation's title endorsed Obama for president

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080812/NEWS/80812013/1056/news09

and was a founder of Republicans for Obama.

http://www.republicansforobama.org/

So stop with the exclusive Blame Gramm bullshit. He was one of many, including prominent Dems and Repubs that have since gone Dem who enthusiastically passed that legislation that Bubba gladly signed.[/url]

I forgot to add:

:oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[HowardRoark]

FRANKLIN RAINES: Raines works for the Obama Campaign as Chief Economic Advisor….$240 million (yes, million!!!) from Fannie Mae. He was order to repay $50 million.

TIM HOWARD: Howard is also a Chief Economic Advisor to Obama. $20 million golden parachute from Fannie Mae.

JIM JOHNSON: Johnson hired as a Senior Obama Finance Advisor and was selected to run Obama's Vice Presidential Search Committee. $28 million Golden Parachute. Worked for Lehman and Fannie.


Where’s the bitch when we need her? I need a golden umbrella for the golden shower we are about to get from these charlatans.

http://www.observer.com/files/imagecache/article/files/katiecouric2.jpg

[texaspackerbacker]

AMEN. I never get the mentality, "I love Palin/GWB! She/he's just like us!" Why would you want someone like you? Wouldn't you want someone with more expertise? What if I ran the Packers? The team would suck. So why would I want "someone like me" running the country?

The "She's just like us" mentality comes from her background, which is much like that of a majority of Americans. Folks who went to prep schools over public schools and took the path through East Coast Universities on their way to getting that law degree tend to be more in the 'elitist' category than folks going through their local public schools and universities. Palin is anything but ordinary, though. Ordinary people don't become mayor and governors, and develop reputations as reformers.

I agree though TH87, that if you ran the Packers, they would suck, as they would if I ran them. If you're trying to equate that with Palin, then it's a bad analogy. She's like the successful NFL coach who wants to move up to be a GM, or like a winning college coach who wants to coach in the NFL. She's been great at everything she's done, and now she has to expand her knowledge base and take on a bigger challenge. But to try to suggest that she lacks experience or expertise, like a football fan to a GM is absurd. I wouldn't want 'someone like you' running the country either, but 1) hopefully Plain won't have to run the country until 2013 and 2) again she's someone like you in her 'working class' 'Average American' background and upbringing, but she's well above average in ability and accomplishment.

WRONG, both of you.

It is NOT about BACKGROUND. It is about VIEWS, VALUES, AND POSITIONS--being IN TUNE with the attitudes and general outlook of the huge majority of GOOD NORMAL AMERICANS. I say the same thing about myself.

Is it NECESSARY to have our kind of background to have those views, values, and positions, and to be in tune? Obviously, it helps, but HELL NO!

NOBODY exemplifies being in tune with the views, values, and positions of America better than RUSH LIMBAUGH--and he is not exactly the prototype of "one of us".

I repeat, though, it's NOT about BACKGROUND; It's about ISSUES, and that's why the leftists spew so much vile HATE for Sarah, Rush, and any of us who dare to defy the elitists and espouse PRO-AMERICAN positions.

Oh yeah, before Ted Thompson came along, hell yeah, I COULD have done a better job than anybody else running the Packers. Now, I'd have to settle for matching Thompson in quality.

[LL2]

It's funny to watch the scorecard's during the debate on CNN. They are so predictable. You got Begala and Rosen dring the points high for Biden and you have Rollins and Castellano driving the points high for Palin. The only ones somewhat fair were King and Borger. Overall, the panel of talking heads on CNN after the debate were so pro-Obama/Biden it's a joke. CNN claims to be the most objective news channel. Here's the favorite emoticon of PIP and Tyrone - :roll:

[mraynrand]

AMEN. I never get the mentality, "I love Palin/GWB! She/he's just like us!" Why would you want someone like you? Wouldn't you want someone with more expertise? What if I ran the Packers? The team would suck. So why would I want "someone like me" running the country?

The "She's just like us" mentality comes from her background, which is much like that of a majority of Americans. Folks who went to prep schools over public schools and took the path through East Coast Universities on their way to getting that law degree tend to be more in the 'elitist' category than folks going through their local public schools and universities. Palin is anything but ordinary, though. Ordinary people don't become mayor and governors, and develop reputations as reformers.

I agree though TH87, that if you ran the Packers, they would suck, as they would if I ran them. If you're trying to equate that with Palin, then it's a bad analogy. She's like the successful NFL coach who wants to move up to be a GM, or like a winning college coach who wants to coach in the NFL. She's been great at everything she's done, and now she has to expand her knowledge base and take on a bigger challenge. But to try to suggest that she lacks experience or expertise, like a football fan to a GM is absurd. I wouldn't want 'someone like you' running the country either, but 1) hopefully Plain won't have to run the country until 2013 and 2) again she's someone like you in her 'working class' 'Average American' background and upbringing, but she's well above average in ability and accomplishment.

WRONG, both of you.

It is NOT about BACKGROUND. It is about VIEWS, VALUES, AND POSITIONS--being IN TUNE with the attitudes and general outlook of the huge majority of GOOD NORMAL AMERICANS. I say the same thing about myself.

Is it NECESSARY to have our kind iof background to have those views, values, and positions, and to be in tune? Obviously, it helps, but HELL NO!

NOBODY exemplifies being in tune with the views, values, and positions of America better than RUSH LIMBAUGH--and he is not exactly the prototype of "one of us".

I repeat, though, it's NOT about BACKGROUND; It's about ISSUES, and that's why the leftists spew so much vile HATE for Sarah, Rush, and any of us who dare to defy the elitists and espouse PRO-AMERICAN positions.

Oh yeah, before Ted Thompson came along, hell yeah, I COULD have done a better job than anybody else running the Packers. Now, I'd have to settle for matching Thompson in quality.

in the way I was using it, BACKGROUND = VIEWS, VALUES, AND POSITIONS, not just geography and schooling. That should have been obvious.

[mraynrand]

Oh yeah, before Ted Thompson came along, hell yeah, I COULD have done a better job than anybody else running the Packers. Now, I'd have to settle for matching Thompson in quality.

Riiiiight.

[texaspackerbacker]

AMEN. I never get the mentality, "I love Palin/GWB! She/he's just like us!" Why would you want someone like you? Wouldn't you want someone with more expertise? What if I ran the Packers? The team would suck. So why would I want "someone like me" running the country?

The "She's just like us" mentality comes from her background, which is much like that of a majority of Americans. Folks who went to prep schools over public schools and took the path through East Coast Universities on their way to getting that law degree tend to be more in the 'elitist' category than folks going through their local public schools and universities. Palin is anything but ordinary, though. Ordinary people don't become mayor and governors, and develop reputations as reformers.

I agree though TH87, that if you ran the Packers, they would suck, as they would if I ran them. If you're trying to equate that with Palin, then it's a bad analogy. She's like the successful NFL coach who wants to move up to be a GM, or like a winning college coach who wants to coach in the NFL. She's been great at everything she's done, and now she has to expand her knowledge base and take on a bigger challenge. But to try to suggest that she lacks experience or expertise, like a football fan to a GM is absurd. I wouldn't want 'someone like you' running the country either, but 1) hopefully Plain won't have to run the country until 2013 and 2) again she's someone like you in her 'working class' 'Average American' background and upbringing, but she's well above average in ability and accomplishment.

WRONG, both of you.

It is NOT about BACKGROUND. It is about VIEWS, VALUES, AND POSITIONS--being IN TUNE with the attitudes and general outlook of the huge majority of GOOD NORMAL AMERICANS. I say the same thing about myself.

Is it NECESSARY to have our kind iof background to have those views, values, and positions, and to be in tune? Obviously, it helps, but HELL NO!

NOBODY exemplifies being in tune with the views, values, and positions of America better than RUSH LIMBAUGH--and he is not exactly the prototype of "one of us".

I repeat, though, it's NOT about BACKGROUND; It's about ISSUES, and that's why the leftists spew so much vile HATE for Sarah, Rush, and any of us who dare to defy the elitists and espouse PRO-AMERICAN positions.

Oh yeah, before Ted Thompson came along, hell yeah, I COULD have done a better job than anybody else running the Packers. Now, I'd have to settle for matching Thompson in quality.

in the way I was using it, BACKGROUND = VIEWS, VALUES, AND POSITIONS, not just geography and schooling. That should have been obvious.

I hear ya on that, and I know your heart is in the right place. However, there are a helluva lot (in an absolute sense, not percentage-wise) of decently raised small city or country folks who stray horribly to the liberal side of the spectrum--some all the way to what could validly be called America-haters .......... and of course, there are a lot of others besides Rush who overcome the other kind of background to join us in the light.

And it is riiiiight, I COULD run the Packers. 43% of my plethora fantssy football teams over the years have finished first; 78% in the top three.

[bobblehead]

Wow. Who knew Mac and Palin were populists. :oops:

Let's see....average Americans vs. Elites, hmmmm, I guess everyone but you knew this.
Your comparison only makes sense if your are looking at intelligence. I'll take the elite brains of Obama and Biden over the average (or below) of McCain and Palin.

Liberals are so fucking enamored by a law degree it kills me. These guys are not geniuses...if they were they could actually...you know, make a difference in the real world. I know a guy who dropped out of high school, started his own tool and dye shop and is worth 17 million right now. You tell me who is the smarter guy, him or obama?

NM, I know your answer...obama went to harvard (or wherever).

[mraynrand]

Question: What's the difference between a Tool and Dye company and a Tool and Die company?


Answer: 38 million google hits

[bobblehead]

Wow. Who knew Mac and Palin were populists. :oops:

Let's see....average Americans vs. Elites, hmmmm, I guess everyone but you knew this.
Your comparison only makes sense if your are looking at intelligence. I'll take the elite brains of Obama and Biden over the average (or below) of McCain and Palin.

Every time I hear someone call Obama an elitist I'm thinking "Good! After 8 years of Bush, we could use one." This country was founded by elitists. Do people think Washington, Adams and Jefferson were millworkers? They were the elite of the elite. It will take someone of elite intelligence to fix the mess left behind by the guy who everybody wanted to have a beer with.

Look, I'm no fan of bush, but he is an elitist too, so drop the "avg. joe got us in this mess" stuff. The bush family goes to the top schools, is born rich and has been for generations. they are elitists...not in the way libs like to think of elitists, but they are.

Second, you can't really blame all that is wrong in this country right now on bush and republicans. I would say its more like 70/30 dems faults. If I had to point to ONE pol it would be barney frank. Lets not forget that the economy was kinda sound in 2006 when libs took over. We were overspending, but that is about all that was wrong. Now if we want to say the roots of the problem go back further than 2006 I agree...we go back much further. EVERY AMERICAN SHOULD OWN THEIR OWN HOME!!

[bobblehead]

Wow. Who knew Mac and Palin were populists. :oops:

Let's see....average Americans vs. Elites, hmmmm, I guess everyone but you knew this.
Your comparison only makes sense if your are looking at intelligence. I'll take the elite brains of Obama and Biden over the average (or below) of McCain and Palin.

Every time I hear someone call Obama an elitist I'm thinking "Good! After 8 years of Bush, we could use one." This country was founded by elitists. Do people think Washington, Adams and Jefferson were millworkers? They were the elite of the elite. It will take someone of elite intelligence to fix the mess left behind by the guy who everybody wanted to have a beer with.

AMEN. I never get the mentality, "I love Palin/GWB! She/he's just like us!" Why would you want someone like you? Wouldn't you want someone with more expertise? What if I ran the Packers? The team would suck. So why would I want "someone like me" running the country?

Hell, I'll give it a try....cuz elitists never actually create anything. They sit around a room and pontificate about how much smarter they are than the schmoe in my previous post who actually is creating a product and putting it on the shelf. While they are patting their own backs he is getting his hands dirty. While they are plotting how to take his money (tax) and help the less fortunate he is actually EARNING it.

80% of this economy is built on small business...the working guy who took a chance and probably failed 5 times before he made the country better...his reward, some prick elitist who wants his money cuz he got "lucky" working 70 hour weeks in his garage eating raman noodles til he got it right when so many "less fortunate" people could use the fruits of his labor. Those elitists know NOTHING about what it takes to succeed anywhere except politics/bloviating. Do I want them and their disdain for those who actually make this country great running the country...FUCK NO, not in a million years.

Now after this little lesson I can predict your response.

But all the workers that worked at his factory deserve a bigger share of that 17 million, why should he need so much. My answer...because without him not ONE worker would have had that fucking JOB!! They deserve the wages they can command on the open market for their labor and not one dollar more. Want to give them a raise? Then make it even more profitable for joe schmoe to create jobs so unemployment drops and hard worker can command higher wages.

[bobblehead]

Question: What's the difference between a Tool and Dye company and a Tool and Die company?


Answer: 38 million google hits

As much as I love you rand, that is very elitist of you...using a spelling error as an arguement of superiority. Yea, I know that isn't what you were doing, but libs love people who can spell, but not really accomplish much else.

[hoosier]

AMEN. I never get the mentality, "I love Palin/GWB! She/he's just like us!" Why would you want someone like you? Wouldn't you want someone with more expertise? What if I ran the Packers? The team would suck. So why would I want "someone like me" running the country?

The "She's just like us" mentality comes from her background, which is much like that of a majority of Americans. Folks who went to prep schools over public schools and took the path through East Coast Universities on their way to getting that law degree tend to be more in the 'elitist' category than folks going through their local public schools and universities. Palin is anything but ordinary, though. Ordinary people don't become mayor and governors, and develop reputations as reformers.


I've been thinking that the "she's like us" mentality comes from the strange feeling you get that you've seen her--or maybe heard her--somewhere before. Did she by chance appear the movie Fargo? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBSTRK6PUjQ&feature=related

[texaspackerbacker]

As I said, background/looks/voice/accent/whatever is NOT what it is about.

It's ALL about VIEWS VALUES, POSITIONS ON ISSUES--POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY. That is why the leftists spew so much HATE toward Sarah Palin.

And yes, George W. Bush IS an elitist and IS NOT "one of us" in the background sense. As for views, values, political philosophy, after 8 years in office, I'm still not sure about that. The answer to that question, however, is rapidly moving toward irrelevancy.

Lastly, on the spelling issue, I lean toward "spelling counts", since you have to look long and hard to find a spelling error by me.

[mraynrand]

AMEN. I never get the mentality, "I love Palin/GWB! She/he's just like us!" Why would you want someone like you? Wouldn't you want someone with more expertise? What if I ran the Packers? The team would suck. So why would I want "someone like me" running the country?

The "She's just like us" mentality comes from her background, which is much like that of a majority of Americans. Folks who went to prep schools over public schools and took the path through East Coast Universities on their way to getting that law degree tend to be more in the 'elitist' category than folks going through their local public schools and universities. Palin is anything but ordinary, though. Ordinary people don't become mayor and governors, and develop reputations as reformers.


I've been thinking that the "she's like us" mentality comes from the strange feeling you get that you've seen her--or maybe heard her--somewhere before. Did she by chance appear the movie Fargo? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBSTRK6PUjQ&feature=related

That's how a lot of folks in Mini so ta actually talk. So what?

[mraynrand]

Question: What's the difference between a Tool and Dye company and a Tool and Die company?


Answer: 38 million google hits

As much as I love you rand, that is very elitist of you...using a spelling error as an arguement of superiority. Yea, I know that isn't what you were doing, but libs love people who can spell, but not really accomplish much else.

I was actually curious - I didn't know if Dye or Die was correct. There were 4 million hits for your spelling 'Dye'. 4 million. So I figure it doesn't matter. A lot of people spell it your way. You say potato, Quayle says potatoe.

[mraynrand]

Wow. Who knew Mac and Palin were populists. :oops:

Let's see....average Americans vs. Elites, hmmmm, I guess everyone but you knew this.
Your comparison only makes sense if your are looking at intelligence. I'll take the elite brains of Obama and Biden over the average (or below) of McCain and Palin.

Every time I hear someone call Obama an elitist I'm thinking "Good! After 8 years of Bush, we could use one." This country was founded by elitists. Do people think Washington, Adams and Jefferson were millworkers? They were the elite of the elite. It will take someone of elite intelligence to fix the mess left behind by the guy who everybody wanted to have a beer with.

AMEN. I never get the mentality, "I love Palin/GWB! She/he's just like us!" Why would you want someone like you? Wouldn't you want someone with more expertise? What if I ran the Packers? The team would suck. So why would I want "someone like me" running the country?

Hell, I'll give it a try....cuz elitists never actually create anything. They sit around a room and pontificate about how much smarter they are than the schmoe in my previous post who actually is creating a product and putting it on the shelf. While they are patting their own backs he is getting his hands dirty. While they are plotting how to take his money (tax) and help the less fortunate he is actually EARNING it.

80% of this economy is built on small business...the working guy who took a chance and probably failed 5 times before he made the country better...his reward, some prick elitist who wants his money cuz he got "lucky" working 70 hour weeks in his garage eating raman noodles til he got it right when so many "less fortunate" people could use the fruits of his labor. Those elitists know NOTHING about what it takes to succeed anywhere except politics/bloviating. Do I want them and their disdain for those who actually make this country great running the country...FUCK NO, not in a million years.

Now after this little lesson I can predict your response.

But all the workers that worked at his factory deserve a bigger share of that 17 million, why should he need so much. My answer...because without him not ONE worker would have had that fucking JOB!! They deserve the wages they can command on the open market for their labor and not one dollar more. Want to give them a raise? Then make it even more profitable for joe schmoe to create jobs so unemployment drops and hard worker can command higher wages.

That's a great response. I would only add that elitists think that the guy who earned 17 mil should give it up in taxes (It's patriotic!). But they somehow think that that 17 million gets put under the mattress outside the economy. No it doesn't. It gets invested or spent by a successful probably shrewd businessman (or woman) who will invest/spend it probably far more wisely than the government. That investment and spending creates jobs and opportunities.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Wow. Who knew Mac and Palin were populists. :oops:

Let's see....average Americans vs. Elites, hmmmm, I guess everyone but you knew this.
Your comparison only makes sense if your are looking at intelligence. I'll take the elite brains of Obama and Biden over the average (or below) of McCain and Palin.

Every time I hear someone call Obama an elitist I'm thinking "Good! After 8 years of Bush, we could use one." This country was founded by elitists. Do people think Washington, Adams and Jefferson were millworkers? They were the elite of the elite. It will take someone of elite intelligence to fix the mess left behind by the guy who everybody wanted to have a beer with.

Well, at least you're being honest.

But Obama? Biden? Smartest people in the room?

BTW, in Korea, the mailmen are the smartest people because most communities existed before city planning and mailmen are the only ones who know exactly where everyone lives.

Well, now we can see why you have such problems. You confuse intelligence with knowledge.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Economics: Right. Mac doesnt' have a clue. And, he is relying on Gramm...who definitely contributed mightily to this problem.

Don't you have any shame, sir, at all? You always refer back to this specific de-regulation: the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Note it is Gramm-Leach-Bliley. The act was passed in 1999 (1999, that's right, 1999). The Senate voted the 90-8 for it and Bill Clinton signed it. Chuck Schumer, John Kerry, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Dick Durbin, Tom Daschle and Barack Obama's running mate, Joe Biden. ALL VOTED FOR IT. The "Leach" in the legislation's title endorsed Obama for president

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080812/NEWS/80812013/1056/news09

and was a founder of Republicans for Obama.

http://www.republicansforobama.org/

So stop with the exclusive Blame Gramm bullshit. He was one of many, including prominent Dems and Repubs that have since gone Dem who enthusiastically passed that legislation that Bubba gladly signed.[/url]

I forgot to add:

:oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

^^^^
Example of somebody losing it.

Rand, you are hilarious. You can't even stand the term "contributed mightily." You are suggesting that he didn't? And, the response was because a poster was blaming dems. There is plenty of blame.

Yes, Clinton signed it..something you guys loved. He was moving towards your side.

However, i wasn't just referring to that bill. Nice try.

Let's review..so you can actually learn something.

In the 1990s, as chairman of the Senate banking committee, he routinely turned down Securities and Exchange Commission chairman Arthur Levitt's requests for more money to police Wall Street; during this period, the sec's workload shot up 80 percent, but its staff grew only 20 percent. Gramm also opposed an sec rule that would have prohibited accounting firms from getting too close to the companies they audited—at one point, according to Levitt's memoir, he warned the sec chairman that if the commission adopted the rule, its funding would be cut.

What else did our friend Gramm do? Only two days earlier, the Supreme Court had issued its decision on Bush v. Gore. As Congress and the White House were hurriedly hammering out a $384-billion omnibus spending bill, Gramm slipped in a 262-page measure called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. Written with the help of financial industry lobbyists and cosponsored by Lugar the measure had been considered dead. Few lawmakers had either the opportunity or inclination to read the version of the bill Gramm inserted.

Hmmm. What was in this bill? Exempted energy trading from regulatory oversight, allowing Enron to run rampant, wreck the California electricity market.

And..wait for it..wait for it...CREDIT SWAPS. The devastation that unregulated swaps would unleash. Because of the swap-related provisions of Gramm's bill a $62 trillion market (nearly four times the size of the entire US stock market) remained utterly unregulated, meaning no one made sure the banks and hedge funds had the assets to cover the losses they guaranteed.

Basically, Gramm allowed Wall Street's biggest players to run a secret casino. Betting on the risk of any given transaction became more important—and more lucrative—than the transactions themselves.

But, there is a bit of poetic justice as UBS, the firm he joined after giving them the keys to the kingdom wrote down 37 billion this spring..equal to the previous 4 years profits!!

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Wow. Who knew Mac and Palin were populists. :oops:

Let's see....average Americans vs. Elites, hmmmm, I guess everyone but you knew this.
Your comparison only makes sense if your are looking at intelligence. I'll take the elite brains of Obama and Biden over the average (or below) of McCain and Palin.

Every time I hear someone call Obama an elitist I'm thinking "Good! After 8 years of Bush, we could use one." This country was founded by elitists. Do people think Washington, Adams and Jefferson were millworkers? They were the elite of the elite. It will take someone of elite intelligence to fix the mess left behind by the guy who everybody wanted to have a beer with.

Look, I'm no fan of bush, but he is an elitist too, so drop the "avg. joe got us in this mess" stuff. The bush family goes to the top schools, is born rich and has been for generations. they are elitists...not in the way libs like to think of elitists, but they are.

Second, you can't really blame all that is wrong in this country right now on bush and republicans. I would say its more like 70/30 dems faults. If I had to point to ONE pol it would be barney frank. Lets not forget that the economy was kinda sound in 2006 when libs took over. We were overspending, but that is about all that was wrong. Now if we want to say the roots of the problem go back further than 2006 I agree...we go back much further. EVERY AMERICAN SHOULD OWN THEIR OWN HOME!!

Yeah, it goes back further. It goes back to the last president who actually spoke straight with us. His name was Jimmy Carter. He talked about sacrifice. He talked about energy independence. He talked about us becoming a nation defined by what we purchased over what we really were.

And, he was attacked...from the left and from the right.

You want to ascribe blame. Look at RR. Who was thrilled about giving credit. Who contributed to the culture of buy, buy, buy...even if you can't afford it.

[bobblehead]

Question: What's the difference between a Tool and Dye company and a Tool and Die company?


Answer: 38 million google hits

As much as I love you rand, that is very elitist of you...using a spelling error as an arguement of superiority. Yea, I know that isn't what you were doing, but libs love people who can spell, but not really accomplish much else.

I was actually curious - I didn't know if Dye or Die was correct. There were 4 million hits for your spelling 'Dye'. 4 million. So I figure it doesn't matter. A lot of people spell it your way. You say potato, Quayle says potatoe.

without looking it up I would guess you are right. Dye as in to dye a shirt is changing its makeup which is what tool and dye is doing. Die is pretty much one meaning as far as I know and that is death or end. The actual process of tool and dye leads me to believe your spelling is accurate for this case. Funny, I'm not too lazy to respond, but I'm too lazy to look it up.

[th87]

I agree though TH87, that if you ran the Packers, they would suck, as they would if I ran them. If you're trying to equate that with Palin, then it's a bad analogy. She's like the successful NFL coach who wants to move up to be a GM, or like a winning college coach who wants to coach in the NFL. She's been great at everything she's done, and now she has to expand her knowledge base and take on a bigger challenge. But to try to suggest that she lacks experience or expertise, like a football fan to a GM is absurd. I wouldn't want 'someone like you' running the country either, but 1) hopefully Plain won't have to run the country until 2013 and 2) again she's someone like you in her 'working class' 'Average American' background and upbringing, but she's well above average in ability and accomplishment.

To me, she's more like a high school coach running the wishbone getting an NFL offensive coordinator gig.

Could it work? Do you believe in miracles?

[th87]

As I said, background/looks/voice/accent/whatever is NOT what it is about.

It's ALL about VIEWS VALUES, POSITIONS ON ISSUES--POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY. That is why the leftists spew so much HATE toward Sarah Palin.

And yes, George W. Bush IS an elitist and IS NOT "one of us" in the background sense. As for views, values, political philosophy, after 8 years in office, I'm still not sure about that. The answer to that question, however, is rapidly moving toward irrelevancy.

Lastly, on the spelling issue, I lean toward "spelling counts", since you have to look long and hard to find a spelling error by me.

Okay, fine. It's political philosophy. My philosophy is that I'd employ the current spread formation, but switch to a power blocking scheme. Does that mean I'm qualified to coach the Packers?

Governor of Alaska is like student council president in a big enough high school. Does anything important happen there?

[th87]

Hell, I'll give it a try....cuz elitists never actually create anything. They sit around a room and pontificate about how much smarter they are than the schmoe in my previous post who actually is creating a product and putting it on the shelf. While they are patting their own backs he is getting his hands dirty. While they are plotting how to take his money (tax) and help the less fortunate he is actually EARNING it.

80% of this economy is built on small business...the working guy who took a chance and probably failed 5 times before he made the country better...his reward, some prick elitist who wants his money cuz he got "lucky" working 70 hour weeks in his garage eating raman noodles til he got it right when so many "less fortunate" people could use the fruits of his labor. Those elitists know NOTHING about what it takes to succeed anywhere except politics/bloviating. Do I want them and their disdain for those who actually make this country great running the country...FUCK NO, not in a million years.

Now after this little lesson I can predict your response.

But all the workers that worked at his factory deserve a bigger share of that 17 million, why should he need so much. My answer...because without him not ONE worker would have had that fucking JOB!! They deserve the wages they can command on the open market for their labor and not one dollar more. Want to give them a raise? Then make it even more profitable for joe schmoe to create jobs so unemployment drops and hard worker can command higher wages.

Work on those prediction skills - I actually see what you're saying. Your millionaire friend should be able to get out there and see if he can apply his common sense know-how to running a government. He has a proven track record of success and there would be great value to his input.

But that wasn't the issue (and your friend isn't Joe Blow either - he's exceptional). It's that Palin sounds like Joe Blow and people love her ONLY because she sounds like Joe Blow and stumbles and bumbles whenever she's on TV. As though that's somehow endearing. If someone speaks much worse than I do, can't coherently form a thought without going into their talking points, and isn't aware of simple political facts like the Bush Doctrine, I'm going to have a very, very hard time believing that this person's competent for the second job in America.

That's just me. I want someone who knows what they're talking about. You can have a folksy accent or whatever. Just know what you're saying, and give me something of substance, rather than stupid buzzwords.

So there it is - in my opinion, she sounds like an idiot AND hasn't done anything of substance. That's scary.

It seems like people would LOVE if Forrest Gump was in the running for VP, as long as he says things like, "God bless America!" and "We must protect our freedom!"

Well, I could say, "We need to open up the Packers offense and not be so conservative," or "We need to be more aggressive on defense." Great thoughts, but does that make me qualified to implement it? Not really.

[HowardRoark]

But that wasn't the issue (and your friend isn't Joe Blow either - he's exceptional). It's that Palin sounds like Joe Blow and people love her ONLY because she sounds like Joe Blow and stumbles and bumbles whenever she's on TV.

I didn't think she stumled or bumbled. She just cloyingly dropped her g's.

I think the Bosniacs do that too though, so I can live with that.

As far as Katie....I honestly think she was caught off guard as to how much of a bitch this woman actually is. I think if she would do an interview again today, she would do better.

[mraynrand]

and isn't aware of simple political facts like the Bush Doctrine, I'm going to have a very, very hard time believing that this person's competent for the second job in America.


And what pray tell, is the Bush Doctrine?


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html

[mraynrand]

Rand, you are hilarious. You can't even stand the term "contributed mightily." You are suggesting that he didn't? And, the response was because a poster was blaming dems. There is plenty of blame.


Much better. To hear you talk about it, the whole thing is on Gramm, as Chair of the banking committee. That was my point.

For example, writing stuff like "Few lawmakers had either the opportunity or inclination to read the version of the bill Gramm inserted." - Did you write that yourself or get it off Daily Kos or Huff post? As though these guys know the stuff well enough to read through it all. They have staffs to read it and understand it. Are you saying Clinton's staff of brilliant economic minds couldn't tell him about the devastation to come and that he shouldn't sign it?

[mraynrand]

To me, she's more like a high school coach running the wishbone getting an NFL offensive coordinator gig.

I'll accept this. But it's a whole lot different than an analogy where a fan (say th87) is allowed to run the whole organization/team.

[bobblehead]

That's just me. I want someone who knows what they're talking about. You can have a folksy accent or whatever. Just know what you're saying, and give me something of substance, rather than stupid buzzwords.

So there it is - in my opinion, she sounds like an idiot AND hasn't done anything of substance. That's scary.


Now, I'm not voting mccain/palin, so I ask this in all seriousness. You won't vote for the #2 based on those reasons, but a first term senator from Illinois with no executive experience is cool?

A guy who's list of blunders includes saying he would bomb in pakistan without their gov'ts approval, a guy who would meet with imanutjob with no prereqs? A guy who's understanding of economics is as fundamentally flawed as mccains and initially said he would nearly double capital gains taxes to 28%? I would also point out that in obama's debate he said uh and umm about 5 billion times. Yea, he is well spoken and sounds like he knows what he is talking about.

Palin, imo, is solid cuz she did take on the oil companies in alaska, has been an executive at two levels, and simply "gets" econ 101. Did she blunder with the russia comment? I guess so, but when is the last time katie or anyone else asked obama about his foreign policy experience?

Finally to show bias, katie couric immediately following the debate:

"Well Sarah Palin avoided making a fool of herself tonight..."

MY GOD, wtf was she thinking. I put this one right up their with judy woodruff:

"America threw a tantrum tonight" (tears and all, bottom lip quivering)

Me, I'm going to vote for real change. I'm hoping mccain loses by 2 points and Barr gets 3% showing the republican party that they must get real about small gov't and taking on real issues if they want to win.

A mccain gov't is as bad as an obama gov't, but too many people just can't see that.

[th87]

and isn't aware of simple political facts like the Bush Doctrine, I'm going to have a very, very hard time believing that this person's competent for the second job in America.


And what pray tell, is the Bush Doctrine?


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html

Fine. Potentially bad example, but it's commonly known as preemptive warring.

Focus more on the slant of her replies: "We have to stop these terrorists that are HELL BENT on destroying America!"

These are simply emotionally-charged catchphrases. Very little substance. I want substance. I want someone that looks like they know a whole lot more than I do. This is an executive position at stake, not a pep rally.

[th87]

To me, she's more like a high school coach running the wishbone getting an NFL offensive coordinator gig.

I'll accept this. But it's a whole lot different than an analogy where a fan (say th87) is allowed to run the whole organization/team.

So then my in-over-my-head factor is, say, 8. The high school coach's in-over-his-head factor is, say, 6. Neither are good, and in my opinion, neither are acceptable.

[th87]

That's just me. I want someone who knows what they're talking about. You can have a folksy accent or whatever. Just know what you're saying, and give me something of substance, rather than stupid buzzwords.

So there it is - in my opinion, she sounds like an idiot AND hasn't done anything of substance. That's scary.


Now, I'm not voting mccain/palin, so I ask this in all seriousness. You won't vote for the #2 based on those reasons, but a first term senator from Illinois with no executive experience is cool?

A guy who's list of blunders includes saying he would bomb in pakistan without their gov'ts approval, a guy who would meet with imanutjob with no prereqs? A guy who's understanding of economics is as fundamentally flawed as mccains and initially said he would nearly double capital gains taxes to 28%? I would also point out that in obama's debate he said uh and umm about 5 billion times. Yea, he is well spoken and sounds like he knows what he is talking about.

Palin, imo, is solid cuz she did take on the oil companies in alaska, has been an executive at two levels, and simply "gets" econ 101. Did she blunder with the russia comment? I guess so, but when is the last time katie or anyone else asked obama about his foreign policy experience?

Finally to show bias, katie couric immediately following the debate:

"Well Sarah Palin avoided making a fool of herself tonight..."

MY GOD, wtf was she thinking. I put this one right up their with judy woodruff:

"America threw a tantrum tonight" (tears and all, bottom lip quivering)

Me, I'm going to vote for real change. I'm hoping mccain loses by 2 points and Barr gets 3% showing the republican party that they must get real about small gov't and taking on real issues if they want to win.

A mccain gov't is as bad as an obama gov't, but too many people just can't see that.

The Senate deals with pretty important global issues. It's the key battleground for tons of important decisions. Therefore, Obama's exposure to the "world" is far higher than Palin's. I could run Alaska with its 5 people.

Even though Obama stumbles, he looks like he's going somewhere with his thoughts, whereas Palin snuggles comfortably within her talking points. It's like that "I like turtles" kid:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMNry4PE93Y

And as an aside, why is it such a big deal to meet with Ahmadinejad? What would happen? Would bombs start exploding? I don't see why. Would they attack us? No reason to think so. Would they attack Israel? Nope. While I don't think it'd really help, I don't exactly see how it would hurt either. Vito Corleone met with Barzini too. It's smart politics to engage everyone. It seems awfully egotistical and stubborn to just stick to this principle of "We don't talk to our enemies," just because. I don't see a good reason for it.

I agree with your Couric comment. It's kind of obnoxious. But the right does it too.

Also agree that the difference between an Obama and McCain government would be minimal. Ron Paul sounded intriguing.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Rand, you are hilarious. You can't even stand the term "contributed mightily." You are suggesting that he didn't? And, the response was because a poster was blaming dems. There is plenty of blame.


Much better. To hear you talk about it, the whole thing is on Gramm, as Chair of the banking committee. That was my point.

For example, writing stuff like "Few lawmakers had either the opportunity or inclination to read the version of the bill Gramm inserted." - Did you write that yourself or get it off Daily Kos or Huff post? As though these guys know the stuff well enough to read through it all. They have staffs to read it and understand it. Are you saying Clinton's staff of brilliant economic minds couldn't tell him about the devastation to come and that he shouldn't sign it?

Much better? You are a joke. Your side continually blames only dems and when pointed out REPEATEDLY that there is blame for all....you attack me.

I note that you can't refute his Leavitt's position. Good. Now, point some resposibility at Gramm. This is who you want in gov't again.

Bill: The timing of the bill was crucial. If you care to debate that...post some relevant info instead of just questions. I've made my assertion, which is backed up by the timeline of the bill...and reading it..has nothing to do with political affiliation.

Let me clear it up for you...AGAIN. December 15, 2000. Only two days earlier, the Supreme Court had issued its decision on Bush v. Gore. President Bill Clinton and the Republican-controlled Congress were locked in a budget showdown. That is exactly the perfect time to do his little dirty work.

As Congress and the White House were hurriedly hammering out a $384-billion omnibus spending bill, Gramm slipped in a 262-page measure called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act.

Yeah..i'm sure that there was plenty of time to read it. No pressure to get the budget passed.

Gramm spoke about it... that it would ensure that neither the sec nor the CFTC got into the business of regulating newfangled financial products called swaps—and would thus "protect financial institutions from overregulation" and "position our financial services industries to be world leaders into the new century."

I know that i can speak for the regular folks of america....it feels great today being a world leader in financial services and that i'm thrilled that was no regulation of the swaps.

[bobblehead]

and isn't aware of simple political facts like the Bush Doctrine, I'm going to have a very, very hard time believing that this person's competent for the second job in America.


And what pray tell, is the Bush Doctrine?


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html

Fine. Potentially bad example, but it's commonly known as preemptive warring.

Focus more on the slant of her replies: "We have to stop these terrorists that are HELL BENT on destroying America!"

These are simply emotionally-charged catchphrases. Very little substance. I want substance. I want someone that looks like they know a whole lot more than I do. This is an executive position at stake, not a pep rally.

OK, 40% of muslims in the middle east believe america is evil and should be destroyed, over 90% of them want israel obliterated....is that enough substance??

[th87]

and isn't aware of simple political facts like the Bush Doctrine, I'm going to have a very, very hard time believing that this person's competent for the second job in America.


And what pray tell, is the Bush Doctrine?


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html

Fine. Potentially bad example, but it's commonly known as preemptive warring.

Focus more on the slant of her replies: "We have to stop these terrorists that are HELL BENT on destroying America!"

These are simply emotionally-charged catchphrases. Very little substance. I want substance. I want someone that looks like they know a whole lot more than I do. This is an executive position at stake, not a pep rally.

OK, 40% of muslims in the middle east believe america is evil and should be destroyed, over 90% of them want israel obliterated....is that enough substance??

So she can discuss how she plans to deal with that without the hysteria.

1. Here's an example of Palin-speak:

Reporter: Coach th87, how would you attack the Falcons offensively?

Me: We must do whatever it takes! We must win!

2. Here's kind of what I'm looking for:

Reporter: Coach th87, how would you attack the Falcons offensively?

Me: We've studied the film and have found some things that we feel we can be successful with. We'll try to take advantage of what we've found, stay cognizant of the fundamentals, and make sure we execute our game plan.

[HowardRoark]

These are simply emotionally-charged catchphrases. Very little substance. I want substance. I want someone that looks like they know a whole lot more than I do. This is an executive position at stake, not a pep rally.

I agree. She should have said neeat-o things like, "yes we can!"

[Zool]

You know what she is? She's a

http://barkbarkwoofwoof.blogspot.com/uploaded_images/Ford%20Maverick%2008-21-06-756128.jpg


Or at least that what she said 682 times.

[mraynrand]

Rand, you are hilarious. You can't even stand the term "contributed mightily." You are suggesting that he didn't? And, the response was because a poster was blaming dems. There is plenty of blame.


Much better. To hear you talk about it, the whole thing is on Gramm, as Chair of the banking committee. That was my point.

For example, writing stuff like "Few lawmakers had either the opportunity or inclination to read the version of the bill Gramm inserted." - Did you write that yourself or get it off Daily Kos or Huff post? As though these guys know the stuff well enough to read through it all. They have staffs to read it and understand it. Are you saying Clinton's staff of brilliant economic minds couldn't tell him about the devastation to come and that he shouldn't sign it?

Much better? You are a joke. Your side continually blames only dems and when pointed out REPEATEDLY that there is blame for all....you attack me.

I note that you can't refute his Leavitt's position. Good. Now, point some resposibility at Gramm. This is who you want in gov't again.

Bill: The timing of the bill was crucial. If you care to debate that...post some relevant info instead of just questions. I've made my assertion, which is backed up by the timeline of the bill...and reading it..has nothing to do with political affiliation.

Let me clear it up for you...AGAIN. December 15, 2000. Only two days earlier, the Supreme Court had issued its decision on Bush v. Gore. President Bill Clinton and the Republican-controlled Congress were locked in a budget showdown. That is exactly the perfect time to do his little dirty work.

As Congress and the White House were hurriedly hammering out a $384-billion omnibus spending bill, Gramm slipped in a 262-page measure called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act.

Yeah..i'm sure that there was plenty of time to read it. No pressure to get the budget passed.

Gramm spoke about it... that it would ensure that neither the sec nor the CFTC got into the business of regulating newfangled financial products called swaps—and would thus "protect financial institutions from overregulation" and "position our financial services industries to be world leaders into the new century."

I know that i can speak for the regular folks of america....it feels great today being a world leader in financial services and that i'm thrilled that was no regulation of the swaps.

Why did Clinton sign it? Certainly he knows washington politics as well as you - and knew Gramm was just trying to push through a bad bill. At least one advisor must have had at least 10 minutes in between managing the budget bill to tell Bill not to sign it.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Why would clinton know? Was he privy to it's drafting? No.

Present some evidence that shows that someone knew what was going on.

Quite clearly most (repubs and dems) didn't have the time..and like MOST bills they dont' have the inclination to read what is in it.

[Zool]

http://lavender.fortunecity.com/westside/797/mav.jpg

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Mavericky!!

[Zool]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/maverick

mav·er·ick
/ˈmævərɪk, ˈmævrɪk/ Pronunciation[mav-er-ik, mav-rik] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. Southwestern U.S. an unbranded calf, cow, or steer, esp. an unbranded calf that is separated from its mother.


http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?page=2&term=maverick

Maverick

One who uses a wingman to overcome the cockblocking ugly female friend of a hotter female.

The Maverick got some last night thanks to his Wingman.

[Zool]

http://www.sfmaverick.com/images/maverick_logo.jpg

[Tyrone Bigguns]

http://www.feedthehabit.com/pics/bike/interbike05/maverickML75Side600.jpg

[hoosier]

http://img5.allocine.fr/acmedia/medias/nmedia/18/36/24/96/18465320.jpg

[Cheesehead Craig]

http://www.solarnavigator.net/films_movies_actors/actors_films_images/top_gun_maverick_tom_cruise_suited.jpg

[HowardRoark]

http://www.nba.com/media/mavericks/Dancers0708.jpg

[Zool]

http://i35.tinypic.com/dztob9.jpg

[Partial]

boner. I would give her one heck of a throw down.

[BallHawk]

boner. I would give her one heck of a throw down.

I'm sure you would.

[th87]

boner. I would give her one heck of a throw down.

This is something we both can agree on.

[bobblehead]

boner. I would give her one heck of a throw down.

This is something we both can agree on.

See, she is uniting the country.