As of this week, you only get one open thread until comment rates rise.
That which is not a thread topic, goes here. Also, any topic you want to bring back from the dead or any suggestions for a new topic, goes here.
caveat: the usual rules apply.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
26 comments:
This one is worth your time:
Michelle Malkin, 29. Aug
...because this is how it begins...
...or (risking a Godwin's Law violation) maybe I should mention the Ordnertruppen
You see, I don't take kindly to suppression of freedom *by any authority*.
great article by Malkin--
Obama's campaign: Do what I tell you and don't ask questions...
His Speech was a coronation, on TV, and kind of dull on the radio, The Media applauding him without objectivity was just shamefull.
However, I do like How McCain jsut took the wind out of Obama's sails with the announcement of his VP pick.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin
I have no objections to her. I have known about her before this, and think this is a good idea.
Scott
As more than one article on the web has pointed out, McCain is already 72, and his father died at 70. How on earth are we supposed to think that Palin is ready to take over the Presidency at a moment's notice after being mayor of a small town, and 2 years of governing Alaska? (And it's not like AK has a budget crisis or anything with the oil price run-up over the last couple of years.)
I am very worried about BO's (lack of) experience, but Palin isn't even in his league.
This is going to be an historic election, but I'm thinking "None of the Above" looks better and better as President at this point.
@Will
re: "but Palin isn't even..."
I'd put those two resumes side by side there before making that call your absolute answer. Moreover, if the point made is that the candidate at the top of the Democratic ticket is marginally more experienced (in your hypothesis)than the candidate in the trailer of the Republican ticket, then I'm not seeing how even having that mentioned is good for the Obama campaign.
Besides,
*This* is what the Obama camp wants the discussion to be. Present the image as seen by the true believers and win over enough of the middle to swing the Electoral College.
Win by 1 or win by a landslide; in the U.S.A., a win is a win.
I have no objections to her. I have known about her before this, and think this is a good idea.
So, you don't object to a pro-lifer who is against abortion even for extreme medical reasons or because of rape?
And you don't object to a Creationist being a heartbeat away from the presidency?
Good to know!
And it's not like AK has a budget crisis or anything
The state might not, but take a look at the sports center land debacle, the ensuing court costs, and the burden still borne by the town of Wasilla, AK that all started while Governor Palin was Mayor of the town. It's not a bright spot on her record of executive decisions.
Reference 1
Reference 2
Reference 3
@mr. bill
If you've got more on Palin's position/history on Abortion rights, I'd for one like to see them, because that is a serious nutcracker issue -- i.e. it breaks things for some people.
If it is as nuanced as her "creationist" position, the Republicans may still be ok... if.
Here's LGF, *archfoe* of creationism in all its forms, on Palin, creationism, and education (state education).
I'm not seeing a show-stopper on that issue. color me surprised.
@mr. bill
reference 2 <--looks like a dead link from where I am.
Rather than my trying to guess and search, have an alternate sourcing?
Thanks!
follow-up
still looking for more on Palin's abortion rights, but even the RtL'ers don't seem to showcase her as an absolutist. They even sounded like they were being her apologist here for not allowing certain legal limits on abortion to enter debate in the Alaska House -because she didn't think they could pass-.
hrm.
She is a Parental Consenter (believes parents should have veto power over minor's choice of abortion).
@LDG:
The deleted comment is mine. I tried to post the raw url, but oddly it didn't wrap, making it useless. So, here it is, using tinyurl:
http://tinyurl.com/5bzygr
And, in handy clickable form: Reference 2 redux
@mr. bill
no luck, from my end at least, with or without tiny url.
sorry to trouble you, compadre.
I'll just hope others can read it, and I'll count it as a contextual source for the two ADN articles and let's go with that.
@LDG:
A science-side take on Gov. Palin's Creationism:
http://scienceblogs.com/afarensis/2006/10/27/intelligent_design_and_the_ala/
or, Observation
@LDG:
re: no luck
Emailed the story from the source to your hotmail account.
@mr.bill
re: mailed it...
Got it, thank you!
Key point there is that the city had to reallocate funding to cover a shortfall projected for FY2008 because of the costs of settling the failed eminent domain case.
re: Science blogs
amusingly cites the same quotations from articles LGF pointed to. small world.
Thanks for taking the time on this, Bill.
As much as any of us may loathe or have no objections to her, I find it interesting that Republicans in her own state object to her being chosen as McCain's running mate:
http://www.adn.com/politics/story/510249.html
Local story
I understand the old-line Alaska GOP hates her, and has been trying to figure out how to deal with her to no avail for years now.
Her general popularity is huge and runs across party lines, so has been reported (Did some one cite 80% approval rating here? Anycase, it is high).
You know, I don't think anyone was planning for the Sen. T. Stevens (R-AK) corruption trial to have *quite* this backdrop of national notice...
Why does everyone in DC or on the two coasts immediately think that anyone without an ivy league education or who has not "served" (read that wasted time) in Congress is not qualified to lead this country? What EXECUTIVE experience does BO have? Also, what qualifications did our founding fathers have? Better, worse? The misogynistic and deprecating remarks I have been reading these days makes me think that the vast majority of people are just paying lip service to "change."
Excuse grammar and typos, but in a rush.
This lead story is a MUST, along with the videos.
http://michellemalkin.com/
@Marie
I think *this* is the lead you refer to, yes?
while-louisiana-prepares-for-hurricane-gustav-dems-gloat-and-guffaw
Meanwhile, in the "I ALWAYS have a tranquilizer dart gun to hand..." Department:
OH, PLEASE, how stupid do you think we are, Reuters?
Happy hurricane, everyone!
I'm getting a little tired of both philosophical extremes wielding the emotional baseball bat to make their points... but the idea of people who define themselves as Christians being so petty, so foul, so shallow to use the power of prayer in their Lord's Name to enact what amounts to some childish prank really disgusts me.
@ Marie:
Why does everyone in DC or on the two coasts immediately think that anyone without an ivy league education or who has not "served" (read that wasted time) in Congress is not qualified to lead this country?
Unless a person's family has a great deal of influence, that individual has to be pretty sharp not only to get into the Ivy League, but to survive its academic rigors. Most everyone I've met who's passed through that particular rite of passage is thoughtful, perceptive, and exceptionally bright. Personally, I like the idea of bright, well-educated people being in charge of the country.
What EXECUTIVE experience does BO have?
If, by BO, you mean Senator Obama,
apparently not very much. Senator McCain's "executive" experience includes commanding a training squadron after he was freed from captivity. That might be more executive experience than Senator Obama has, but I don't see it as a qualifying resume bullet point for holding down the job of Chief Executive of the United States of America.
Also, what qualifications did our founding fathers have? Better, worse?
You mean, aside from the Ivy League educations some of them held? They came from myriad backgrounds with a vast array of experience. They were also all white and male.
The misogynistic and deprecating remarks I have been reading these days makes me think that the vast majority of people are just paying lip service to "change."
If you're referring to those commonly associated with the Liberal Left, may I remind you that Senator McCain is purported to have referred to his wife by the c-word, in public, in view and hearing of reliable witnesses.
This is as close to first-hand knowledge of such things as I can find. I'd like to see references to recorded/witnessed language, and not just some pundit's interpretation of a message -- but all I've read is someone's subjective interpretation of what someone else said. I am beginning to wonder if one can criticize a female politician without it being interpreted as misogynistic.
@mr bill
You are on a roll here this morning, Bravo!
real quick notes from me:
re: Dobson's FotF -- I have come to expect little else from them. I *know* that is an unfair collective statement, but they keep doing such in public.
re: Marie's and yours on Ivy League Education -- you two are talking past one another, methinks. Nothing in Marie's assertation precuded anything in mr. bill's. This is a time you can both be correct.
re: executive experience -- This actually calls into focus the old arguement that being a Senator is a very different, and in some light an unsuitable, experience set for what one would want in a President. The old "Governors beat Senators" as Presidential Candidates argument. What makes it tough this time is the top of *both* tickets come out of the Senate, so all sorts of secondary measures of competence come into play (He's better eduacated; He's got more legislative history; and so on)
side comment on "founding fathers" -- I'll believe "race", or such labels as "white" or "black" matter just as soon as someone defines for me *what "race" means* when discussing human ancestry and tells me *why that matters in the slightest*. CULTURE matters. This persistant (and foolish) identity-seeking labeled "race" does not.
ok, back on track now. Thanks for indulging me.
Post a Comment