No agenda. I honestly want to know what you think.
Printable View
No agenda. I honestly want to know what you think.
I do too actually.
Since Lyle is not around at the moment and I seem to be the only other Republican on the board I will tell you what I think of Governor Palin.
I think Sara Palin is good enough to be vice president, but if something should happen to McCain she would make a lousy president. I think she and McCain both need to stop being so friendly and let Obama and Biden have it!
Biden got... 0.9% of the demecratic vote when he was running to be their presidential nominee. This tells me that most Dems probably don't care for him any more than they do Palin.
All she has to do tonight is appear intellegent and all is well. No one thinsk she can out debate Joe Biden. A lot of people think Joe Biden will make more than one embarresing remark tonight.
Vote McCain!
I wouldnt vote McCain at gunpointQuote:
Originally Posted by BoxingGorilla
First off he's one of the Keating 5
Second off,Mr Maverick voted with the failed Bush administration %95 of the time
3rd,he'd met Palin for all of 15 minutes before he picked her for VP,not vetting her well enough to know there are at least 3 different ethics violations toward her right now
Not to mention,the odds of him even finishing one term are long
No,no,and no way
she's really not that bright is she :-\
Gosh darn it Joe there you go again bringing up the past ! Gosh darnit, I'm just a regular soccer mom and I'm gonna show that by saying gosh darnit a lot !
She doesn't answer any questions. Its crazy, she just won't answer them, she just goes off on something else. I know its not abnormal for a politician to swerve questions but she kind of brings it to a new level.
Gosh darn it Joe,Im a regular soccer mom with over a million dollars in assetsQuote:
Originally Posted by OumaFan
Sarah Palin did well. She pointed out that before Biden was on the Obama ticket he said that Obama would not make a good president and that he would run on a ticket with McCain...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eN8jv...eature=related
People who can't see that the Dems are full of it amaze me.
People who cant see that Republicans are lying vicious elitists who wouldnt even allow you on to the grounds of the "summer home" amaze meQuote:
Originally Posted by BoxingGorilla
Trying to see your pointQuote:
Originally Posted by BoxingGorilla
Except you are reduced to not having one
Hey,forgetting the word "Vice" once is way worse then being a key player in the Lincloln Financial S&L crisis
Pointing out there are alot of Indians in Delaware(and there are) now is unforgivable,having three different abuse of power investigations over your year and a half as gov of Alaska(I didnt know there was any power to abuse,go fig)is okey dokey
Damn....wish I had been told about this thread sooner :rolleyes:
Palin was a demographics choice #1 She brings the GOP together #2 She puts in play the women who were put off by the way Hillary was treated and either they emotionall get behing Palin or they agree with McCain who they know is more like Hillary than Obama is. She has been in executive office and has done ok with it but some states are easier to run than others, Alaska doesn't seem to me to be all that difficult to run.
She's a liability at this point nothing else, she gave a partial bump and that was it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by amat
I was halfhearted about her before the debate. I thought there was a chance she would freeze when the whole "world" was watching. I at least tuned in, and I am sure everyone else from Saddoboxing who is passionate about politics watched. I'm positive they did. Yup, they watched.
Anyway, she certainly doesn't hurt the Rebublican chances. Not anymore.
The Dems are worried. How will it look if the Republican party are the first ones to put a minority in the White House?!
Some folks may think that I am uneducated about what is going on over here but that is FAR from acurrate. Sure, I post alot of clips from this guy and that guy without giving my own opinion, but I want everyone to see what I see and hear what I hear. I'm just words in a post afterall.
For every supposed McCain "lie" I can show you three or four that Obama and Biden have told. Look, the fact is that Biden was ripping Obama to shreds and backing McCain until Obama picked Joe as VP.
How can Obama rally for change and then pick a vice president who is old as the hills themselves? Biden is a fan of John McCain and he is pretending not to be in hopes of making history.
Anyway, I don't want to start making fun of each other or cause trouble. I just want you all to know how I feel and who in the media represents my views and opinions.
How could anybody even consider allowing the Republicans another term in office?? No offence to Lyle and BG, who are generally good posters, but I cannot get my head around US politics and the workings of the average voters mindset. Palin is a despicable fake and McCain is a dithering old man looking to perpetuate the 8 years that have gone before. Why would anybody in the US would want a continuation of that??
And I really do not get this argument that because Obama has no experience therefore McCain is the main we need for this complicated game of politics. What tripe. Experience in perpetuating the status quo, and not trying to change things? Change is the healthy and neccessary option here. America needs it.
miles McCain stood alone against Bush for basically the whole time other than right after the failed immigration bill. McCain authors legislation that works, he's solutions oriented, and he called for and got a strategy that worked in Iraq. I supported McCain in 2000 his ideas then and his ideas now are roughly the same and it seem rather fishy that McCain once a media darling is now a parriah on tv stations everywhere and why??? Is it because he changed??? No it's simply because he opposes Obama.
And BG is 100% correct about Biden and Obama making idiots out of themselves: thinking America has 57 states, asking crippled people you've know for your entire career in the Senate to stand up, saying FDR was on tv after the Great Depression, and so on are things that if Republicans did would be plastered all over tv like ooooooh I don't know Gerald Ford falling down and Dan Quayle misspelling potato. But there is of course no media bias, there is only "Conservative talk radio"
Like most urban rumours,I can allready spot the lie.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
Actually it was a Texas speaker of the House 20 years ago that asked handicapped people to stand and be recognised.
Isnt it fun when you pay attention to history? You dont even need Snopes then,you just remember it happening
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey
Rumor?! Lie?!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2mzbuRgnI4
Not exactly the same is it,he immediatey corrected himself,and then asked the croud to stand up for himQuote:
Originally Posted by BoxingGorilla
Half truths,and blatant lies,without them,there wouldnt be a republican party
I must of misunderstood your comment. I thought you said it was a lie.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey
Lies and stuff, that doesn't really matter to me. They are all just pandering for votes of course they are going to lie or contradict themselves. I don't really care about that. What I do care about is policies, the stuff that you actually want to happen, and that's why I think Obama is the obvious choice. Don't really think character matters as much as policy was. If Jesus Christ was running on McCain's policies I wouldn't vote for him.
So we need the government to spend a trillion MORE dollars???
I got to chime in here. Are you all blind? They are virtually the same. They argue if we should be at war in afganistan or iraq. Either way they are pushing the same thing a different way.
We should borrow more money and spend it on health care or national defense. Either way the answer is to keep borrowing and racking up debt.
We have been duped for years thinking theres a difference between the repubs and dems. They are both presenting virtually identical policies. Your choice is a hamburger or a cheeseburger.
If you buy that Obama or any other major party nominee is going to make some drastic change and help us you are niave. Your vote is better off going to santa claus.
The vote we should be holding is if we should tar and feather or flog every one of the members of both political parties.
They have managed to bankrupt our nation and we are paying them lots of money to screw everything up. Seriously it disgusts me to hear people argue over this bullshit they are all jackasses that have fucked up the whole thing. And we keep on ignoring reality and chase our tails with bullshit issues.
Its a half truth based on something that did actually happen,but it wasnt Biden who said it.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoxingGorillaI must of misunderstood your comment. I thought you said it was a lie.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey
Biden immediatly corrected himself,the former speaker of the House of Texas on state Handicapped day,didnt
The way its put forward makes it sound like Biden didnt correct himself,which he did
Yeah Biden corrected himself because he made a fucking fool of himself...doesn't change that it happened, it's just the empitome of how Joe Biden is.....nice guy but just talks too much and says the wrong things at the wrong times.
Oh but there's a vast right wing conspiracy to this! Democrats are NEVER stupid, they are NEVER wrong, and they NEVER misspeak....there is ALWAYS a right wing conspiracy behind such performances :rolleyes:
Just admit it Joe Biden can/has/and will continue to misspeak and make a fool of himself...all I'm trying to prove is that when Joe Biden does it he's not called out for being a moron.
Truth.Quote:
Originally Posted by luvfightgame
If after 8 years of George Bush and Republicans in power you still think there's no real difference between Republicans and Democrats then I don't know what to tell you. That argument made some sense for awhile, but its clearly not valid anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by luvfightgame
Not like I'm hugely enthusiastic about the Democrats but they are clearly the lesser of two evils.
I think what he's saying is that the differences are somewhat superficial. The government is still going to be run at the behest of big business. A power structure that represents and favors the interests of the elites will still be in place. Special interest groups will still be dominant. There will still only be two real choices in regards to leadership etc. No real fundamental changes will occur.Quote:
Originally Posted by OumaFanIf after 8 years of George Bush and Republicans in power you still think there's no real difference between Republicans and Democrats then I don't know what to tell you. That argument made some sense for awhile, but its clearly not valid anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by luvfightgame
Not like I'm hugely enthusiastic about the Democrats but they are clearly the lesser of two evils.
It will still be a choice between two evils so to speak. At least I think that's his point.
BullshitQuote:
Originally Posted by CFHI think what he's saying is that the differences are somewhat superficial. The government is still going to be run at the behest of big business. A power structure that represents and favors the interests of the elites will still be in place. Special interest groups will still be dominant. There will still only be two real choices in regards to leadership etc. No real fundamental changes will occur.Quote:
Originally Posted by OumaFanIf after 8 years of George Bush and Republicans in power you still think there's no real difference between Republicans and Democrats then I don't know what to tell you. That argument made some sense for awhile, but its clearly not valid anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by luvfightgame
Not like I'm hugely enthusiastic about the Democrats but they are clearly the lesser of two evils.
It will still be a choice between two evils so to speak. At least I think that's his point.
Im a little older so
Republicans have controlled the White House for all but 12 of the last 40 years
The only prosperous years the country had was in 8 of those 12 not the other 28
5 Recessions, two fuel crisis,erosion of civil rights 3 different stock market crashes,2 major bailouts of financial institutions should be a wee bit of hint of what the difference is
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3045/...dae193.jpg?v=0
So history shows us there are two ways this ratio can skyrocket out of control. Either World War Two breaks out or the American people elect a member of the modern conservative movement to the White House.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.co.../palinflow.jpg
Yeah, there are some differences, obviously, but the fundamentals are still the same. Big business still hands out tons of cash to further their own interests. The elites still have their priorities pushed to the fore etc. Everything I said before is true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer MonkeyBullshitQuote:
Originally Posted by CFHI think what he's saying is that the differences are somewhat superficial. The government is still going to be run at the behest of big business. A power structure that represents and favors the interests of the elites will still be in place. Special interest groups will still be dominant. There will still only be two real choices in regards to leadership etc. No real fundamental changes will occur.Quote:
Originally Posted by OumaFan
It will still be a choice between two evils so to speak. At least I think that's his point.
Im a little older so
Republicans have controlled the White House for all but 12 of the last 40 years
The only prosperous years the country had was in 8 of those 12 not the other 28
5 Recessions, two fuel crisis,erosion of civil rights 3 different stock market crashes,2 major bailouts of financial institutions should be a wee bit of hint of what the difference is
I'm not saying the Rep. and Dem. are the same in all ways, but fundamentally they are. The every recession was not purely a result of the Republican party either. Look at the economy when Carter was in change, that was one of, if not the, most important factions that lead to Reagan.
The DEms are better, no doubt, but they're not a bunch of white-cloaked saints. They're the lesser of two evils, but they're still a bunch of self-serving, interest-representing politicians.
That being said, I hope the Rep.'s never get elected again. Hell, I wouldn't shed a tear if each one of them was executed.
Actually,noQuote:
Originally Posted by CFHYeah, there are some differences, obviously, but the fundamentals are still the same. Big business still hands out tons of cash to further their own interests. The elites still have their priorities pushed to the fore etc. Everything I said before is true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer MonkeyBullshitQuote:
Originally Posted by CFH
Im a little older so
Republicans have controlled the White House for all but 12 of the last 40 years
The only prosperous years the country had was in 8 of those 12 not the other 28
5 Recessions, two fuel crisis,erosion of civil rights 3 different stock market crashes,2 major bailouts of financial institutions should be a wee bit of hint of what the difference is
I'm not saying the Rep. and Dem. are the same in all ways, but fundamentally they are. The every recession was not purely a result of the Republican party either. Look at the economy when Carter was in change, that was one of, if not the, most important factions that lead to Reagan.
The DEms are better, no doubt, but they're not a bunch of white-cloaked saints. They're the lesser of two evils, but they're still a bunch of self-serving, interest-representing politicians.
That being said, I hope the Rep.'s never get elected again. Hell, I wouldn't shed a tear if each one of them was executed.
Every reliable poll says that without the hostage crisis,Carter beats Reagan.
Isnt it interesting how quickly the Iranians released the hostages after the election,almost like they had a deal or something.
And Im sure Reagan authorizing the sale of missile components to Iran later was strictly coincidental
That certainly was extremely influential, and one of the main reasons for Reagan ascention, but it was certainly not the only reason. Everything I have read and have been taught in school has stated that the economic situation was a primary reason, not the only one, but a very important one. Inflation soared in 1979, he gave his "malaise speech", scandals broke out in the while house. Carter was also unable to firmly establish his human rights policy, nor was he able to strike a deal with the Soviets on arms limitations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer MonkeyActually,noQuote:
Originally Posted by CFHYeah, there are some differences, obviously, but the fundamentals are still the same. Big business still hands out tons of cash to further their own interests. The elites still have their priorities pushed to the fore etc. Everything I said before is true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey
I'm not saying the Rep. and Dem. are the same in all ways, but fundamentally they are. The every recession was not purely a result of the Republican party either. Look at the economy when Carter was in change, that was one of, if not the, most important factions that lead to Reagan.
The DEms are better, no doubt, but they're not a bunch of white-cloaked saints. They're the lesser of two evils, but they're still a bunch of self-serving, interest-representing politicians.
That being said, I hope the Rep.'s never get elected again. Hell, I wouldn't shed a tear if each one of them was executed.
Every reliable poll says that without the hostage crisis,Carter beats Reagan.
Isnt it interesting how quickly the Iranians released the hostages after the election,almost like they had a deal or something.
And Im sure Reagan authorizing the sale of missile components to Iran later was strictly coincidental
Didnt read it in school,I was around for itQuote:
Originally Posted by CFHThat certainly was extremely influential, and one of the main reasons for Reagan ascention, but it was certainly not the only reason. Everything I have read and have been taught in school has stated that the economic situation was a primary reason, not the only one, but a very important one. Inflation soared in 1979, he gave his "malaise speech", scandals broke out in the while house. Carter was also unable to firmly establish his human rights policy, nor was he able to strike a deal with the Soviets on arms limitations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer MonkeyActually,noQuote:
Originally Posted by CFH
Every reliable poll says that without the hostage crisis,Carter beats Reagan.
Isnt it interesting how quickly the Iranians released the hostages after the election,almost like they had a deal or something.
And Im sure Reagan authorizing the sale of missile components to Iran later was strictly coincidental
You take out the hostage mess,there is no Reagan Revolution,thats all anyone was talking about in 1979/1980
And the recession started in 1973 under Nixon with the Opec embargo
I can't help when I was born, and no offense intended but I'll take the opinions of experts who have spent their career's studying such things over the words of someone who happen to be "around for it". I don't for a second disagree that the hostage crises was very influential, but its not the sole reason Carter lost.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer MonkeyDidnt read it in school,I was around for itQuote:
Originally Posted by CFHThat certainly was extremely influential, and one of the main reasons for Reagan ascention, but it was certainly not the only reason. Everything I have read and have been taught in school has stated that the economic situation was a primary reason, not the only one, but a very important one. Inflation soared in 1979, he gave his "malaise speech", scandals broke out in the while house. Carter was also unable to firmly establish his human rights policy, nor was he able to strike a deal with the Soviets on arms limitations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey
You take out the hostage mess,there is no Reagan Revolution,thats all anyone was talking about in 1979/1980
And the recession started in 1973 under Nixon with the Opec embargo
I'm also well aware of the OPEC situation, it starting under Nixon means nothing because it doesn't negate the fact that the Carter adminstration inherited the problems.
We can make it even more fun
Why did they take the hostages?
Because the US had been allied with the Shah of Iran for 20 years,and if we didnt let him in to the states for cancer treatment,we would have come across as untrustworthy to the rest of the world,so Carter more or less had no choice but to let him in.
Now who supported his rise to power when he was President?
Dwight D Eisenhower
He also sent the first military advisers to Vietnam
Im not a huge fan of either party not owning up to their own messes,and Im adamantly opposed to history being re-written.
But if you compare records,there is a serious difference between the Democrats and the Republicans.
You want some flaws of the last three Democrat presidents
Clinton po'ed the old school party early
Carter won because he promised to end corruption,the ensconced corruption vowed to end him for it. He didnt play ball well
Johnson got handed a cluster F all around. He tried to do some good things,but he got handed a mess.First Nam was dropped right in his lap,and it was totally unwinnable,evidence suggests Nixon also tampered with the 68 Peace Negotiations which was so helpfull. On top of that he had a moral obligation to sign the Civil Rights Act,but that cost him all of the Dixiecrats
The "experts" have done a magnificent job of re-writing history, sorry it still stands,every reliable poll at the time had Carter winning the election without the Hostage CrisisQuote:
Originally Posted by CFHI can't help when I was born, and no offense intended but I'll take the opinions of experts who have spent their career's studying such things over the words of someone who happen to be "around for it". I don't for a second disagree that the hostage crises was very influential, but its not the sole reason Carter lost.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer MonkeyDidnt read it in school,I was around for itQuote:
Originally Posted by CFH
You take out the hostage mess,there is no Reagan Revolution,thats all anyone was talking about in 1979/1980
And the recession started in 1973 under Nixon with the Opec embargo
I'm also well aware of the OPEC situation, it starting under Nixon means nothing because it doesn't negate the fact that the Carter adminstration inherited the problems.
November 4 1980 Election
January 20th all Hostages released
January 20th Reagan Inaugural Address
For the 3rd time, I never said there weren't differences between the parties, I've also said I prefer the Dems., but they both operate in a similar manner. Representing the interests of business, helping their friends, helping the rich get richer or stay rich, and everything else. Clearly there are differences, that is why there are two parties.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey
IN MY OPINION, the Democrats are not the good guys, they are the slightly less bad guys, but both parties are seriously flawed.
What would a bunch of liberal, left-wing academics have to gain by re-writing history in favor of the Republicans? How exactly did they re-write history? Their interest is in facts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer MonkeyThe "experts" have done a magnificent job of re-writing history, sorry it still stands,every reliable poll at the time had Carter winning the election without the Hostage CrisisQuote:
Originally Posted by CFHI can't help when I was born, and no offense intended but I'll take the opinions of experts who have spent their career's studying such things over the words of someone who happen to be "around for it". I don't for a second disagree that the hostage crises was very influential, but its not the sole reason Carter lost.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey
I'm also well aware of the OPEC situation, it starting under Nixon means nothing because it doesn't negate the fact that the Carter adminstration inherited the problems.
November 4 1980 Election
January 20th all Hostages released
January 20th Reagan Inaugural Address
So all my extremely liberal profs and the writers of the text books are all part of some right-wing conspiracy? ok.... :rolleyes:
What is a reliable poll? They are inherently flawed and far from reliable.
Liberal,son you aint been paying attention,the William Kristols,and Milton Friendmans of the world have been taking over academiaQuote:
Originally Posted by CFHWhat would a bunch of liberal, left-wing academics have to gain by re-writing history in favor of the Republicans? How exactly did they re-write history? Their interest is in facts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer MonkeyThe "experts" have done a magnificent job of re-writing history, sorry it still stands,every reliable poll at the time had Carter winning the election without the Hostage CrisisQuote:
Originally Posted by CFH
November 4 1980 Election
January 20th all Hostages released
January 20th Reagan Inaugural Address
So all my extremely liberal profs and the writers of the text books are all part of some right-wing conspiracy? ok.... :rolleyes:
What is a reliable poll? They are inherently flawed and far from reliable.
When I was your age Ayn Rand was barely considered toilet paper,now its required reading
Well Michael Harrington is now forgotten,Mother Jones is nothing but a magazine,and Bill Buckley got everything he ever wanted
And the result on every single indicator,is absolute disaster.
No,I refuse to let the repugnants weasel out,saying its bad on both sides,or we didnt really want that.They got everything they ever wanted,have been striving for since 1968 and its a complete mess. Dont give me the defeatist "Oh well theyre all the same" or let them weasel out. You shit on your self your supposed to smell bad.
An old way of dealing with a chicken killing dog,you tie that last chicken around its neck,and let it rot.
That dog wont kill anymore chickens
I smell chicken