Obama versus McCain (versus the rest)

[JonInMiddleGA]

Yeah, I agree. Geez I can actually see his white hood all the way from Colorado.

Nah. That's just the turbans Obama bin Biden's are wearing.

:D

[SFL Cat]

Yeah, I agree. Geez I can actually see his white hood all the way from Colorado.

Well played sir.

LOL for real.

I usually don't attempt to engage in adult discussions here...it's generally pointless, especially in regards to politics.

Thank you lovely gents for making my point. Now go chill and vote for Barrack Hussein Obama bin Biden this November. :p

[SFL Cat]

dola -- and if he does win, I'll certainly be here to watch your political orgasms.

[DaddyTorgo]

Thank you lovely gents for making my point. Now go chill and vote for Barrack Hussein Obama bin Biden this November. :p

*ignore list*

[SFL Cat]

*ignore list*

*sniff*

[molson]

Sincere question for Obama supporters:

-Who would you most "fear" as a McCain VP? Understanding of course that VPs don't mean much (that's no fun though). Who could have McCain picked that would make you think, "shit, that's a good pick", and be a (mild) punch to your stomach?

[Crim]

Pretty much scored exactly where I figured:

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz-score/draw.php?p=7&e=4

how did you guys post that chart?

[sabotai]

-Who would you most "fear" as a McCain VP?

My two cents

IMO Mike Huckabee would have been the best choice. I sincerely doubt that picking Palin is going to bring Clinton's supporters to McCain. If anything, some might get offended at the thought of McCain picking her to appeal to them. Huckabee would solidify the conservative base behind McCain, is well known, and I think he's a genuinely likeable person. We know he can certainly hold his own during a debate as well. His demeanor and the way he speaks to an audience would have been a great counter to Biden-the-Attack-Dog.

[sabotai]

how did you guys post that chart?

Right click on the image after taking the test and pick "Copy Image Location" (or something like that).

[Crim]

correction of my earlier post. Apparently, the Buffy the Vampire slayer thing was a rumor. Her kid is named Willow, but not based on the character from the show.

Don't know if that'll change anyone's vote or not.

Bolded part lolled me.

[SFL Cat]

My two cents

IMO Mike Huckabee would have been the best choice. I sincerely doubt that picking Palin is going to bring Clinton's supporters to McCain. If anything, some might get offended at the thought of McCain picking her to appeal to them. Huckabee would solidify the conservative base behind McCain, is well known, and I think he's a genuinely likeable person. We know he can certainly hold his own during a debate as well. His demeanor and the way he speaks to an audience would have been a great counter to Biden-the-Attack-Dog.

Actually, I think if Huckabee had been the guy, Obama's people would have immediately launched a "look, McCain has picked a religious-right wacko for his running mate," style attack. I think the Obama team would have loved this scenario.

[Crim]

Okay, let's see if this works...

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz-score/draw.php?p=5&e=7


Right about where I expected to be, but I'll echo others that the wording of a coupla questions was problematic. I hadda go with two "maybes".

[Vegas Vic]

Pretty much what I expected:

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz-score/draw.php?p=6&e=5

[Arles]

Actually, I think if Huckabee had been the guy, Obama's people would have immediately launched a "look, McCain has picked a religious-right wacko for his running mate," style attack. I think the Obama team would have loved this scenario.
Yep, McCain hit the jackpot with Palin. With one choice, he made his candidacy more attractive to independent/moderate women, shored up the conservative base and added a jolt of electricity to the ticket right before the convention.

Had McCain named Romney, Liebermann, Pawlenty, Huckabee or Ridge, most republicans would be feeling defeatist going into next week's convention after Obama's very good performance Thursday night. Now, Obama's speech is a distant memory and everyone is excited about seeing this new ticket on parade next week.

Now, does this mean McCain wins? I don't know, I still see it as a bit of a longshot given the political climate. Still, the process has suddenly become very interesting for conservatives - something I didn't think would be possible just weeks ago.

[SFL Cat]

Now, does this mean McCain wins? I don't know, I still see it as a bit of a longshot given the political climate. Still, the process has suddenly become very interesting for conservatives - something I didn't think would be possible just weeks ago.

agreed.

[stevew]

Maybe they were spoonfeeding her on the CNBC interview I saw with her, but she seemed good enough for me. Too bad she actually accepted the nod, and gets to go down on the USS McFailure.

I mean, regardless, the party is fucked beyond belief. It's going to take 10-12 years to fix the damage Bush has done. Hopefully by then they boot out all the old guard republicans who are way too owned by special interests.

Ah well, only like 5 more months of the Romanov dynasty left.

[SackAttack]

Sincere question for Obama supporters:

-Who would you most "fear" as a McCain VP? Understanding of course that VPs don't mean much (that's no fun though). Who could have McCain picked that would make you think, "shit, that's a good pick", and be a (mild) punch to your stomach?

I think to me, the answer involves both meanings of the word "fear."

I think Huckabee would have brought out a lot of the single-issue Republican voters who might otherwise have sat things out...

...and I would be scared shitless at the prospect of him being anywhere remotely close to the Presidency. Enough that I'd be volunteering for the Obama campaign instead of merely considering myself likely to vote for him at this stage.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I mean, regardless, the party is fucked beyond belief. It's going to take 10-12 years to fix the damage Bush has done.

A mediocre candidate that doesn't inspire even the base, an iffy choice for a running mate, trying to succeed an incumbent that isn't exactly Mr. Popularity ... and they're neck & neck after the DNC party and within hours of it's end all the attention is on McCain.

Never mind the politics of either side, the Dems ought to have been in position for a coronation & yet even pessimistic ol' doom & gloom me has already figured out that if McCain doesn't screw up he's probably going to pull this off.

Seems to me that the one that keeps winning probably isn't the one that gets to wear the "fucked beyond belief" label. But I have to admit watching the D's snatch defeat from the jaws of victory is kinda fun.

[lighthousekeeper]

yet even pessimistic ol' doom & gloom me has already figured out that if McCain doesn't screw up he's probably going to pull this off.

heh - you might want to reevaluate your self-characterization :)

[lighthousekeeper]

Sincere question for Obama supporters:

-Who would you most "fear" as a McCain VP? Understanding of course that VPs don't mean much (that's no fun though). Who could have McCain picked that would make you think, "shit, that's a good pick", and be a (mild) punch to your stomach?


Bill Clinton. If he ran as McCain's running mate, Obama's camp would certainly need to worry.

[flere-imsaho]

Which is a loftier decision than Obama has ever had to make.

I don't think you understand the stakes involved in community organizing, to pick but one example.

No, but I'm not discounting it either. Clinton was the governor of itty bitty Arkansas, and yet many of you consider him the greatest president ever.

Prove it (the bolded part). I don't think there's a single FOFC member here who feels this way. Prove it.

dola -- on top of that, Palin has actually had a career outside of politics, something I don't think any of the other candidates can claim, unless you want to count McCain's military service.

Obama's worked as a community organizer, as a lawyer, as a lecturer and in a research firm, as well as being involved in a good number of boards.

Sincere question for Obama supporters:

-Who would you most "fear" as a McCain VP? Understanding of course that VPs don't mean much (that's no fun though). Who could have McCain picked that would make you think, "shit, that's a good pick", and be a (mild) punch to your stomach?

For me, it was Colin Powell. I didn't think it would happen, but I did see it bandied about a bit.

[Swaggs]

Sincere question for Obama supporters:

-Who would you most "fear" as a McCain VP? Understanding of course that VPs don't mean much (that's no fun though). Who could have McCain picked that would make you think, "shit, that's a good pick", and be a (mild) punch to your stomach?

I would have been most uncomfortable with Romney. I think he could have helped shore up McCain in his biggest areas of weakness (economy, fundraising, solidifying his base) and have boosted McCain past Obama in Western swing states (New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada). He also has more of the suddenly all-important executive experience as Palin. I think Obama has to win 2 of those 3 states in order to win the general. I think his religion may have hurt McCain, a bit, in the South -- but not enough to swing things to Obama.

[Swaggs]

Yep, McCain hit the jackpot with Palin. With one choice, he made his candidacy more attractive to independent/moderate women, shored up the conservative base and added a jolt of electricity to the ticket right before the convention.

Had McCain named Romney, Liebermann, Pawlenty, Huckabee or Ridge, most republicans would be feeling defeatist going into next week's convention after Obama's very good performance Thursday night. Now, Obama's speech is a distant memory and everyone is excited about seeing this new ticket on parade next week.

Now, does this mean McCain wins? I don't know, I still see it as a bit of a longshot given the political climate. Still, the process has suddenly become very interesting for conservatives - something I didn't think would be possible just weeks ago.


By all acounts, Palin is far more conservative than McCain, so I'm not sure how attractive she is going to be to independent/moderate voters. I think she will substantially help to rally the base, but her views on creationism, abortion, and (I think the charge she is going to be attacked on most, aside from inexperience) cronyism will stand out to voters once the initial "wow" factor subsides.

[JPhillips]

You mean the Don Young who was connected to both the Abramoff debacle (adn.com | alaska : Young linked to Abramoff's tribal clients (http://dwb.adn.com/news/alaska/story/7391199p-7303453c.html)) and one of the main culprits in the Veco scandal? (adn.com | Alaska political investigations : Paper reports Young's Veco ties investigated in federal probe (http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/fbi/story/9162143p-9077780c.html))


You mean the Frank Murkowski who was a complete disaster as governor, created a ton of wasteful spending and left office with a whopping 14% approval rating because of scandals/spending?


About the only thing that would hurt Palin from those two winners would be a complete endorsement. Why don't we just ask Jack Ryan his opinion of Obama while we're at it.

And it will still be all over the media.

[JPhillips]

dola

-Who would you most "fear" as a McCain VP? Understanding of course that VPs don't mean much (that's no fun though). Who could have McCain picked that would make you think, "shit, that's a good pick", and be a (mild) punch to your stomach?

Palin is a good political choice, even if it's rather nakedly so. The Republican crowd yesterday cheering for Hillary was a bit too much IMO.

The guy that would really scare me is Jesus. A McCain/Jesus ticket would be tough to beat.

[Big Fo]

Who would you most "fear" as a McCain VP? Understanding of course that VPs don't mean much (that's no fun though). Who could have McCain picked that would make you think, "shit, that's a good pick", and be a (mild) punch to your stomach?

I thought Huckabee would have been a better choice, he seemed likable, appeals to the religious right, and did pretty well in the primaries. Also, people couldn't say he was blatantly chosen for his gender.

But fear is the wrong word since I fear none of them and feel that the Democrats have an excellent chance of winning the election regardless of who was chosen.

[timmynausea]

And it will still be all over the media.

That's exactly what I was going to say.

[Galaril]

Sincere question for Obama supporters:

-Who would you most "fear" as a McCain VP? Understanding of course that VPs don't mean much (that's no fun though). Who could have McCain picked that would make you think, "shit, that's a good pick", and be a (mild) punch to your stomach?

Who he has picked Paulin. She was a great choice and really well timed and played. I mean there has been not a peep on TV about Obamas speech really amazing considering how good it was.

[Jas_lov]

Palin was McCain's best choice. Huckabee is a lunatic, Romney is a flip flopper, Libermann is a democrat, Pawlenty is boring. Palin gets the base enthusastic and helps with the women vote. The VP matters the most in the VP debate. The bar for her vs. Biden will be so low, but she can't have a major flop or this will be a big disaster. Palin should also probably get up to speed on Iraq.

[timmynausea]

I think you guys gushing over Palin may have missed the post about how she isn't actually a Buffy fan.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Yep, McCain hit the jackpot with Palin. With one choice, he made his candidacy more attractive to independent/moderate women, shored up the conservative base and added a jolt of electricity to the ticket right before the convention.

I love this notion that ex-Hillary supporters or women in general who were on the fence will (or may) now shift their support/vote to McCain because he picked a woman as his running mate.

I mean, seriously, people are acting as if women could care less about the issues or a politician's views on any number of subjects and will just vote: VAGINA!!!!

Yeah, we've come a long way, baby...

That is all. See you in November!

[JPhillips]

I can see the bumper stickers already:

Don't Blame Me
I Voted Vagina!

[QuikSand]

The guy that would really scare me is Jesus. A McCain/Jesus ticket would be tough to beat.

The Romney campaign worked hard to point out that while he has clearly spent lots of time in the states, he is not a natural-born American, and therefore ineligible to seek the office. BULLET DODGED.

[JPhillips]

Very nice.

[lighthousekeeper]

The guy that would really scare me is Jesus. A McCain/Jesus ticket would be tough to beat.

What!? He has ZERO executive experience!

[Buccaneer]

My two cents

IMO Mike Huckabee would have been the best choice. I sincerely doubt that picking Palin is going to bring Clinton's supporters to McCain. If anything, some might get offended at the thought of McCain picking her to appeal to them. Huckabee would solidify the conservative base behind McCain, is well known, and I think he's a genuinely likeable person. We know he can certainly hold his own during a debate as well. His demeanor and the way he speaks to an audience would have been a great counter to Biden-the-Attack-Dog.

Sab, but the "replace the Constitution with the Scriptures" thing would get a lot of play, don't you think? The two most common words I have seen about Palin are "inexperience" and "reformer". Those two would be much more positive, relatively, then those atrributed to Huckabee.

[Buccaneer]

Quiksand, I had forgotten to check worthwhilemoney this week to see what the GOP VP shares had been running, particularly before Wednesday. Do you recall?

[ISiddiqui]

Who he has picked Paulin. She was a great choice and really well timed and played. I mean there has been not a peep on TV about Obamas speech really amazing considering how good it was.

Exactly. McCain is dominating the TV cycle. And Palin, while lacking experience, is someone that evangelicals just LOVE (and McCain needed to shore up his base) and, in addition, has a rep as an ethical reformer and a fighter or entrenched political machines, even if they are in her own party.

[John Galt]

Palin, because she is a largely unknown quantity, is like a new EA game at FOFC. Initial excitement is very high and supporters will love the selection for a few days. The real test is how everyone will feel about her in a month. The opinions and impressions today are unrelated to how people will feel later.

For prior examples of this honeymoon effect, see every EA game ever posted on this board and the experience of Barack Obama. EA games never hold up well. Obama has done alright, but the luster is clearly gone for a lot of people. Who knows how Palin will look in a month?

And SFL Cat is a racist tool.

[ISiddiqui]

Tigh/Roslin '08

http://i33.tinypic.com/f9lhy0.jpg

[Big Fo]

Palin, because she is a largely unknown quantity, is like a new EA game at FOFC. Initial excitement is very high and supporters will love the selection for a few days. The real test is how everyone will feel about her in a month. The opinions and impressions today are unrelated to how people will feel later.


Nice one :D

[Buccaneer]

For prior examples of this honeymoon effect, see every EA game ever posted on this board and the experience of Barack Obama. EA games never hold up well. Obama has done alright, but the luster is clearly gone for a lot of people. Who knows how Palin will look in a month?



You would have to factor in the case that there were a lot of people, of all political persuasions, rooting for Obama to beat the Clintons.

I think in a month, the bigger question will be how McCain will look, not Palin. Same for Obama.

[John Galt]

I think in a month, the bigger question will be how McCain will look, not Palin. Same for Obama.

I agree that the VP selection doesn't matter as much - I'm just trying to temper the emotions of those who are a bit enthused by the selection of Palin. However, barring some major mistake or scandal, public opinion of McCain and Obama won't change much at all. 95% of the American public doesn't follow politics to 1/10th of the degree that pundits assume.

[sabotai]

Sab, but the "replace the Constitution with the Scriptures" thing would get a lot of play, don't you think?

Yeah, as someone said earlier, Hackabee is a lunatic, but one that the religious right loves. He's just too nice of a guy to hate because of his insanity, and I've always thought that above everything else, elections are simply popularity contests. Huckabee is a likeable, popular person and anyone who would be turned off by his religious nutbaggery wasn't voting for McCain anyway.

[Apathetic Lurker]

lawyer[/B] and law professor. McCain worked for his father-in-law's beer distributorship. Biden was a lawyer.

There ya go. Now its obvious who would be better for America. Take the guy who drops off the kegs over the ambulance chasers

[Crapshoot]

Yes, I feel soooo much more confident seeing Osama bin Bama negotiating that treaty.



Tell me, how have the local Klan meetings been going? Must be harder to recruit these days. :rolleyes:

[Deattribution]

I love this notion that ex-Hillary supporters or women in general who were on the fence will (or may) now shift their support/vote to McCain because he picked a woman as his running mate.

I mean, seriously, people are acting as if women could care less about the issues or a politician's views on any number of subjects and will just vote: VAGINA!!!!

Yeah, we've come a long way, baby...

That is all. See you in November!

And nobody is voting for Obama because he's black also, right?

That's not saying that is the only reason he's getting votes but when you have people voting for one guy cause he's black, people voting for a woman because they're a woman isn't quite the stretch you try to make it sound. I'd suggest coming back to reality where race, gender and political affiliation actually do effect the way people vote.

Hell, people vote for candidates because Oprah or Madonna like them. We just don't have any of them on this board (I don't think).

She'll get votes because she's a woman, and she'll lose them because she's a woman. Just like Obama will because he's black. As far as we've come, there are still lots of people who want things to stay the same. That's what makes this election, and McCain's choice historic - because no matter what it's going to create change in the perception for women, and/or minorities. In the end, that'll only be the only change we are guaranteed which isn't such a bad thing.

[DaddyTorgo]

honestly -- my last big fear about this election is exemplified by SFL Cat. We like to claim we're a progressive society, that we don't see race anymore, but to what extent are we kidding ourselves? What % of the electorate simply won't vote for Obama because of the color of his skin, or his name? I think that's got to be a real concern actually, because I think that there is a vocal minority who we can be sure won't (exemplified by SFL Cat), but that's just the "tip of the iceberg" and like a real iceberg, the vast majority of it is underwater.

[molson]

What % of the electorate simply won't vote for Obama because of the color of his skin, or his name?

Deattribution brings up a good point though - what % of the electorate will vote for Obama simply because he, as he loves to say, "doesn't look like your typical presidential candidate".

I'm sure its a substantial number. We can't know which number is bigger.

[stevew]

A mediocre candidate that doesn't inspire even the base, an iffy choice for a running mate, trying to succeed an incumbent that isn't exactly Mr. Popularity ... and they're neck & neck after the DNC party and within hours of it's end all the attention is on McCain.

Never mind the politics of either side, the Dems ought to have been in position for a coronation & yet even pessimistic ol' doom & gloom me has already figured out that if McCain doesn't screw up he's probably going to pull this off.

Seems to me that the one that keeps winning probably isn't the one that gets to wear the "fucked beyond belief" label. But I have to admit watching the D's snatch defeat from the jaws of victory is kinda fun.


I guess I mean "fucked beyond belief" on a personal level. These don't fit the mold of what I think a republican should be. It's going to take several toilet flushes to get rid of the majority of these "conservative" jokers.

Anyways, yeah, if McCain wins it'll be hilarious.

[molson]

Anyways, yeah, if McCain wins it'll be hilarious.

Yes...Where would the Democratic Party go from there? What's the next level after desperation?

[ISiddiqui]

Anyways, yeah, if McCain wins it'll be hilarious.

:D

Hillary would have a field day too.

[sabotai]

If McCain wins, what are the odds of a Sarah Palin vs. Hilary Clinton election in 2012? McCain is 72, he'll turn 76 during the 2012 campaign, and 4 years as President is a long time. I'm wondering if he wins, what are the chances he chooses to serve for just 1 term? A bit unheard of these days, but so is having an 70+ year old President.

And if McCain wins, there's a really good chance Clinton is the nominee in 2012. The only reason she wouldn't would be if McCain/Pelin have a really good approval rating and McCain runs for a 2nd term (she wouldn't run if she knows she'll lose to a popular President).

[molson]

If McCain wins, what are the odds of a Sarah Palin vs. Hilary Clinton election in 2012? McCain is 72, he'll turn 76 during the 2012 campaign, and 4 years as President is a long time. I'm wondering if he wins, what are the chances he chooses to serve for just 1 term? A bit unheard of these days, but so is having an 70+ year old President.

And if McCain wins, there's a really good chance Clinton is the nominee in 2012. The only reason she wouldn't would be if McCain/Pelin have a really good approval rating and McCain runs for a 2nd term (she wouldn't run if she knows she'll lose to a popular President).

I think it would be tough for Palin to win the Republican nomination. Though I could see whoever was nominated to use her as running mate.

[Big Fo]

Pretty funny stuff, Karl Rove speculating on who Obama might choose as a VP a few weeks ago.

"I think he's going to make an intensely political choice, not a governing choice," Rove said. "He's going to view this through the prism of a candidate, not through the prism of president; that is to say, he's going to pick somebody that he thinks will on the margin help him in a state like Indiana or Missouri or Virginia. He's not going to be thinking big and broad about the responsibilities of president."

Rove singled out Virginia governor Tim Kaine, also a Face The Nation guest, as an example of such a pick.

"With all due respect again to Governor Kaine, he's been a governor for three years, he's been able but undistinguished," Rove said. "I don't think people could really name a big, important thing that he's done. He was mayor of the 105th largest city in America."

Rove continued: "So if he were to pick Governor Kaine, it would be an intensely political choice where he said, `You know what? I'm really not, first and foremost, concerned with, is this person capable of being president of the United States? What I'm concerned about is, can he bring me the electoral votes of the state of Virginia, the 13 electoral votes in Virginia?'"

Replace VA's electoral votes with moderate women and there you go. cbsnews.com link (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/10/ftn/main4336134.shtml)

Also, Republicans have been grossly exaggerating Palin's resistance to the Bridge to Nowhere.

Did Palin Really Fight The “Bridge To Nowhere”?

Republicans have been heavily touting Sarah Palin's reformist credentials, with her supposed opposition to Alaska's "Bridge to Nowhere" as Exhibit A. But how hard did she really fight the project? Not very, it seems. Here's what she told the Anchorage Daily News on October 22, 2006, during the race for the governor's seat (via Nexis):

5. Would you continue state funding for the proposed Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges?

Yes. I would like to see Alaska's infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now--while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist.

So she was very much for the bridge and insisted that Alaska had to act quickly—the party of Ted Stevens and Don Young might soon lose its majority, after all. By that point, the project was endangered for reasons that had nothing to do with Palin—the bridge had become a national laughingstock, Congress had stripped away the offending earmark, shifting the money back to the state's general fund, and future federal support seemed unlikely. True, after Palin was sworn into office that fall, her first budget didn't allocate any money for the bridge. But when the Daily News asked on December 16, 2006, if she now opposed the project, Palin demurred and said she was just trying to figure out where the bridge fit on the state's list of transportation priorities, given the lack of support from Congress. Finally, on September 19, 2007, she decided to redirect funds away from the project altogether with this sorry-sounding statement:

"Ketchikan desires a better way to reach the airport, but the $398 million bridge is not the answer," said Governor Palin. "Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project, and it's clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island," Governor Palin added. "Much of the public's attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here. But we need to focus on what we can do, rather than fight over what has happened."

Maybe I've missed something, but it sure looks like she was fine with the bridge in principle, never had a problem with the earmarks, bristled at all the mockery, and only gave up on the project when it was clear that federal support wasn't forthcoming. Now, Charles Homans, who knows Alaska well, says Palin's anti-corruption instincts are fairly solid (she sold off the gubenatorial jet upon taking office, for one), and a casual Nexis search suggests that she's fiscally conservative (insofar as that term makes sense in a quasi-socialist state like Alaska), but this hardly looks like the "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington" moment everyone's making it out to be.

TNR link (http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/08/29/did-palin-really-fight-the-bridge-to-nowhere.aspx)

[Arles]

In response to Rove's comments, I think you have to take into account the top of the ticket as well. If Obama would have chosen a "democratic Palin" type, you would have both members of the ticket with little experience. Just like if McCain would have taken Biden, you'd have 2 old rich white guys who've been in the senate since Andrew Jackson was president (OK, maybe not that long ;) ).

To me, Biden is a solid choice for Obama, but would have been a terrible choice for McCain. In the same light, Palin is a nice choice for McCain, but would have been an awful choice for Obama.

Finally, citing her opinions on a major political project before she took office (your quotes were from 10/06, she wasn't sworn in until December) isn't all that surprising. It would be prudent to get all the information on the project once you are governor before trashing it in public. I'm sure, in theory, the project had some merit. But, there's something to be said for pulling the plug once you take office (6-7 months in) and see the money pit it was becoming.

[Flasch186]

it totally boils down to pandering to the religious contingent of the Republican party, which sickens me. Of course, I believe that religion and politics shouldnt mix but Im one person. If the Republican party would excise the religious distinction from their party Im sure many people, including myself would be more open to other aspects that they could bring to the table. IMO though they continue to view this "base" as critical to winning.

[Crapshoot]

Yes...Where would the Democratic Party go from there? What's the next level after desperation?

Well, they will have 55 seats in the Senate, and a 40-50 seat majority in the house. I think they'll survive.

I do agree that only the Dems could blow an election like this one.

[Arles]

f the Republican party would excise the religious distinction from their party Im sure many people, including myself would be more open to other aspects that they could bring to the table. IMO though they continue to view this "base" as critical to winning.
As much as I sometimes wish it weren't the case, this seems to be the reality of winning presidential elections for the republicans. If you look at the last 30 years, the social conservative tickets (Reagan/Bush, Bush/Quayle, W/Cheney) have won while the more moderate social tickets (Ford/Dole, Dole/Kemp) have lost. It's opposite for the democrats where the "southern centrist" candidates (Carter, Clinton) have won while the liberal ones (Kerry, Gore, Mondale, Dukakis) have lost.

That's what makes this election so interesting. Both parties have nominated candidates in the "loser" categories from above. It will be interesting to see who wins. But, if McCain wins, the social conservatives will say it was because of the inclusion of Palin and Obama being too liberal. If McCain loses, they will say that nominating a moderate is no way to win a presidential election for the republicans. So, in the end, I doubt this strategy of pandering to the social right will change any time soon.

From my perspective, I think the democrats could make some headway if they went for a fiscal centrist who is socially moderate (or even tilts a bit to the left on abortion/gay rights). That's what won them many of their congress seats in the midterms (going with people like Heath Shuler, Brad Ellsworth and others). History has shown that's a winning equation for the presidency as well.

[larrymcg421]

I think the "executive experience" spin is pretty cute. I mean, we've been hearing all along that McCain's got more experience on Obama, based on his many more years of Senate service. Now we're hearing that it's executive experience that matters, which would make all the attacks of the last few months meaningless.

[Toddzilla]

Pretty funny stuff, Karl Rove speculating on who Obama might choose as a VP a few weeks ago.
Good stuff - which is why I posted it 2 pages ago ;)

[Crapshoot]

honestly -- my last big fear about this election is exemplified by SFL Cat. We like to claim we're a progressive society, that we don't see race anymore, but to what extent are we kidding ourselves? What % of the electorate simply won't vote for Obama because of the color of his skin, or his name? I think that's got to be a real concern actually, because I think that there is a vocal minority who we can be sure won't (exemplified by SFL Cat), but that's just the "tip of the iceberg" and like a real iceberg, the vast majority of it is underwater.

Nah, good ol' boys like SFL will always be around, but they are for the most a dying breed (Jesse Helms, Storm Thurmond, and the rest of the Dixiecrats), or at least have advanced to using code words these days instead of outright racial language. I think the vast vast majority of Republican voters who vote against Obama will be doing so on policy, which is a good thing.

[Buccaneer]

it totally boils down to pandering to the religious contingent of the Republican party, which sickens me. Of course, I believe that religion and politics shouldnt mix but Im one person. If the Republican party would excise the religious distinction from their party Im sure many people, including myself would be more open to other aspects that they could bring to the table. IMO though they continue to view this "base" as critical to winning.

There are faith-based voters of all political stripes, even among those running for office. That shouldn't sicken anyone unless you have hatred. That was what I was alluding to a while back when hatred for a certain party/individual is simply a mask for anti-faith hatred.

Be clear, I do not like the so-called "religious right" either but they are far from monolithic or to be lumped into one category, if you would really want to look at those groups objectively. There are many faith-based voters on the "left" as well, except there are not many that are prominent in the public eye.

No, it is easy to attack certain evangelicals (as I do) and easy to lump them all together because typically other "conservative" values go along with it. To want to "excise religion", you would make the values of 60-70% of the people irrelevant, not to mention invalidating some of our country's history.

[yes, I have violated my statement in not responding to blatant partisan attacks/posts but the tone of your post offended me when you are taking a small yet vocal segment and painting a broad brush. You want others to do the same in saying certain far-left segments peak for all Democrats?]

[Chief Rum]

I love this notion that ex-Hillary supporters or women in general who were on the fence will (or may) now shift their support/vote to McCain because he picked a woman as his running mate.

I mean, seriously, people are acting as if women could care less about the issues or a politician's views on any number of subjects and will just vote: VAGINA!!!!

Yeah, we've come a long way, baby...

That is all. See you in November!

If you don't think there are a number of people who vote for the person most like them or against the one most not like them, then I don't know know what to tell you.

Or do you think Obama being black will not have an impact?

[Chief Rum]

honestly -- my last big fear about this election is exemplified by SFL Cat. We like to claim we're a progressive society, that we don't see race anymore, but to what extent are we kidding ourselves? What % of the electorate simply won't vote for Obama because of the color of his skin, or his name? I think that's got to be a real concern actually, because I think that there is a vocal minority who we can be sure won't (exemplified by SFL Cat), but that's just the "tip of the iceberg" and like a real iceberg, the vast majority of it is underwater.

I don't fear how many people will not vote for Obama because he's black as much as the people who will vote for Obama because he's black.

Racism cuts both ways.

[Flasch186]

[yes, I have violated my statement in not responding to blatant partisan attacks/posts but the tone of your post offended me when you are taking a small yet vocal segment and painting a broad brush. You want others to do the same in saying certain far-left segments peak for all Democrats?]

no, but the difference is how much power they wield in their respective party. Didnt mean to offend by opinion remains that starting with Reagan, the Religious Right clung onto the Republican party and was pervasive in their invasion of many if not most facets of the platform. In some respects the party has abandoned some of the non-religious focal points like fiscal responsibility and instead clung on the more poignant keywords, like "gay" and "abortion" since they play to a base that is easier to get to understand in lieu of trying to explain the intricacies of Free Markets and Trickle Down economics.

Just because 70% of American's have faith doesnt mean that our public policy should be beholden to it. For example there shouldnt be 10 commandments on Courthouse steps like there shouldnt be a Koran at city hall, etc.

[ace1914]

I don't fear how many people will not vote for Obama because he's black as much as the people who will vote for Obama because he's black.

Racism cuts both ways.

Hmm. Maybe he's just the better candidate in some people's eyes. I promise, people don't vote as blindly as you might think.

Estimates
204 million Whites
45 million Hispanics
40 million Blacks
13 million Asians

I'd guess 10% of every race is racist as hell.


20 mil Whites will not vote for Obama.
4 mil Blacks will not vote for McCain
4 mil Hispanics will not vote for McCain/Obama.
1 mil of Asians will not vote Obama/McCain.

I'd guess Obama would still be handicapped just based on shear % of hardcore racists.

[Chief Rum]

Hmm. Maybe he's just the better candidate in some people's eyes. I promise, people don't vote as blindly as you might think.

Actually, the issue is your definition of how I am thinking here. Most people will vote with their heads. You and I are on the same page there.

But if you think there isn't a significant number of people who are either voting for him because of his ethnicity or counting it hugely in his favor, then I don't know what to say about that. It's simply a huge factor for many people.

There are a lot of people who are at least partially inclined to vote for Obama because the media has made race such an overwhelming issue in our social consciousness that there is a public need to absolve. There are some people who view Obama as a racist-history cure all. These are mostly white people, because we are the race to which the racist stigma is mostly attached.

And that's on top of those members of the African-American race who will refuse to vote for a white man or would never vote for any white man over a black man, which is just as racist as the KKK fuckers doing the same on their end. In the end, I believe both of these groups have fallen off, that largely racism on either side has fallen off a lot. While race is certainly still an issue, it is clearly improved over how things were.

But all that means is that the "white guilt" vote becomes easily the largest race-based voting group (and the most critical to this election).

[Chief Rum]

Hmm. Maybe he's just the better candidate in some people's eyes. I promise, people don't vote as blindly as you might think.

Estimates
204 million Whites
45 million Hispanics
40 million Blacks
13 million Asians

I'd guess 10% of every race is racist as hell.


20 mil Whites will not vote for Obama.
4 mil Blacks will not vote for McCain
4 mil Hispanics will not vote for McCain/Obama.
1 mil of Asians will not vote Obama/McCain.

I'd guess Obama would still be handicapped just based on shear % of hardcore racists.

I think your percentage is way too high. Racist as hell is a pretty strong statement. And we're also talking about how many people would actually have this as the end-all, be-all, no other issue matters issue.

I think the number is far closer to 1% for KKK-level racism in voting. That makes your numbers far less significant.

The "white guilt" vote will be much higher than that, IMO.

[Young Drachma]

I read somewhere else that it was clear by picking Palin, that Rove and Co. had nothing to do with this picking process.

[Young Drachma]

McCain is on CNN now with Palin in Pennsylvania. He's taking the change message head on now. Man, shapeshifting ftl.

[DaddyTorgo]

McCain is on CNN now with Palin in Pennsylvania. He's taking the change message head on now. Man, shapeshifting ftl.

it's kinda insulting that they think people have memories that short. Then again it's even more depressing that a significant % of people actually do.

[Young Drachma]

it's kinda insulting that they think people have memories that short. Then again it's even more depressing that a significant % of people actually do.

Well she'll do fine on the stump. It's when they get her in front of hostile crowds or make her have to speak without prepared remarks that we'll see how they've coached her.

I think that if Joe Biden is a loose cannon flyhandle or whatever, but...she's just as prone to say something off the cuff and inappropriate. More so, since she's got less experience.

[molson]

Hmm. Maybe he's just the better candidate in some people's eyes. I promise, people don't vote as blindly as you might think.

Estimates
204 million Whites
45 million Hispanics
40 million Blacks
13 million Asians

I'd guess 10% of every race is racist as hell.


20 mil Whites will not vote for Obama.
4 mil Blacks will not vote for McCain
4 mil Hispanics will not vote for McCain/Obama.
1 mil of Asians will not vote Obama/McCain.

I'd guess Obama would still be handicapped just based on shear % of hardcore racists.

I would also say the 10% number is way high and more than that, not really relevant here.

The real question is, which is number is higher:

1A: The number of people would normally have voted Democrat, but because its a black guy, they go with McCain
+
1B: The number of people who normally wouldn't vote at all, but go vote McCain because Obama's a black guy

OR

2A: The number of people who would normally have voted Republican, but will vote for Obama just because he's black
+
2B: The number of people who would normally not vote, but go vote Obama just because he's black.

I think 2A is higher than 1A, and 2B is higher than 2A (though I'd love to hear a Democrat argue that there are that many racist Democrats to make 1A a significant number).

[DaddyTorgo]

I know at least one 1B, although they've lately started to change their tune to "it's not b/c he's black...i just don't trust him though" from their earlier "won't vote for a black guy to be president"

[Flasch186]

FWIW Palin is repeating her speech in Washington, Pa and her line about thanking Hillary Clinton for putting 18 million cracks in the ceiling was met with resounding boos so Im not sure that the tactic is going as planned on day 2.

[Young Drachma]

She's got a big ass family to be globetrotting them around the country like this on the stump. I mean, i'm sure it's fine and all..but...that's got to be annoying. I didn't see the baby this time, at least. But ugh.

[JPhillips]

I read somewhere else that it was clear by picking Palin, that Rove and Co. had nothing to do with this picking process.

I've read that too, but it seems to me that this pick is more about Schmidt and Rove than McCain. Look at what's been reported:

For a couple of weeks it's been rumored that McCain is looking at a pro-choice VP

Last Saturday McCain was supposedly set on Lieberman

Sometime late last weekend or early in the week Rove called Lieberman asking him to withdraw his name

McCain is famous for surrounding himself with close confidants, but before selecting Palin he'd only met her in person once and had a total of less than an hour talking to her.

McCain has been more controlled by his advisors since switching his staff. He's said he isn't allowed to use his cellphone much and his famous contacts with the press have all but disappeared.

I honestly believe that McCain wanted Lieberman, but his advisors convinced him that the effects of that choice would severely strain the GOP. At that point he did what's he's done dozens of times over the past couple of years and accepted what his advisors told him he had to do if he wanted to be the President.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Didnt mean to offend by opinion remains that starting with Reagan, the Religious Right clung onto the Republican party and was pervasive in their invasion of many if not most facets of the platform. In some respects the party has abandoned some of the non-religious focal points like fiscal responsibility and instead clung on the more poignant keywords, like "gay" and "abortion" since they play to a base that is easier to get to understand in lieu of trying to explain the intricacies of Free Markets and Trickle Down economics.

Flasch, I know good & darned well you're smart enough to understand how/why it works that way.

Without the religious right today, the GOP can't win a national election. Period. They lose the South without 'em, and they don't have enough strength elsewhere to make up the electoral votes nor do I see any way they could gain the same back elsewhere by shifting.

The reality is that's there simply more people in states that can won by the GOP who actually legitimately care about those buzzwords than about any of the fiscal issues. Right, wrong, indifferent, doesn't matter -- some of those issues are the ones they care most about.

While I share many of their concerns, I part company fully with them on at least one of their key issues so I have to say "they" instead of "we" (nor would they count me as one of them for that matter) but I'm also realistic enough to know that the only way to have a chance at making progress in the directions I want is to give up a bit that they want. And that's what the GOP knows too.

[JPhillips]

I would also say the 10% number is way high and more than that, not really relevant here.

The real question is, which is number is higher:

1A: The number of people would normally have voted Democrat, but because its a black guy, they go with McCain
+
1B: The number of people who normally wouldn't vote at all, but go vote McCain because Obama's a black guy

OR

2A: The number of people who would normally have voted Republican, but will vote for Obama just because he's black
+
2B: The number of people who would normally not vote, but go vote Obama just because he's black.

I think 2A is higher than 1A, and 1B is higher than 2B (though I'd love to hear a Democrat argue that there are that many racist Democrats to make 1A a significant number).

It's much more complicated than what you guys are arguing. There is, of course, a block of people that are openly and knowingly racists. If we had a mass truth serum, we could measure that.

Studies have shown, though, that people are can exhibit racial biases in an almost subconscious way. Many people, while not openly racist, hold people of a different race to higher standards than they do people of their own race. For example, a person is more likely to forgive a lie from someone of their own race than someone of a different race.

Race will be a factor in this election as it's the first time the country has had a choice, but trying to measure the open racists doesn't really get at the core issue.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I think 2A is higher than 1A, and 1B is higher than 2B (though I'd love to hear a Democrat argue that there are that many racist Democrats to make 1A a significant number).

Huh?

2B is almost certainly the largest segment, 2A is almost certainly the smallest, with 1A & 1B somewhere in the middle.

Surely you had a typo there somewhere. You don't really mean to that you believe there's a sizable contingent of Republican voters who've been longing for a chance to vote for a black candidate.

[molson]

Huh?

2B is almost certainly the largest segment, 2A is almost certainly the smallest, with 1A & 1B somewhere in the middle.

Surely you had a typo there somewhere. You don't really mean to that you believe there's a sizable contingent of Republican voters who've been longing for a chance to vote for a black candidate.

The second half of that is a typo, and edited. Yes, I agree that 2B is the largest segment, and the one most likely to create an impact in this selection.

2A is very, very small, but I think 1A is even smaller. (For 2A, I imagine moderate suburban republican types, and of course black republicans). Or maybe I just wanted to hear a Democrat argue that there's a significant number of racist Democrats.

[JonInMiddleGA]

The second half of that is a typo, and edited.

Whew.

[Flasch186]

Looks like Gustav may effect the Pres. schedule around the GOP convention....At least Katrina taught him a lesson in regards to schedule if nothing else.

[Radii]

The real question is, which is number is higher:

1A: The number of people would normally have voted Democrat, but because its a black guy, they go with McCain
+
1B: The number of people who normally wouldn't vote at all, but go vote McCain because Obama's a black guy

OR

2A: The number of people who would normally have voted Republican, but will vote for Obama just because he's black
+
2B: The number of people who would normally not vote, but go vote Obama just because he's black.

I think 2A is higher than 1A, and 2B is higher than 2A (though I'd love to hear a Democrat argue that there are that many racist Democrats to make 1A a significant number).

I'd agree with this, and also add:

What percentage of people in these groups are in states where it matters in the first place. Someone in Mississippi voting McCain because Obama is black who would otherwise not vote really doesn't impact anything. the same goes for someone in California who would otherwise not vote going to vote for Obama so they can vote for the first black president.

[Flasch186]

Obama and Biden are speaking in Dublin, OH and theyre going for a more relaxed look and feel and Im not sure it's working for me at first blush.

[Flasch186]

eh, doesnt mean anything since we know any critique of credentials must be biased:


Scholars question Palin credentials - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/13001)

[SFL Cat]

Ah...thanks for the racists kudos guys...guess I'm in good company, though.

Bill Clinton got the same treatment during the primaries and he was the FIRST black president.

Aways a pleasure to get bashed by the local liberal goon squad.

[Arles]

FWIW Palin is repeating her speech in Washington, Pa and her line about thanking Hillary Clinton for putting 18 million cracks in the ceiling was met with resounding boos so Im not sure that the tactic is going as planned on day 2.
You understand that this pro-republican crowd was boing the mention of Clinton, not Palin, correct? Please tell me you got that.

[Arles]

eh, doesnt mean anything since we know any critique of credentials must be biased:


Scholars question Palin credentials - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/13001)
I think it's fair to question her experience. But, again, I don't see a major difference between 8 years as mayor + commitee chair and 2 years as governor and 8 years as a state senator + 4 years as a senator. Both seem fairly inexperienced, with one being the top of the ticket.

And since you brought it up, it's important to mention who is doing the criticizing:

The authors quote four scholars attacking Gov. Palin's fitness for the office of Vice President. Among them, David Kennedy is a maxed out Obama donor, Joel Goldstein is also an Obama donor, and Doris Kearns Goodwin has donated exclusively to Democrats this cycle. Finally, Matthew Dallek is a former speech writer for Dick Gephardt. This is not a story about scholars questioning Governor Palin's credentials so much as partisan Democrats who would find a reason to disqualify or discount any nominee put forward by Senator McCain.
Again, much like with all the alaskan people criticizing Palin, it's not surprising that many might not be very supportive of her or republicans (shocking, I know).

[DaddyTorgo]

I think it's fair to question her experience. But, again, I don't see a major difference between 8 years as mayor + commitee chair and 2 years as governor and 8 years as a state senator + 4 years as a senator. Both seem fairly inexperienced, with one being the top of the ticket.

And since you brought it up, it's important to mention who is doing the criticizing:


Again, much like with all the alaskan people criticizing Palin, it's not surprising that many might not be very supportive of her or republicans (shocking, I know).


lol - my dad went to HS in Alaska - he's been through Wisalia and says (and numerous other people have shown and shown pictures) that it's literally less than a one stoplight town. There's like 5500-6500 people in that "town" (which consists of a bar and a single shopping center). Being mayor of that town means jack-shit as far as any type of experience. It's a joke.

[Big Fo]

lol - my dad went to HS in Alaska - he's been through Wisalia and says (and numerous other people have shown and shown pictures) that it's literally less than a one stoplight town. There's like 5500-6500 people in that "town" (which consists of a bar and a single shopping center). Being mayor of that town means jack-shit as far as any type of experience. It's a joke.

but but but she has crucial executive experience!

[JonInMiddleGA]

Being mayor of that town means jack-shit as far as any type of experience.

{scratches head}

Just wondering if you actually think people are putting significant weight on her time as mayor vs her time as governor.

[Vegas Vic]

Being mayor of that town means jack-shit as far as any type of experience. It's a joke.

And being on the top of your party's ticket as a U.S. Senator with 140 working days of experience (most of which has been spent campaigning for president) isn't a joke?

[DaddyTorgo]

{scratches head}

Just wondering if you actually think people are putting significant weight on her time as mayor vs her time as governor.

I dunno - just saying is all.

[DanGarion]

http://www.doctorhousingbubble.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/mccain-obama.gif

[Crapshoot]

Ah...thanks for the racists kudos guys...guess I'm in good company, though.

Bill Clinton got the same treatment during the primaries and he was the FIRST black president.

Aways a pleasure to get bashed by the local liberal goon squad.

Yes, your Osama / Obama lines, the ones that McCain's campaign and the likes of NR/RedState (you know, those known liberals) called off-limits are clearly just you having fun. You throw out racial bullshit, you will get called on it. And if the shoe fits...

[DaddyTorgo]

dan - where'd the chart come from? I have someone I want to show it to

[JPhillips]

Woohoo! My taxes will be lower under Obama.

[Crapshoot]

{scratches head}

Just wondering if you actually think people are putting significant weight on her time as mayor vs her time as governor.

Yeah, that doesn't make much sense. She has been Governor for what, 18 months now? I don't think the experience argument is big either way, but that is exec experience. Now, Alaska is smaller than many cities in the US (ie, Guliani's experience in my mind far trumps hers), but that's another vein.

[Flasch186]

You understand that this pro-republican crowd was boing the mention of Clinton, not Palin, correct? Please tell me you got that.

of course but I think, if we agree that theyre going after the Pro Hillary contingent, having the present crowd boo isn't going to help the cause, you get that, right?

[JPhillips]

The experience part doesn't bother me much as I don't think there's a lot of relevant experience for being the President, although it really should close the door on all Obama experience criticism. My problem is that she doesn't seem to know about much. The audio from the Time interview a couple of weeks ago is painful.

[DanGarion]

dan - where'd the chart come from? I have someone I want to show it to

Sorry it came from a housing blog, via Washington Post, let me supply the link. 1 min.

[DanGarion]

Here is the link to what I posted.

A Decade of Slow Growth: Why the United States will Face a Decade of Economic Stagnation and Face a L Shaped Recession. 10 Charts and Pictures as to Why This will Occur. » Dr. Housing Bubble Blog (http://www.doctorhousingbubble.com/a-decade-of-slow-growth-why-the-united-states-will-face-a-decade-of-economic-stagnation-and-face-a-l-shaped-recession-10-charts-and-pictures-as-to-why-this-will-occur/)

And the Washington Post link http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060900950.html

[DaddyTorgo]

cool dangarion - thanks!

[Apathetic Lurker]

I think it might be funny if/or when the republicans lose, they come out and say democrats are a bunch of sexist pigs since they didnt want a woman in the office.....

[SFL Cat]

Yes, your Osama / Obama lines, the ones that McCain's campaign and the likes of NR/RedState (you know, those known liberals) called off-limits are clearly just you having fun. You throw out racial bullshit, you will get called on it. And if the shoe fits...

You boys sure are thin-skinned about your guy's name...

At least I didn't pull a Teddy Kennedy...

YouTube - Ted Kennedy calling Barak Obama, Osama Bin Laden.Funny!!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzx5R9_u3ts&NR=1)

[astrosfan64]

McCain selecting Palin as his VP, pretty much guaranted I'll be voting democrat for the first time in my life. I've always been libertarian or republican.

I can not honestly vote for anyone that knows they are going to have a baby with down syndrome and don't abort it. That is not logical or sound judgement and pretty much lets me know you don't get it.

No thanks. I need rational and logical people in office.

Next point. This baby is five months old now or something like that. What kind of mother is she going to be to a newborn, flying around the country all the time. Some kind of shitty family values if you ask me.

BOO Palin, Boo this choice. Go obama.

[Crapshoot]

You boys sure are thin-skinned about your guy's name...

At least I didn't pull a Teddy Kennedy...

YouTube - Ted Kennedy calling Barak Obama, Osama Bin Laden.Funny!!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzx5R9_u3ts&NR=1)

Listen, asshole, go back to your fellow misanthropes, okay? I'm sure you can sit together and reminisce how things were better back in the day.

And the idea that I'm voting for Obama is amusing, to say the least. I like McCain and think he's a good guy, and easily my choice for the GOP nominee (though I liked Guliani, and pre-batshit crazy Mitt Romney).

[SFL Cat]

And the idea that I'm voting for Obama is amusing, to say the least.

Let me pull a Flasch....yeah right, you're not voting for Obama. :rolleyes:

[Flasch186]

You boys sure are thin-skinned about your guy's name...

At least I didn't pull a Teddy Kennedy...

YouTube - Ted Kennedy calling Barak Obama, Osama Bin Laden.Funny!!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzx5R9_u3ts&NR=1)

are you sure youre not Bubba Wheels and just made a new forum name after being banned?

[DaddyTorgo]

what's the over/under for how long till SFL Cat gets banned for trolling/general asshattery?

[SFL Cat]

Thought I was on *ignore*

[Flasch186]

i wont ignore anyone, not even the guy who hates me, Duckman, because, Like Obama says it's best to engage with your enemy as well as your friends ;)

[Alan T]

Let me pull a Flasch....yeah right, you're not voting for Obama. :rolleyes:


I don't really know who you are, and I'm not tied down enough to one party to really feel strongly enough to argue for or against someone, however I don't recall seeing a single one of your posts add really anything constructive to this conversation.

In fact the majority of your posts seem to be striving to either try to infuriate others (such as a troll would do), or you just are outright racist in reality. As I don't know you, I won't judge.. but if your intention is to try to steer this thread away from any kind of reasonable debate on the politicians or their suggested policies, you are doing so very well.

Perhaps you should cool it off, or take a break from this thread before you find yourself boxed for ridiculous trolling. There are others whom are doing your "side" of the discussion a far better service with actual intelligent discussion such as Arles or others.

[Big Fo]

Next point. This baby is five months old now or something like that. What kind of mother is she going to be to a newborn, flying around the country all the time. Some kind of shitty family values if you ask me.

My mother feels the same way about Palin fwiw, also mentioning that her second youngest is four or five years old.

[JPhillips]

McCain selecting Palin as his VP, pretty much guaranted I'll be voting democrat for the first time in my life. I've always been libertarian or republican.

I can not honestly vote for anyone that knows they are going to have a baby with down syndrome and don't abort it. That is not logical or sound judgement and pretty much lets me know you don't get it.

No thanks. I need rational and logical people in office.

Next point. This baby is five months old now or something like that. What kind of mother is she going to be to a newborn, flying around the country all the time. Some kind of shitty family values if you ask me.

BOO Palin, Boo this choice. Go obama.

There are plenty of reasons not to like the Palin pick, but questioning her ability to mother seems way out of line IMO. Women all over the country balance work and motherhood. She seems to be a very concerned mother and I'm sure between her husband and th rest of the family arrangements can be made. I'd really hate to think in this day and age we're going to disqualify women with young children.

[flere-imsaho]

To me, Biden is a solid choice for Obama, but would have been a terrible choice for McCain. In the same light, Palin is a nice choice for McCain, but would have been an awful choice for Obama.

Agreed 100%. Which is why I was worried when Kaine was being tossed around as a VP.

I do agree that only the Dems could blow an election like this one.

True, although this time I don't think it would be due to poor organization and a poor campaign (2000/2004) or poor candidates (1984/1988), but due to parts of the Democratic "big tent" not seeing the forest for the trees.

I know it's been beaten to death, but the case in point is any pro-choice Clinton supporter who doesn't vote or votes for McCain. Registering disappointment is fine, but if McCain wins, with both Palin as VP and the current state of the Supreme Court (with impending retirements), Roe v. Wade is done and we might even see it go the other way with a federal ban on a women's right to chose.

Woohoo! My taxes will be lower under Obama.

Same here. Well, $12 anyway. :eek:

[DaddyTorgo]

There are plenty of reasons not to like the Palin pick, but questioning her ability to mother seems way out of line IMO. Women all over the country balance work and motherhood. She seems to be a very concerned mother and I'm sure between her husband and th rest of the family arrangements can be made. I'd really hate to think in this day and age we're going to disqualify women with young children.

+1

[SFL Cat]

I don't really know who you are, and I'm not tied down enough to one party to really feel strongly enough to argue for or against someone, however I don't recall seeing a single one of your posts add really anything constructive to this conversation.

In fact the majority of your posts seem to be striving to either try to infuriate others (such as a troll would do), or you just are outright racist in reality. As I don't know you, I won't judge.. but if your intention is to try to steer this thread away from any kind of reasonable debate on the politicians or their suggested policies, you are doing so very well.

Perhaps you should cool it off, or take a break from this thread before you find yourself boxed for ridiculous trolling. There are others whom are doing your "side" of the discussion a far better service with actual intelligent discussion such as Arles or others.

I'm going to do as you suggest. Frankly, being called a racist would bother me, but only if that comes from someone who doesn't automatically pull out the flame-thrower whenever I post someting. Coming from the usual suspects like Flash, flere, or John Galt, frankly, I don't really give much of a shit about what they think of me or my opinions just as I'm sure they don't give much of a shit about what I think. But since you aren't part of that group, and seem generally to be a civil poster, I'll bow to your judgement and apologize for any offense I've caused. Out for a while.

[Flasch186]

I do legitimately feel bad for the GOP with the hurricane causing a major hiccup in their plans. Ive read that they may turn the convention into a telethon to raise money for the after effects of Gustav BUT that certainly isn't what the ENC had in mind and I dont know how it will play out or if its even fair to judge or grade, etc. Also Ive heard that the convention may be delayed as views on TV of a festival aired in contrast with the devastation, destruction, and despair in the Gulfcoast would probably not be good...I would hope the Dems would not take advantage of the situation via commentary or TV ads. This is not a fair situation for the GOP to find themselves in and I hope they handle it with the utmost care for everyone involved and effected without any politicalization from either side.

[astrosfan64]

There are plenty of reasons not to like the Palin pick, but questioning her ability to mother seems way out of line IMO. Women all over the country balance work and motherhood. She seems to be a very concerned mother and I'm sure between her husband and th rest of the family arrangements can be made. I'd really hate to think in this day and age we're going to disqualify women with young children.

Does she breast feed? Any woman who doesn't breast feed is selfish, unless there is a medical reason not to (which is very rare). It is a proven fact that it is healthier for breast fed children for both their immune system and intellengence.

No matter how much, I would love to be a "mother" to my newborn I simply can't do it. It is a fact that newborns know the smells of their mother and need the touch and feel of their mothers.

I have to admit, I can't understand why people have children, to let somebody who makes 10 bucks an hour to raise them. I look at all these daycares and I'm like WTF, why even have kids.

One of the reasons that USA is going to shit, is two working parents. I'll even give a bit and say one parent should be home (i would still prefer it the mom), but one parent needs to be home with a developing child.

[ace1914]

http://www.doctorhousingbubble.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/mccain-obama.gif


I've never seen it broken down like this. Looks like I would have been pretty much even under either one.

[astrosfan64]

+1

Explain your +1? You honestly think that working as an administrative assistant or manager at a company can compare to flying all over the country? Give me a break.

[Warhammer]

I can not honestly vote for anyone that knows they are going to have a baby with down syndrome and don't abort it. That is not logical or sound judgement and pretty much lets me know you don't get it.

Wow... I think that is all I can say to this. My brother has cerebral palsy and I am glad he is around. He can also function without the help of others, has a wife and kids, etc. How can we know what the resulting life of a child is going to be if we do not give them a chance at life?

I can understand going the other route, but to basically call her decision not logical? To me, if she was staunchly pro-life and then changed her mind when she learned her baby has down's is the height of hypocrisy. Kudos to her for actually living her creed.

[rowech]

Does she breast feed? Any woman who doesn't breast feed is selfish, unless there is a medical reason not to (which is very rare). It is a proven fact that it is healthier for breast fed children for both their immune system and intellengence.

No matter how much, I would love to be a "mother" to my newborn I simply can't do it. It is a fact that newborns know the smells of their mother and need the touch and feel of their mothers.

I have to admit, I can't understand why people have children, to let somebody who makes 10 bucks an hour to raise them. I look at all these daycares and I'm like WTF, why even have kids.

One of the reasons that USA is going to shit, is two working parents. I'll even give a bit and say one parent should be home (i would still prefer it the mom), but one parent needs to be home with a developing child.

Agreed...however, because of our country's lifestyle choices, it will never be the majority of homes with kids being like this.

[Warhammer]

Does she breast feed? Any woman who doesn't breast feed is selfish, unless there is a medical reason not to (which is very rare). It is a proven fact that it is healthier for breast fed children for both their immune system and intellengence.

For one, what if the child can't figure it out? We had one that did and one that didn't do it. Quite honestly they are not far apart in any way. I would actually place the one that breastfed behind the one that didn't. But that is primarily because he didn't need to develop language skills because his brother took care of everything for him.

I have to admit, I can't understand why people have children, to let somebody who makes 10 bucks an hour to raise them. I look at all these daycares and I'm like WTF, why even have kids.

One of the reasons that USA is going to shit, is two working parents. I'll even give a bit and say one parent should be home (i would still prefer it the mom), but one parent needs to be home with a developing child.


Maybe because accidents happen? My wife and I had a 3 year plan for having kids. Instead, she was pregnant within two months of us being married. That said, how is daycare any different than a child going to school? Heck, after staying home with my 3 year old for 6 months while out of work, he probably gets more instruction at daycare, simply because there is much more structure there during the day. With me doing chores, cooking, picking up and dropping off the 6 year old, there was not much time for any sort of teaching my youngest.

All that said, I would prefer that my wife be able to stay at home, but unfortunately, we are not able to do that.

[DaddyTorgo]

Explain your +1? You honestly think that working as an administrative assistant or manager at a company can compare to flying all over the country? Give me a break.

I'm not really a fan of having a holier-than-thou attitude when criticizing other people's parenting choices. Some may be better than others, but I don't think it's anybody's right to decide what is best for me and my children, and if someone for example tried to come up to my (as yet hypothetical) wife and tell her she was doing a disservice by not breastfeeding my (hypothetical) child, I'd have some very colorful language telling them what they could do in response.

[Arles]

Next point. This baby is five months old now or something like that. What kind of mother is she going to be to a newborn, flying around the country all the time. Some kind of shitty family values if you ask me.
Just curious, but would you have this problem if Mr. Palin was running for VP? Or is just because the mother is running?

There are many families in america where the father is atleast 50-50 (if not more responsible for the kids) now days. I will be interested to here from all the Obama supporters on how the woman's role is in the kitchen and home with the baby. I mean, there's no way the husband could pick up any slack while both him and the baby travel with Gov Palin - right? Plus, I would say Palin has shown some pretty solid family values by raising the other four kids.

Plus, according to three different articles she is still breastfeeding and a very active mom. It just involves good time management. In fact, I would bet that being a VP candidate with the additional resources means she spends more time with her child than most working "administrative assistants" do. Her husband is also extremely involved. But, maybe she should just go back to the kitchen in Alaska and know her role in society.

[ace1914]

Wow... I think that is all I can say to this. My brother has cerebral palsy and I am glad he is around. He can also function without the help of others, has a wife and kids, etc. How can we know what the resulting life of a child is going to be if we do not give them a chance at life?

I can understand going the other route, but to basically call her decision not logical? To me, if she was staunchly pro-life and then changed her mind when she learned her baby has down's is the height of hypocrisy. Kudos to her for actually living her creed.

I agree. My wife and I haven't been blessed with a child yet, but when we do the last thing that would ever be on my mind would be aborting....no lets be frank...killing the kid. I'm all about pro-choice, believe me because to each their own, but I applaud her and her husband. That's a real testament to family strength and values.

[Flasch186]

Again, I think abortion rights and the choice that lies therein is a personal issue within a family and has nothing to do with anyone outside of that family and shouldnt be judged....hence my abortion rights stance vs. those that are Anti-abortion rights. Palin's choice is not to be commended and someone who exercises their right to end a pregnancy is not to be commended either or looked down upon and vice versa....it doesnt belong to anyone to judge as good or bad, IMO.

[Arles]

I do legitimately feel bad for the GOP with the hurricane causing a major hiccup in their plans. Ive read that they may turn the convention into a telethon to raise money for the after effects of Gustav BUT that certainly isn't what the ENC had in mind and I dont know how it will play out or if its even fair to judge or grade, etc. Also Ive heard that the convention may be delayed as views on TV of a festival aired in contrast with the devastation, destruction, and despair in the Gulfcoast would probably not be good...I would hope the Dems would not take advantage of the situation via commentary or TV ads. This is not a fair situation for the GOP to find themselves in and I hope they handle it with the utmost care for everyone involved and effected without any politicalization from either side.
That's life, IMO. Looking out for the people in Louisiana should be everyone's number one goal (in both parties). If that means that republicans have to adjust their convention schedule and do more to help, they should be thankful for the opportunity to help on such a big stage.

Maybe that means McCain will have to win the election without an 80K rockstar reception in prime time ;) Such is the way it goes and I'm guessing many in Louisiana would gladly exchange places with republican advisers in Minnesota.

[ace1914]

Again, I think abortion rights and the choice that lies therein is a personal issue within a family and has nothing to do with anyone outside of that family and shouldnt be judged....hence my abortion rights stance vs. those that are Anti-abortion rights. Palin's choice is not to be commended and someone who exercises their right to end a pregnancy is not to be commended either or looked down upon and vice versa....it doesnt belong to anyone to judge as good or bad, IMO.

Its commendable if you agree with what she did. On the flip side, I wouldn't be offended if they went the other way.

[JPhillips]

Just curious, but would you have this problem if Mr. Palin was running for VP? Or is just because the mother is running?

There are many families in america where the father is atleast 50-50 (if not more responsible for the kids) now days. I will be interested to here from all the Obama supporters on how the woman's role is in the kitchen and home with the baby. I mean, there's no way the husband could pick up any slack while both him and the baby travel with Gov Palin - right? Plus, I would say Palin has shown some pretty solid family values by raising the other four kids.

Plus, according to three different articles she is still breastfeeding and a very active mom. It just involves good time management. In fact, I would bet that being a VP candidate with the additional resources means she spends more time with her child than most working "administrative assistants" do. Her husband is also extremely involved. But, maybe she should just go back to the kitchen in Alaska and know her role in society.

Let's be clear that this is a lone opinion. Every other Obama supporter here has praised Palin as a mother.

[Buccaneer]

Academy Award-winning filmmaker Michael Moore, best-known for his documentaries "Roger and Me" and "Fahrenheit 9/11" told MSNBC commentator Keith Olbermann on Friday that projections that Hurricane Gustav could hit near New Orleans on the opening night of the Republican National Convention "is proof that there is a God in heaven."

Fuck you. This is as worse than anything that those right-wing religious nuts have said regarding disasters. But this is getting no play - big surprise. The liberals broadbrush all non-liberals for their associations with such preachers and maybe some can broadbrush all left-leaning folks for their associations with these left-wing nuts.

[Big Fo]

Yeah I definitely cringed when I saw him say that on Olbermann's show the other night.

edit: I thought everyone stopped paying attention to Moore years ago, if it hasn't happened yet I hope it does now...

[DaddyTorgo]

yeah. definite supreme asshattery by that fat tub of lard

[Recoil]

Maybe that means McCain will have to win the election without an 80K rockstar reception in prime time ;)

:rolleyes:

[astrosfan64]

Just curious, but would you have this problem if Mr. Palin was running for VP? Or is just because the mother is running?

There are many families in america where the father is atleast 50-50 (if not more responsible for the kids) now days. I will be interested to here from all the Obama supporters on how the woman's role is in the kitchen and home with the baby. I mean, there's no way the husband could pick up any slack while both him and the baby travel with Gov Palin - right? Plus, I would say Palin has shown some pretty solid family values by raising the other four kids.

Plus, according to three different articles she is still breastfeeding and a very active mom. It just involves good time management. In fact, I would bet that being a VP candidate with the additional resources means she spends more time with her child than most working "administrative assistants" do. Her husband is also extremely involved. But, maybe she should just go back to the kitchen in Alaska and know her role in society.

Arles:

If you read my post, you see I already answered that question. It is my belief that one parent should be home with a child. (I believe it should be the mother, but then again so does nature). If it is the father and he has the makeup to handle that then fine.

I agree it has to be a great idea to fly around the country with your 5 month child who has Downs. Best decision ever! I'm sure that is great time managment.

[Mac Howard]

The experience part doesn't bother me much as I don't think there's a lot of relevant experience for being the President, although it really should close the door on all Obama experience criticism.

The Republican spin on her lack of experience has been desperate. The crucial point of her lack of experience is that by far the most effective argument against Obama - his inexperience - has been rendered futile by this appointment - at best it will be seen meaningless, at worst hypocritical. It does not open up the Republican campaign to effective accusations of inexperience but negates the attacks on Obama for the same.

When I first heard the announcement I thought that it was very clever - McCain retained his image as a maverick while introducing a nomination that appealed to the conservative right of the party. It takes away the media focus on the Democrat Convention. It also looked as if he could gain some of those Clinton votes. But as I learned more about her and thought a little deeper then it didn't seem so clever.

What woman who voted for Clinton will vote for a gun-toting, pro-life, creationist, global warming sceptic that wants to drill in ANWR? Anyone that could vote for both Clinton and Palin should be put down ;)

This has to be a hell of a risk. McCain has destroyed his primary argument against Obama for an unpredictable gain in votes. McCain puts himself forward as the America-first patriot but this selection clearly puts his election first. Some women will clearly vote for her but many won't because of her conservatism, particularly on abortion. Some conservatives will be happier with the McCain ticket but some independents less. She has promoted at personal cost ethics in politics but may well be involved in a corruption scandal herself. The gain in votes has to be unknown.

I have to admit this is turning out to be a fascinating contest despite my lack of any direct practical interest :)

[astrosfan64]

Wow... I think that is all I can say to this. My brother has cerebral palsy and I am glad he is around. He can also function without the help of others, has a wife and kids, etc. How can we know what the resulting life of a child is going to be if we do not give them a chance at life?

I can understand going the other route, but to basically call her decision not logical? To me, if she was staunchly pro-life and then changed her mind when she learned her baby has down's is the height of hypocrisy. Kudos to her for actually living her creed.

Warhammer:

I think its all fine and dandy that your parents choose this for you and your brother. Do I believe the decision is logical? No. Does it really matter that your mom and dad make logical decisions? Unless they are running for President or VP or some kind of elected office it doesn't. Well at least to me it doesn't.

I expect my elected officials to make intellegent informed decisions. The whole purpose you get the test, is to determine whether you should abort the fetus. I believe the stat is like 97% of babies who are detected with Downs are aborted.

So that goes to show you that our proposed elected official is at 3%.

I guess here is my point. I understand she "loves" all of her children. I don't want a president or vp that make decisions out of love or fear of god. I want one that uses logic and reason.

[ISiddiqui]

:jawdrop:

That's like the dumbest post ever. Ever.

[stevew]

I would more question the really bad decision to have a child post 40(danger rates rise substantially I believe) more than whether or not she decided to abort her baby(personal choice). Is she catholic or something?

[astrosfan64]

I would more question the really bad decision to have a child post 40 than to whether or not she decided to abort her baby. Is she catholic or something?

Excellent point, I forgot to mention that.

[Mike D]

Thought I was on *ignore*

Zing!

[astrosfan64]

Maybe because accidents happen? My wife and I had a 3 year plan for having kids. Instead, she was pregnant within two months of us being married. That said, how is daycare any different than a child going to school? Heck, after staying home with my 3 year old for 6 months while out of work, he probably gets more instruction at daycare, simply because there is much more structure there during the day. With me doing chores, cooking, picking up and dropping off the 6 year old, there was not much time for any sort of teaching my youngest.



The ages 1 - 4 are about teaching kids how to live. It isn't about sitting them in a school learning their ABC's. Their job is to learn how to be kids. They do that best by being around the people who care most about them e.g. their parents. I mean you should read to them, work with them on counting or whatever other early learning excercies you wish, but, you wouldn't do it full time. An hour or two a day is all you need to do at that young age.

Things like compassion, manners, respect, self esteem, moral values are taught at home by the parents. Its pretty hard to cram that learning into them 2 hours a night after work?

And do you really want some lady making 10 bucks an hour to teach these core values to your children?

I get in this discussion quite often. I've heard peole tell me they couldn't afford it or it isn't possible. Well, people quite often don't make the sacrafices they need to.

We have this neighbor, she and her husband both work. They have twins. They both have nice cars, plasma TV, drink wine on a daily basis, eat out etc... etc... They talk about how they would love for the mom to stay home with the kids, but they can't afford it. They could afford it, if they changed their lifestyle.

For the first three and half years of my first childs life, we had one car. We wouldn't make enough money for our house and two cars and insurance etc... without her working. So, she sacraficed and did without a car. We did without eating out all the time. I did without buying games all the time. Heck, I didn't even upgrade my computer for those early years.

I'm not saying this is the case with your relationship. I'm just making a statement, that there are a ton of people who could live off of one income, but they choose not to.

[Galaril]

I don't really know who you are, and I'm not tied down enough to one party to really feel strongly enough to argue for or against someone, however I don't recall seeing a single one of your posts add really anything constructive to this conversation.

In fact the majority of your posts seem to be striving to either try to infuriate others (such as a troll would do), or you just are outright racist in reality. As I don't know you, I won't judge.. but if your intention is to try to steer this thread away from any kind of reasonable debate on the politicians or their suggested policies, you are doing so very well.

Perhaps you should cool it off, or take a break from this thread before you find yourself boxed for ridiculous trolling. There are others whom are doing your "side" of the discussion a far better service with actual intelligent discussion such as Arles or others.

Awesome post from a former fellow Grafton resident. I agree take a break SFL unless your post are for real then........no comment.

[astrosfan64]

After her water broke, on the day of Trig's delivery, Palin delivered a keynote address in Texas and then flew 8 hours to Alaska.

She returned to the office three days after delivering the child.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin



MOTHER OF THE YEAR!

[DaddyTorgo]

The ages 1 - 4 are about teaching kids how to live. It isn't about sitting them in a school learning their ABC's. Their job is to learn how to be kids. They do that best by being around the people who care most about them e.g. their parents. I mean you should read to them, work with them on counting or whatever other early learning excercies you wish, but, you wouldn't do it full time. An hour or two a day is all you need to do at that young age.

Things like compassion, manners, respect, self esteem, moral values are taught at home by the parents. Its pretty hard to cram that learning into them 2 hours a night after work?

And do you really want some lady making 10 bucks an hour to teach these core values to your children?

I get in this discussion quite often. I've heard peole tell me they couldn't afford it or it isn't possible. Well, people quite often don't make the sacrafices they need to.

We have this neighbor, she and her husband both work. They have twins. They both have nice cars, plasma TV, drink wine on a daily basis, eat out etc... etc... They talk about how they would love for the mom to stay home with the kids, but they can't afford it. They could afford it, if they changed their lifestyle.

For the first three and half years of my first childs life, we had one car. We wouldn't make enough money for our house and two cars and insurance etc... without her working. So, she sacraficed and did without a car. We did without eating out all the time. I did without buying games all the time. Heck, I didn't even upgrade my computer for those early years.

I'm not saying this is the case with your relationship. I'm just making a statement, that there are a ton of people who could live off of one income, but they choose not to.

you made one choice, they made another. Who are you to judge their choice? You have ZERO idea of the circumstances that they were in. Maybe they both needed to work to provide support to a sick parent and had a little extra leftover after that to increase their standard of living? You really have no idea of what's going on inside their lives.

Judge not lest ye be judged hmm?

:rant:

[astrosfan64]

you made one choice, they made another. Who are you to judge their choice? You have ZERO idea of the circumstances that they were in. Maybe they both needed to work to provide support to a sick parent and had a little extra leftover after that to increase their standard of living? You really have no idea of what's going on inside their lives.

Judge not lest ye be judged hmm?

:rant:

Actually, I'm well aware of what goes in their lives. I'm called over there quite often to sit down with them and discuss these things.

I look at their kids and that is why I judge. :(

[DanGarion]

I can not honestly vote for anyone that knows they are going to have a baby with down syndrome and don't abort it. That is not logical or sound judgement and pretty much lets me know you don't get it.

Wow that's pretty damn harsh. I don't think it's really anyone's place to decide if it's logical to have a child, regardless if the child is mentally challenged. It's one thing to be pro-life or pro-choice, but just being a pro-dumbass like your comment, is just wrong. I'm pro-choice, but I wouldn't ever judge someone because they choose to have a child that they know will be difficult to raise. It's a choice I personally hope I will never have to make.

[astrosfan64]

Wow that's pretty damn harsh. I don't think it's really anyone's place to decide if it's logical to have a child, regardless if the child is mentally challenged. It's one thing to be pro-life or pro-choice, but just being a pro-dumbass like your comment, is just wrong. I'm pro-choice, but I wouldn't never judge someone because they choose to have a child that they know will be difficult to raise. It's a choice I personally hope I will never have to make.

Handicapped children are paid for by us. They are a burden on society. Unless you are wealthy and can cover all the expense with having a child that is handicapped, it does indeed effect all of us.

I'm not saying we should force people to have an abortion. I'm saying, I have a right to not vote for them.

If you know that your child is going to be handicapped and you have it anyway, that is not logical. In fact it is stupid.

This lady would force woman who are raped to have the child.

This lady would force an incestious baby to be born.

This lady would force everyone who had a down's syndrome baby to carry it to term.

I repeat again, 97% of people terminate the baby. I want our leaders to use sense, not emotion or religous beliefs in their decisions.

[DanGarion]

Handicapped children are paid for by us. They are a burden on society. Unless you are wealthy and can cover all the expense with having a child that is handicapped, it does indeed effect all of us.

I'm not saying we should force people to have an abortion. I'm saying, I have a right to not vote for them.

If you know that your child is going to be handicapped and you have it anyway, that is not logical. In fact it is stupid.


So taking your "logic" if someone becomes handicapped they should be taken out back and shot?

[astrosfan64]

So taking your "logic" if someone becomes handicapped they should be taken out back and shot?

No, again you are missing the point.

She had a test to see if a fetus had a genetic problem. It did and she choose to do nothing about it. That is the issue.


If you had a child who was handicapped and you didn't know about, that is 100% completely different.
If you had a child who became handicapped later in life, of course that is again different.

[DanGarion]

No, again you are missing the point.

She had a test to see if a fetus had a genetic problem. It did and she choose to do nothing about it. That is the issue.


If you had a child who was handicapped and you didn't know about, that is 100% completely different.
If you had a child who became handicapped later in life, of course that is again different.
How is knowing your child may have a genetic problem, different from you or someone you love coming down with a handicap?

[ISiddiqui]

If you believe the fetus is a person, then what? Basically, astrofan takes the recently handicapped out back and shoots them for being a burden on society.

Frankly, children of poor people are a burden on society as well. We should just abort all of them too.

[DanGarion]

Doing some research it appears that detection rates of Down Syndrome is about 60-80% I can't find any numbers of false positives though.

[Arles]

One other thing to mention. It's not like Palin is starting the campaign in 2007 and has a year and a half left. She's basically on the campaign trail for two months. Then, she's either at a home in Washington or back in Alaska. Given she has the baby with her and her husband is there for support, I don't see how two months of campaigning with a strong support network (and the baby with you) is going to seriously impact the baby's future.

As many of you know, all that baby's doing over the next two months is eating, pooping and sleeping (with some crying thrown in for effect ;) ). As long as she is able to be near the baby, breastfeed if she chooses and spend quality time with him every day, I don't see how this child suffers the next two months.

[astrosfan64]

Dong some research it appears that detection rates of Down Syndrome is about 60-80% I can't find any numbers of false positives though.

Before you quote BS numbers do better research. The numbers you posted are for screenings not an amniocentesis.

http://my.clevelandclinic.org/healthy_living/Pregnancy/hic_Genetic_Amniocentesis.aspx

How accurate is amniocentesis?

The accuracy of amniocentesis is about 99.4%.
Amniocentesis may occasionally be unsuccessful because of technical problems, such as an inability to collect an adequate amount of amniotic fluid or failure of the collected cells to grow when cultured.

My wife is 37 and we had this procedure done about a year ago. We read up on all of this stuff and went to genetic counciling.

[astrosfan64]

One other thing to mention. It's not like Palin is starting the campaign in 2007 and has a year and a half left. She's basically on the campaign trail for two months. Then, she's either at a home in Washington or back in Alaska. Given she has the baby with her and her husband is there for support, I don't see how two months of campaigning with a strong support network (and the baby with you) is going to seriously impact the baby's future.

As many of you know, all that baby's doing over the next two months is eating, pooping and sleeping (with some crying thrown in for effect ;) ). As long as she is able to be near the baby, breastfeed if she chooses and spend quality time with him every day, I don't see how this child suffers the next two months.

Yep its a great idea to fly your child around everyday! Excellent idea. At five to seven months a child rolls over for the first time, is very much into his surroundings. They do quite a bit more then eat and poop.

[DanGarion]

Before you quote BS numbers do better research. The numbers you posted are for screenings not an amniocentesis.

http://my.clevelandclinic.org/healthy_living/Pregnancy/hic_Genetic_Amniocentesis.aspx

How accurate is amniocentesis?

The accuracy of amniocentesis is about 99.4%.
Amniocentesis may occasionally be unsuccessful because of technical problems, such as an inability to collect an adequate amount of amniotic fluid or failure of the collected cells to grow when cultured.

My wife is 37 and we had this procedure done about a year ago. We read up on all of this stuff and went to genetic counciling.

First you claim my numbers are BS, and then you say my numbers are for screenings. Which one is it? I personally know very little about this testing, those were some numbers I found. Might as well just kill off anyone that can't contribute to society. So what do you do for a living?...:cool:

[astrosfan64]

If you believe the fetus is a person, then what? Basically, astrofan takes the recently handicapped out back and shoots them for being a burden on society.

Frankly, children of poor people are a burden on society as well. We should just abort all of them too.

Oh please. A fetus is not a person. Its a glob of cells. Until brain activity takes place its just a growth inside of a woman. There really isn't a debate on this if you use any type of logic or reason.

If you want to go down the "soul" route. If someone kills a "baby" and if you believe in the whole christian god/heaven thing. The baby would goto heaven anyway, so what is the big deal. It would just be the people who were aborting the baby that would be punished for their sins.

[DanGarion]

Oh hey look I actually found something more useful than your numbers, false positive numbers.

From this site Down's Syndrome: Prenatal Screening and Your Baby (http://www.womens-health.co.uk/downs.asp)

The false positive rate above relates to the total percentage of the population who are advised to have amniocentesis and have a positive test result but who do not have a DS baby. The detection rate shows how many women in the population will still have a DS baby in spite of their screen being 'negative' (normal). So, for example, at a cut-off rate of 1 in 250, 5.2% of women will have an unneccessary amniocentesis, and we will still miss 42% of DS cases.

As you can see this is a pretty imperfect test, but it is the best we have at the moment. Many women do not wish to accept the test, as it is presently, and consider the worry and inherent risk of miscarriage in amniocentesis not worthwhile. Others, however, accept its limitations and feel that they could not deal with giving birth to a Down's syndrome child. Many just have the test done as part of the routine bloods without thinking about it - don't be one of those, it may lead to some difficult choices later!
The bold was my doing to prove a point.

[astrosfan64]

First you claim my numbers are BS, and then you say my numbers are for screenings. Which one is it? I personally know very little about this testing, those were some numbers I found. Might as well just kill off anyone that can't contribute to society. So what do you do for a living?...:cool:

A screening is a blood test. I linked to the information for you if you are interested.


The amniocentesis is a needle that they stick into the amniotic sack and get amniotic fluid. They can then look at the actual chromosomes and see if there is an extra one. In the case of a down syndrome baby, there is one extra. They can screen for other birth defects as well.

The success rate on this test is well above 99%. The results aren't wrong, but sometimes they test can fail totally if they don't get enough fluid or your doctor is incompetent.

[DanGarion]

A screening is a blood test. I linked to the information for you if you are interested.


The amniocentesis is a needle that they stick into the amniotic sack and get amniotic fluid. They can then look at the actual chromosomes and see if there is an extra one. In the case of a down syndrome baby, there is one extra. They can screen for other birth defects as well.

The success rate on this test is well above 99%. The results aren't wrong, but sometimes they test can fail totally if they don't get enough fluid or your doctor is incompetent.

I guess it all depends on where you get your information, since what I've now found contradicts what you claim. :confused:

[astrosfan64]

Oh hey look I actually found something more useful than your numbers, false positive numbers.

From this site Down's Syndrome: Prenatal Screening and Your Baby (http://www.womens-health.co.uk/downs.asp)


The bold was my doing to prove a point.

This is almost completely contradictory to what I read on about 10 other sites and what our genetic councilor told us.

[DaddyTorgo]

If you believe the fetus is a person, then what? Basically, astrofan takes the recently handicapped out back and shoots them for being a burden on society.

Frankly, children of poor people are a burden on society as well. We should just abort all of them too.

don't forget stupid people. I guess we should have mandatory IQ tests and only keep enough stupid people to do menial labor and shoot the rest.

[Crim]

Tell me, how have the local Klan meetings been going? Must be harder to recruit these days. :rolleyes:

Sure was nice of SFL Cat to give you guys something to latch onto like this. I was kind of hoping he'd come right out and say he hates niggers or something.

Christ, guys, bastardizing Hussein Obama's name into something resembling a terrorist's name is not racist, unless that's just what you choose to see in SFL Cat's posts.

I fail to see how that post was targeting the fact that Obama is half black. It was using the sililarity of his name to -- ah, forget it. You read what you want to read. Just because it wasn't funny doesn't make it evidence of Klan sympathy, is all I'm sayin.

[astrosfan64]

I guess it all depends on where you get your information, since what I've now found contradicts what you claim. :confused:

Down syndrome: Tests and diagnosis - MayoClinic.com (http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/down-syndrome/DS00182/DSECTION=tests-and-diagnosis)

Blood tests. Results of the ultrasound are paired with blood tests that measure levels of pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A) and a hormone known as human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG). Abnormal levels of PAPP-A and HCG may indicate a problem with the baby.
When this two-step screening is done during the 11th week of pregnancy, researchers say it can identify 87 percent of babies with Down syndrome. By 13 weeks, accuracy of the two-step screening approach drops to 82 percent.

I can only assume that the numbers from that UK site are for tests such as these. (basic blood tests)



If your screening tests are positive or worrisome or you're at high risk of having a baby with Down syndrome, you might consider further testing to confirm the diagnosis. Diagnostic tests that can identify Down syndrome include:

Amniocentesis. A sample of the amniotic fluid surrounding the fetus is withdrawn through a needle inserted into the mother's uterus. This sample is then used to analyze the chromosomes of the fetus. Doctors usually perform this test after 15 weeks of gestation. The test carries a risk of miscarriage of one in 200.
Chorionic villus sampling (CVS). Cells taken from the mother's placenta can be used to analyze the fetal chromosomes. Typically performed between the ninth and 14th week of pregnancy, this test carries a risk of miscarriage of one in 100.
Percutaneous umbilical blood sampling (PUBS). Blood is taken from a vein in the umbilical cord and examined for chromosomal defects. Doctors generally perform this test after 18 weeks of gestation. This test carries a greater risk of miscarriage than does amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling. Generally, this test is only done when speed of diagnosis is essential.

Each of these three tests is 98 percent to 99 percent accurate in diagnosing Down syndrome before birth.

I think the mayoclinic is one of the top rated medical facilities in the world. I think we can all agree that information from their site is very reliable.

[astrosfan64]

Oh hey look I actually found something more useful than your numbers, false positive numbers.

From this site Down's Syndrome: Prenatal Screening and Your Baby (http://www.womens-health.co.uk/downs.asp)


The bold was my doing to prove a point.

After rereading this. Those numbers you see on the chart are for the blood tests only. If you go on to read, the only option to be sure is Amniocentesis. But, there are chances you could miscarry, so some woman don't choose it.

All of this is not the point anyway. Now that we have determined that you can reliably detect if your baby is going to be mentally handicapped, I think we can debate the point of keeping it.

I could care less what any person normally does in this situation. You guys do what you want.

I just don't want my president or vp or senator or governor to make that choice. I think its foolish and not logical. So I would not want them representing me or making decisions for my country.

[DaddyTorgo]

Christ, guys, bastardizing Hussein Obama's name into something resembling a terrorist's name is not racist, unless that's just what you choose to see in SFL Cat's posts.


maybe not black/white racist, but anti-arab racist...sure it was. maybe it's all about your sensitivity, and the belief that if he's so quick to say that on a messageboard what is the rest that he's not saying, or hasn't said yet, what he has said just being the tip of the iceberg.

[DanGarion]

After rereading this. Those numbers you see on the chart are for the blood tests only. If you go on to read, the only option to be sure is Amniocentesis. But, there are chances you could miscarry, so some woman don't choose it.

All of this is not the point anyway. Now that we have determined that you can reliably detect if your baby is going to be mentally handicapped, I think we can debate the point of keeping it.

I could care less what any person normally does in this situation. You guys do what you want.

I just don't want my president or vp or senator or governor to make that choice. I think its foolish and not logical. So I would not want them representing me or making decisions for my country.
I agree with you that it is foolish and not logical for them to make the choice for me in this case, and honestly I don't know Palin's background on any issues yet, but just because someone makes a choice in their own life doesn't mean they expect to make that choice in all other people's lives.

Fortunately the decision to have a child isn't always logical in the first place, regardless of if there are complications. Not everything is cut and dry black and white logic when it comes to life, this is one of the special things that makes us human. We can actually cognitively think about things and decide what we want to do. There are always other factors then logic when it comes to life.

[Crim]

I can not honestly vote for anyone that knows they are going to have a baby with down syndrome and don't abort it. That is not logical or sound judgement and pretty much lets me know you don't get it.


Umm.

Do you know anyone with Down's Syndrome? These are people, astrosfan, not numbers.

Of course there are additional challenges with raising any disabled child (I'm thankful to only know this second-hand, as both my girls are healthy), but there are also rewards that, for some parents I've spoken to, balance out or even outweigh the challenges.

I know a girl with microcephaly, used to work with her. What an absolute joy to know her! She just sent me a happy July 4th card she had made from construction paper and decorated two weeks ago, and I cherish it. One thing her father told me once when we were discussing her condition that's stuck with me ever since: "Karrie has never had a bad day like so called normal kids might. And she keeps us [her mom and dad] from having bad days, too."

I think your above quoted post is reprehensible, to be honest, af64. Or maybe just ingorant, if you've never had the chance to know and interact with people with "diabilities," maybe you can't be expected to have perspective on the issue.

[Chief Rum]

Fuck you. This is as worse than anything that those right-wing religious nuts have said regarding disasters. But this is getting no play - big surprise. The liberals broadbrush all non-liberals for their associations with such preachers and maybe some can broadbrush all left-leaning folks for their associations with these left-wing nuts.

That's asshattery on the level of that Kansas church that protests the funerals of soldiers killed in action.

[Chief Rum]

Arles:

If you read my post, you see I already answered that question. It is my belief that one parent should be home with a child. (I believe it should be the mother, but then again so does nature). If it is the father and he has the makeup to handle that then fine.

I agree it has to be a great idea to fly around the country with your 5 month child who has Downs. Best decision ever! I'm sure that is great time managment.

Yup, better off to have killed the Downs kid, and then go run for VP on a Pro-Life platform!

[Crim]

Warhammer:

I think its all fine and dandy that your parents choose this for you and your brother. Do I believe the decision is logical? No. Does it really matter that your mom and dad make logical decisions? Unless they are running for President or VP or some kind of elected office it doesn't. Well at least to me it doesn't.

I expect my elected officials to make intellegent informed decisions. The whole purpose you get the test, is to determine whether you should abort the fetus. I believe the stat is like 97% of babies who are detected with Downs are aborted.

So that goes to show you that our proposed elected official is at 3%.

I guess here is my point. I understand she "loves" all of her children. I don't want a president or vp that make decisions out of love or fear of god. I want one that uses logic and reason.


Oh my.

[TCY Junkie]

Sure was nice of SFL Cat to give you guys something to latch onto like this. I was kind of hoping he'd come right out and say he hates niggers or something.

Christ, guys, bastardizing Hussein Obama's name into something resembling a terrorist's name is not racist, unless that's just what you choose to see in SFL Cat's posts.

I fail to see how that post was targeting the fact that Obama is half black. It was using the sililarity of his name to -- ah, forget it. You read what you want to read. Just because it wasn't funny doesn't make it evidence of Klan sympathy, is all I'm sayin.

I thought it was funny, because he started to add the last part of his name. I've never heard that before in a serious conversation even if he didn't sound all there. It was a disasterous interview and I find most disasterous things funny.

Umm.

Do you know anyone with Down's Syndrome? These are people, astrosfan, not numbers.

Of course there are additional challenges with raising any disabled child (I'm thankful to only know this second-hand, as both my girls are healthy), but there are also rewards that, for some parents I've spoken to, balance out or even outweigh the challenges.

I know a girl with microcephaly, used to work with her. What an absolute joy to know her! She just sent me a happy July 4th card she had made from construction paper and decorated two weeks ago, and I cherish it. One thing her father told me once when we were discussing her condition that's stuck with me ever since: "Karrie has never had a bad day like so called normal kids might. And she keeps us [her mom and dad] from having bad days, too."

I think your above quoted post is reprehensible, to be honest, af64. Or maybe just ingorant, if you've never had the chance to know and interact with people with "diabilities," maybe you can't be expected to have perspective on the issue.

+1

This is the first time I opened this thread and the last.

[CraigSca]

Handicapped children are paid for by us. They are a burden on society. Unless you are wealthy and can cover all the expense with having a child that is handicapped, it does indeed effect all of us.

This sounds like something out of Germany circa 1938.

[Northwood_DK]

:popcorn:

This is getting ugly

[Crim]

Oh please. A fetus is not a person. Its a glob of cells. Until brain activity takes place its just a growth inside of a woman. There really isn't a debate on this if you use any type of logic or reason.

If you want to go down the "soul" route. If someone kills a "baby" and if you believe in the whole christian god/heaven thing. The baby would goto heaven anyway, so what is the big deal. It would just be the people who were aborting the baby that would be punished for their sins.

Now you're reminding me of... who was it? molson? A few pages back said he liked conservatives better because they try to you into their point of view, whereas libs look down their nose at you for not seeing that their way is correct (I know, I know, I'm wayyyyyy paraphrasing).

Anyway, I know you're self-described as conservative-leaning but in this case you're playing the role of the know-what's-best-for-everyone-better-than-they-know-themselves asshat.




Thing is, I don't say that your views are wrong for you and your wife. I'm no militant pro-lifer myself. I paid for my girlfriend to have an abortion when I was young (though I wish I could have that to do over again).

But you are coming down like a voice from on high, preaching about what is right and logical for other people to do.

You, sir, are no judge of my moral choices.

[Chief Rum]

The Republican spin on her lack of experience has been desperate. The crucial point of her lack of experience is that by far the most effective argument against Obama - his inexperience - has been rendered futile by this appointment - at best it will be seen meaningless, at worst hypocritical. It does not open up the Republican campaign to effective accusations of inexperience but negates the attacks on Obama for the same.

When I first heard the announcement I thought that it was very clever - McCain retained his image as a maverick while introducing a nomination that appealed to the conservative right of the party. It takes away the media focus on the Democrat Convention. It also looked as if he could gain some of those Clinton votes. But as I learned more about her and thought a little deeper then it didn't seem so clever.

What woman who voted for Clinton will vote for a gun-toting, pro-life, creationist, global warming sceptic that wants to drill in ANWR? Anyone that could vote for both Clinton and Palin should be put down ;)

This has to be a hell of a risk. McCain has destroyed his primary argument against Obama for an unpredictable gain in votes. McCain puts himself forward as the America-first patriot but this selection clearly puts his election first. Some women will clearly vote for her but many won't because of her conservatism, particularly on abortion. Some conservatives will be happier with the McCain ticket but some independents less. She has promoted at personal cost ethics in politics but may well be involved in a corruption scandal herself. The gain in votes has to be unknown.

I have to admit this is turning out to be a fascinating contest despite my lack of any direct practical interest :)

I think McCain is trying to cut it two ways. With centrists, particularly women, he is trying to appeal to them by bringing a new sort of candidate than the GOP usually sends out there. There aren't that many votes to swing his way--most of the country decided months ago. He's going for what he can with undecideds, but I don't think that was his primary focus.

His second way and probably the one he is more focused on was revitalizing the conservative right. And it's not because he fears anyone on the conservative right is going to vote for Obama. They won't and he knows it. No, his concern is being sure they vote, period. Because if they go to the polls, they are voting for him. Republicans tend to be more faithful and consistent voters as a bloc, from what I have always heard. Democrats are passionate, but there is a tendency toward voting apathy, partially because a powerful voting bloc among liberals is the younger set, which tend to take voting and politics less seriously.

So McCain may be making this choice to be sure that the consistent right wing voters out there will go to the polls. And to be sure to get more fundraising from the conservative right to attempt to appeal to the few undecideds out there.

Really, his most important point with this selection may already be complete--in one move, he essentially eliminated the talk about Obama's speech and refocused media attention on the GOP.

You're dead on that it is one of the more intriguing political moves I have seen, ever really. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

[Chief Rum]

Warhammer:

I think its all fine and dandy that your parents choose this for you and your brother. Do I believe the decision is logical? No. Does it really matter that your mom and dad make logical decisions? Unless they are running for President or VP or some kind of elected office it doesn't. Well at least to me it doesn't.

I expect my elected officials to make intellegent informed decisions. The whole purpose you get the test, is to determine whether you should abort the fetus. I believe the stat is like 97% of babies who are detected with Downs are aborted.

So that goes to show you that our proposed elected official is at 3%.

I guess here is my point. I understand she "loves" all of her children. I don't want a president or vp that make decisions out of love or fear of god. I want one that uses logic and reason.

I present to you, astrofan's choice for VP!

http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/08/08/spock_3.jpg

SPOCK FOR VICE PRESIDENT!!!

[Chief Rum]

The ages 1 - 4 are about teaching kids how to live. It isn't about sitting them in a school learning their ABC's. Their job is to learn how to be kids. They do that best by being around the people who care most about them e.g. their parents. I mean you should read to them, work with them on counting or whatever other early learning excercies you wish, but, you wouldn't do it full time. An hour or two a day is all you need to do at that young age.

Things like compassion, manners, respect, self esteem, moral values are taught at home by the parents. Its pretty hard to cram that learning into them 2 hours a night after work?

And do you really want some lady making 10 bucks an hour to teach these core values to your children?

I get in this discussion quite often. I've heard peole tell me they couldn't afford it or it isn't possible. Well, people quite often don't make the sacrafices they need to.

We have this neighbor, she and her husband both work. They have twins. They both have nice cars, plasma TV, drink wine on a daily basis, eat out etc... etc... They talk about how they would love for the mom to stay home with the kids, but they can't afford it. They could afford it, if they changed their lifestyle.

For the first three and half years of my first childs life, we had one car. We wouldn't make enough money for our house and two cars and insurance etc... without her working. So, she sacraficed and did without a car. We did without eating out all the time. I did without buying games all the time. Heck, I didn't even upgrade my computer for those early years.

I'm not saying this is the case with your relationship. I'm just making a statement, that there are a ton of people who could live off of one income, but they choose not to.

If this is such an issue for you, I am curious if you know the child-rearing decisions of the other candidates, all of whom, I believe, have families as well, and did so as they began and advanced in their political careers?

Or are you so entrenched in the "woman should be in the kitchen" mentality that this is purely a misogynistic stance for you that only applies to Palin?

[Chief Rum]

maybe not black/white racist, but anti-arab racist...sure it was. maybe it's all about your sensitivity, and the belief that if he's so quick to say that on a messageboard what is the rest that he's not saying, or hasn't said yet, what he has said just being the tip of the iceberg.

I stayed out of the SFL Cat stuff because I thought what he said was pretty damn stupid.

That said, I have thought all along that you guys have come out far too much over the top, considering this IS a message board as you say. We don't really know anything about SFL Cat, and my initial impression is that what he said was made as a dumb decision to crack a joke, or to maybe hurt Obama's chances at electability, not some overt form of intentional racism. Now, the first two are certainly no great things either, but they aren't quite as serious as what you guys have charged him, and I don't honestly think you have enough information on him to make this accusation in anything but an extremely careless and dangerous way, especially with the way these political threads go.

SFL Cat secured for himself a position in the Hall of Stupidity with his stubborn defense of his joke, but that deosn't mean those of you who leaped on the race card were right to villify him to the extent that you did.

[Danny]

I'm working, going to graduate school, and will make a career out of working with predominantly special education kids, their families and teachers. Every child, whether they are your typical "normal" kid, have down syndrome or any other disability has different challenges and rewards involved with raising or interacting with them. However, they are all precious and a gift.

The mother of a child I work with has twins who both have moderate to major autism. The mother works all night while they sleep, drops her kids off at school, sleeps while they are in school and takes care of them after school. When she picks up the twins after school and they come running to her to give her a big hug, she lights up like most people rarely do. This is the same story in most of my experiences with the parents. In fact, I'd say that the different and yes sometimes greater set of challenges some of these wonderful children present could even cause the parents to appreciate and cherish their child even more.

Astrosfan, I don't know if it is due to lack of experience or exposure to children with disabilities, but if so, I would highly recommend changing that before voicing opinions on something you seem to have little exposure to.

[Mac Howard]

I think McCain is trying to cut it two ways. With centrists, particularly women, he is trying to appeal to them by bringing a new sort of candidate than the GOP usually sends out there. There aren't that many votes to swing his way--most of the country decided months ago. He's going for what he can with undecideds, but I don't think that was his primary focus.

His second way and probably the one he is more focused on was revitalizing the conservative right.

Having learned more about her I don't see that she has much appeal for the centre - perhaps a few votes simply because she's a woman - but I certainly agree about her ensuring the right vote for McCain. That's why I first thought it to be a clever selection - he appeals to the right of the party while maintaining his image as a maverick (by selecting someone no one expected).

But there is an interesting poll out today that reports that the choice has far more approval from men than women. I'm not quite sure yet what to make of that but I do recall it was also true of Margaret Thatcher.

Really, his most important point with this selection may already be complete--in one move, he essentially eliminated the talk about Obama's speech and refocused media attention on the GOP.

He certainly achieved that but I think it may be at some serious cost. I was watching the discussion programs on CNN and Fox and it was interesting to watch the GOP commentators, who have clearly been thrown by this (the Dem commentators much more comfortable with it), and were not sure of the tack to take. They were even more evasive than usual. Larry King cut to the chase with something like this: "is she the best Republican politician to become Commander in Chief if something happens to McCain". One GOP campaign advisor complained "you keep asking that". I was sorry King wasn't sufficiently uncivil to reply "Yes, but you haven't answered it yet" as she went on explaining how running a village of 9,000 people was ideal preparation for dealing with Putin and Osama bin Laden (it must be an interesting village :) ).

The problem is that the two big sticks that have been used to batter Obama and have lifted the McCain campaign have been seriously compromised - Obama's inexperience and the "who the hell is this guy" question. Well, McCain has now given the Democrats the perfect answer to these - "John McCain himself clearly doesn't think these are important."

I don't see the Dems using her inexperience directly but to deflect attacks on Obama.

So I'm not sure this is the great move it originally seemed. Geraldo illustrated this for me when he enthused that now the debate could cut to the chase and deal with the real issues such as the economy, global warming, energy crisis etc. But does McCain want the debate to turn to these? I think not. He would surely be much happier to keep the debate about Obama's lack of foreign affairs experience and his relatively unknown background which has had such success.

You're dead on that it is one of the more intriguing political moves I have seen, ever really. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

It is fascinating as to where it will go from here. As a non-American I must admit there's some of the appeal of watching a train wreck but my PVR has nearly as many political programs set for recording as soccer games :)

[Mike D]

I'm working, going to graduate school, and will make a career out of working with predominantly special education kids, their families and teachers. Every child, whether they are your typical "normal" kid, have down syndrome or any other disability has different challenges and rewards involved with raising or interacting with them. However, they are all precious and a gift.

The mother of a child I work with has twins who both have moderate to major autism. The mother works all night while they sleep, drops her kids off at school, sleeps while they are in school and takes care of them after school. When she picks up the twins after school and they come running to her to give her a big hug, she lights up like most people rarely do. This is the same story in most of my experiences with the parents. In fact, I'd say that the different and yes sometimes greater set of challenges some of these wonderful children present could even cause the parents to appreciate and cherish their child even more.

Astrosfan, I don't know if it is due to lack of experience or exposure to children with disabilities, but if so, I would highly recommend changing that before voicing opinions on something you seem to have little exposure to.

Well said, sir.

[JPhillips]

The problem with using Palin to blunt Obama's speech talk is that it's so shortsighted. 538 was discussing this and pointed out that convention bounces go away on their own.

I also think this pick shows the danger of allowing advisors to be too strong, let's call it the Marc Penn effect. McCain is the underdog and isn't expected to win. Certainly his advisors would like him to win, but they won't suffer professionally if he loses. What they need to do to boost their profile in the party and ensure future work isn't necessarily what's best for McCain. Choosing Palin to control a day of media coverage seems a perfect example of taking a big risk that boosts profile among Republicans but could backfire terribly for McCain.

[JPhillips]

So McCain and Palin are going to the Gulf region today to be briefed on Gustav. That's, IMO, a pretty stupid move, but please don't let McCain do this.

Complicating matters, the Politico added, "McCain was scheduled to deliver his acceptance speech Thursday but now may do so from the devastation zone if the storm hits the U.S. coast with the ferocity feared by forecasters."

[astrosfan64]

I present to you, astrofan's choice for VP!

http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/08/08/spock_3.jpg

SPOCK FOR VICE PRESIDENT!!!

Great Post :)

[astrosfan64]

Umm.

Do you know anyone with Down's Syndrome? These are people, astrosfan, not numbers.

Of course there are additional challenges with raising any disabled child (I'm thankful to only know this second-hand, as both my girls are healthy), but there are also rewards that, for some parents I've spoken to, balance out or even outweigh the challenges.

I know a girl with microcephaly, used to work with her. What an absolute joy to know her! She just sent me a happy July 4th card she had made from construction paper and decorated two weeks ago, and I cherish it. One thing her father told me once when we were discussing her condition that's stuck with me ever since: "Karrie has never had a bad day like so called normal kids might. And she keeps us [her mom and dad] from having bad days, too."

I think your above quoted post is reprehensible, to be honest, af64. Or maybe just ingorant, if you've never had the chance to know and interact with people with "diabilities," maybe you can't be expected to have perspective on the issue.

You aren't killing a child. If the child was born with downs then of course you wouldn't lill them. To abort the fetus at 15 to 20 months, is far from killing a child or human. So your post is pretty dumb.

Aborting a fetus at 15 to 20 months is scrapping a blob of cells because they were the right material to build with.

[Mac Howard]

I'm working, going to graduate school, and will make a career out of working with predominantly special education kids, their families and teachers. Every child, whether they are your typical "normal" kid, have down syndrome or any other disability has different challenges and rewards involved with raising or interacting with them. However, they are all precious and a gift.

The mother of a child I work with has twins who both have moderate to major autism. The mother works all night while they sleep, drops her kids off at school, sleeps while they are in school and takes care of them after school. When she picks up the twins after school and they come running to her to give her a big hug, she lights up like most people rarely do. This is the same story in most of my experiences with the parents. In fact, I'd say that the different and yes sometimes greater set of challenges some of these wonderful children present could even cause the parents to appreciate and cherish their child even more.

Astrosfan, I don't know if it is due to lack of experience or exposure to children with disabilities, but if so, I would highly recommend changing that before voicing opinions on something you seem to have little exposure to.

There's a touch of self-righteousness there that I'm sure you're not aware of, Danny. Had your experiences been with young women whose lives have been destroyed by being unable to deal with the extreme demands of a disabled child, turned to drugs and repeatedly attempted suicide you too might have a different view on this.

I'm sure everything you describe, Danny, is quite correct but it is only one man's experience and there are many experiences to be dealt with. For that we need a far more flexible approach than what you propose.

[larrymcg421]

After rereading this. Those numbers you see on the chart are for the blood tests only. If you go on to read, the only option to be sure is Amniocentesis. But, there are chances you could miscarry, so some woman don't choose it.

All of this is not the point anyway. Now that we have determined that you can reliably detect if your baby is going to be mentally handicapped, I think we can debate the point of keeping it.

I could care less what any person normally does in this situation. You guys do what you want.

I just don't want my president or vp or senator or governor to make that choice. I think its foolish and not logical. So I would not want them representing me or making decisions for my country.

Wow, you're a fucking idiot.

[Noop]

Wow. This has gotten nasty.

Since its already stated I think Obama will not win because he is black.

As for SFL Cat, his posts are very disappointing and the fact some if you can defend him is disappointing as well.

[Mike D]

There's a touch of self-righteousness there that I'm sure you're not aware of, Danny. Had your experiences been with young women whose lives have been destroyed by being unable to deal with the extreme demands of a disabled child, turned to drugs and repeatedly attempted suicide you too might have a different view on this.

No one view fits all circumstances which is why there needs to be a range of options for those who find themselves in these awful dilemmas.

It's not self-righteousness! My sister has a son that is suffering from cerebral palsy and severe autism. It's a tough, tough, tough situation, but she deals with it by being absolutely selfless and amazing for her child. If other women are turning to drugs and committing suicide, blame them, not those who would offer knowledge, help and guidance.

[astrosfan64]

Wow, you're a fucking idiot.

Nice reply sheep. You let the government make your choices for you. If you are calling me an idiot because of the stats of the procedure. Then you are calling the doctors at the mayo clinic idiots.

[Mac Howard]

I blame them,

That illustrates my point, Danny. That is the self-righteous, even sanctimonious, tone I'm referring to.

not those who would offer knowledge, help and guidance.

You see, you're not offering help and guidance you're offering condemnation.

[astrosfan64]

I just reread the posts above. This is why I stay out of political threads. Everyone here looks to call someone a racist, an idiot, a sheep or 100 other insulting type of phrases or names.

No thanks, I'm not getting drawn into this. Intellegent debate on this topic doesn't work here. I'm going back to the normal sports and video game threads.

Carry on everyone and good wishes to all of you.

[larrymcg421]

Nice reply sheep. You let the government make your choices for you. If you are calling me an idiot because of the stats of the procedure. Then you are calling the doctors at the mayo clinic idiots.

I'm calling you an idiot because you're making a political issue out of someone giving birth to a special needs child.

[larrymcg421]

I just reread the posts above. This is why I stay out of political threads. Everyone here looks to call someone a racist, an idiot, a sheep or 100 other insulting type of phrases or names.

No thanks, I'm not getting drawn into this. Intellegent debate on this topic doesn't work here. I'm going back to the normal sports and video game threads.

Carry on everyone and good wishes to all of you.

This is one of my big pet peeves. Seriously, if you're going to leave the thread, because you can't handle it, then just leave the thread. Don't make bullshit posts like this so you get the last word in and leave. That is nothing more than trolling.

Also, you're an idiot.

[larrymcg421]

There's a touch of self-righteousness there that I'm sure you're not aware of, Danny. Had your experiences been with young women whose lives have been destroyed by being unable to deal with the extreme demands of a disabled child, turned to drugs and repeatedly attempted suicide you too might have a different view on this.

I'm sure everything you describe, Danny, is quite correct but it is only one man's experience and there are many experiences to be dealt with. For that we need a far more flexible approach than what you propose.

There's a difference from saying you should have a choice to abort a special needs child and criticizing someone for not doing that.

[SFL Cat]

Honestly, I don't know why I keep coming into these threads. It's like a drinking binge, you know you're going to regret it later, but sometimes you just can't stop yourself. It really is pointless, because regardless of how eloquent posters like Arles can be, I know someone like Flasch will never see the light. :)

These political threads are basically glorified pissing contests. Frankly, there is enough graft, corruption and general incompetence on both sides of the aisle that I can call "bullshit" on anyone who tries to take some kind of ethical high ground and demonize the other side here. In my book, the Democrats are more guilty simply because during the past century, they have held the reigns of power in Washington longer than the Republicans.

I generally support Republicans because their positions, at least their stated positions, are much closer to my core values than what the Democrats espouse. I have noticed that once they get to Washington, other than throwing a few legislative crumbs to their supporters to keep them appeased, there isn't much difference between the two major parties in how they govern.

When I took "Obama's" name in vain, I happened to be watching youtube clips of various announcers and politicians flubbing his name. I was genuinely surprised and amused by how quickly the Obamanation members of this forum immediately began flinging racist accusations my way...and I suppose I did take it to the point of trolling -- and I do apologize for that -- but I do enjoy watching those who are supposed to be so "high-minded" so quickly resort to name calling when they feel offended. I can understand though, religious folk get pretty riled when you take the Lord's name in vain too. Oops.

I can't promise I'll stay completely out of these discussions, but when I do participate, I'll try to avoid general asshattery...can't make any promises there either.

Anyhoo, looks like astrosfan is currently toting the rock, so I'll just watch for a while.

[Mac Howard]

There's a difference from saying you should have a choice to abort a special needs child and criticizing someone for not doing that.

I agree entirely. I think it's diabolical that anyone should be criticised for continuing the pregnancy and some of the comments above about Palin are disgraceful. Pro-choice means precisely that - pro choice not pro abortion and choosing to continue a pregnancy is fully deserving of respect and even praise when it involves so much personal sacrifice.

[Alan T]

That illustrates my point, Danny. That is the self-righteous, even sanctimonious, tone I'm referring to.



You see, you're not offering help and guidance you're offering condemnation.

Mac, not sure if you noticed, but it is two different posters that you are lumping up in your head as all being Danny's posts.

Danny's post was the original one where his opinion is shaped based on his work or future work with special needs children.

Dutch's posts were the ones you just replied to where he bases his opinion shaped by his interaction with his sister and her kids whom have special needs.


As for the whole thing that Astrofan has brought up.. there are very few things I won't debate someone about.. but a few of them are to do with abortion or abortion rights. I'll admit that I am pro-choice, but would have a very difficult (if not impossible) decision to ever do that myself. It actually is something that my wife and I talked about after she almost died she has been told that she can't have any more children or the labor process would kill her. We had to talk about what would we do if she did somehow get pregnant. I can't imagine that it is an easy choice for everyone to just make, and in our case we've obviously done other measures to prevent pregnacy for the future.

I just feel very uncomfortable about anyone making Palin's own decision a political issue as I have to guess when you are faced with a decision such as that it never can be black/white on what to do there. I have absolutely no problem with you attacking her stance at being a pro-life candidate, as I personally am pro-choice as well, but I guess I just feel attacking her baby is kind of off-limits.

[Flasch186]

. In my book, the Democrats are more guilty simply because during the past century, they have held the reigns of power in Washington longer than the Republicans and had a budget surplus and added jobs and increased personal incomes.

I generally support Republicans because their positions, at least their stated positions, are much closer to my core values than what the Democrats espouse. I have noticed that once they get to Washington, other than throwing a few legislative crumbs to their supporters to keep them appeased, there isn't much difference between the two major parties in how they govern.

When I took "Obama's" name in vain, I happened to be watching youtube clips of various announcers and politicians flubbing his name. I was genuinely surprised and amused by how quickly the Obamanation members of this forum immediately began flinging racist accusations my way...and I suppose I did take it to the point of trolling -- and I do apologize for that -- but I do enjoy watching those who are supposed to be so "high-minded" so quickly resort to name calling when they feel offended. I can understand though, religious folk get pretty riled when you take the Lord's name in vain too. Oops.

[do keep in mind however that the environment would hold that we are always one moment away from being attacked by an Radical Islamic terrorist whose leader is Osama and then you intentionally called him by that leader's name which would be the equivalent to calling Yaweh, Yaweh Von Hitler or something like that, but you knew what you were doing....simply calling Jesus, Jesus Christ, doesnt really equate, in my book...but what do you care anyways] - Flasch

I can't promise I'll stay completely out of these discussions, but when I do participate, I'll try to avoid general asshattery...can't make any promises there either.

Anyhoo, looks like astrosfan is currently toting the rock, so I'll just watch for a while.

edited within your quote

[path12]

His second way and probably the one he is more focused on was revitalizing the conservative right. And it's not because he fears anyone on the conservative right is going to vote for Obama. They won't and he knows it. No, his concern is being sure they vote, period. Because if they go to the polls, they are voting for him. Republicans tend to be more faithful and consistent voters as a bloc, from what I have always heard. Democrats are passionate, but there is a tendency toward voting apathy, partially because a powerful voting bloc among liberals is the younger set, which tend to take voting and politics less seriously.

I think you're right, and it's not a good sign. It seems to me that McCain has had to spend way more time and energy getting the base in order than reaching out to swing voters.

[Mac Howard]

Mac, not sure if you noticed, but it is two different posters that you are lumping up in your head as all being Danny's posts.

Then my apologies to Danny. I had assumed that as the answer came to my direct comment to him that he was replying. I should take more care.

I just feel very uncomfortable about anyone making Palin's own decision a political issue as I have to guess when you are faced with a decision such as that it never can be black/white on what to do there. I have absolutely no problem with you attacking her stance at being a pro-life candidate, as I personally am pro-choice as well, but I guess I just feel attacking her baby is kind of off-limits.

I haven't attacked her pro-life stance at all and certainly criticise those who condemn her for her choice to take her last pregnancy to full term. It has no place in determining her suitabilty for the VP position. I have merely suggested that Clinton voters are unlikely to transfer their vote to her because of her pro-life position (along with gun law, global warming, drilling in ANWR etc). I would think that reasonable.

[Flasch186]

No question that they will get less hillary voters than the opportunity allots due to the anti-choice stance of Palin, but that probably wont make much of a difference in the long run.

[SFL Cat]

edited within your quote

piss on, my friend. :p

[path12]

Interesting piece in the Times today regarding the selection:

Advisers Say Conservative Ire Pushed McCain Away From Picking Lieberman - NYTimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/us/politics/31reconstruct.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1220196556-s42rIabJ8RK42Ml3q0j3aw)

[JPhillips]

This is comforting. From the NYTimes article:

“I make them as quickly as I can, quicker than the other fellow, if I can,” Mr. McCain wrote, with his top adviser Mark Salter, in his 2002 book, “Worth the Fighting For.” “Often my haste is a mistake, but I live with the consequences without complaint.”

[Mac Howard]

No question that they will get less hillary voters than the opportunity allots due to the anti-choice stance of Palin, but that probably wont make much of a difference in the long run.

I suppose there are some women who did vote for Hillary purely because she was a woman and may transfer their vote to Palin but I doubt there are a great number. I think Palin's pro-life stance may also lose her the votes of other women. I don't pretend to know what the balance would be. That's one reason I think it is something of a risk for McCain.

But my main point is that McCain has undermined his primary arguments against Obama - his inexperience and that he is not well known. He has clearly not thought that important in his VP selection who can be accused of exactly the same. He has given the Democrats an easy answer to any future attacks on those fronts. I think that plays into their hands.

But it's a multi-faceted election and there may well be many events and debates that render this unimportant. It will be interesting to see.

And it's good to get back on to the real political debate :)

[Flasch186]

I suppose there are some women who did vote for Hillary purely because she was a woman and may transfer their vote to Palin but I doubt there are a great number. I think Palin's pro-life stance may also lose her the votes of other women. I don't pretend to know what the balance would be. That's one reason I think it is something of a risk for McCain.

But my main point is that McCain has undermined his primary arguments against Obama - his inexperience and that he is not well known. He has clearly not thought that important in his VP selection who can be accused of exactly the same. He has given the Democrats an easy answer to any future attacks on those fronts. I think that plays into their hands.

But it's a multi-faceted election and there may well be many events and debates that render this unimportant. It will be interesting to see.

And it's good to get back on to the real political debate :)

Piss on, Mac, Piss on :)

[Crim]

I stayed out of the SFL Cat stuff because I thought what he said was pretty damn stupid.

That said, I have thought all along that you guys have come out far too much over the top, considering this IS a message board as you say. We don't really know anything about SFL Cat, and my initial impression is that what he said was made as a dumb decision to crack a joke, or to maybe hurt Obama's chances at electability, not some overt form of intentional racism. Now, the first two are certainly no great things either, but they aren't quite as serious as what you guys have charged him, and I don't honestly think you have enough information on him to make this accusation in anything but an extremely careless and dangerous way, especially with the way these political threads go.

SFL Cat secured for himself a position in the Hall of Stupidity with his stubborn defense of his joke, but that deosn't mean those of you who leaped on the race card were right to villify him to the extent that you did.

well said

[Arles]

I think you're right, and it's not a good sign. It seems to me that McCain has had to spend way more time and energy getting the base in order than reaching out to swing voters.
Hasn't McCain been reaching out to "swing voters" for the past 3 years (including most of the campaign)? When the main objectors to your candidacy in the primary are Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter, I don't think people can say you cater to the right and aren't working for independents.

There are two moderate/independent voters that McCain had no chance of getting regardless of who he nominated - those who vote on the abortion issue and those vehemently opposed to the war in Iraq. Now, Palin certainly doesn't help in those cases, but those were lost causes anyway. Naming Liebermann, Ridge, Romney or the mythical embodiment of Jane Rowe + Ghandi for VP wouldn't have swayed those voters.

However, he has a chance with conservatives who were thinking about sitting it out or moderates who do not vote primarily on the abortion issue and are looking for something other than the "two old, rich white guys" republican ticket that we've had for the past 30 years.

All these complaints on McCain not reaching out to choice voters would be akin to railing on Obama for not naming a pro-life running mate to try and get the evangelical moderates/independents. I doubt many of you would be advocating that. Yet, it's somehow vital for McCain to bring in a pro-choice person to go after a voting block (strong pro-choice) that he really had no chance with to begin with.

[Flasch186]

arles, I think his choice is fine but it certainly put a label or showed his hand in what his block is trying to do....and that's ok. I obviously dont agree, and everyone knows that but, like you said, his choice wasn't aimed at me. As Jon pointed out this is strictly a play to his base which we'll find out in November if that was the right strategy or not. It would seem that the base he was aiming at with her selection are willing to ignore or explain the lack of or amount that is enough regarding experience for her positions that are hot buttons in the base (as pointed out by Jon). A lot of us agree that those hot buttons are the most important things to that block and to that end he satisfied them and probably guaranteed that evangelical vote....ok. However, trying to spin it as anything but, IMO, is disingenuous.

[John Galt]

SFL Cat secured for himself a position in the Hall of Stupidity with his stubborn defense of his joke, but that deosn't mean those of you who leaped on the race card were right to villify him to the extent that you did.

But Chief, it was that "stubborn defense" that, in my mind, earned the spurning of SFL Cat. I called him a "racist tool" only after he made it clear that his joke wasn't innocent at all.

Names, like many other things, can be a proxy for race. As an example, names can be the basis for hiring discrimination based upon race (http://www.chicagomaroon.com/online_edition/article/7332). Or for a more humorous example of how names can be strongly associated with race, see the Sports Guy's Reggie Cleveland All-Stars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reggie_Cleveland).

When you make fun of Obama's "ethnic sounding" name and associate it with a well-known terrorist, you are engaging in racially charged humor. And when you get indignant and attack anyone who calls you on your bad joke (as SFL Cat did), you pretty much show yourself to be uncaring that your joke might be racially offensive. He concluded by making another variation on the same bad joke and it was only at that time I called him a racist tool (to be fair, he could have been called a "tool" far sooner based upon his many ridiculously bad posts in this thread).

Jokes that use proxies for race are tough to make as Imus' famous "nappy-headed hoes" comment which made fun of the Rutgers' womens' basketball team's hair (and gender) illustrated. It's one thing to make such a joke, but to me it is much worse to continue to defend it and then make another variation on the same joke just to piss people off.

Edited to add: In all, I think SFL Cat got off pretty easy. Much worse things have been said to people who have done far less on this board. If you are going to make racial jokes in a politics thread, I don't think you should be surprised when you get called a racist.

[path12]

Hasn't McCain been reaching out to "swing voters" for the past 3 years (including most of the campaign)? When the main objectors to your candidacy in the primary are Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter, I don't think people can say you cater to the right and aren't working for independents.

All those folks are behind him now, correct? That's because he has had to veer significantly to the right to secure the nomination.

However, he has a chance with conservatives who were thinking about sitting it out or moderates who do not vote primarily on the abortion issue and are looking for something other than the "two old, rich white guys" republican ticket that we've had for the past 30 years.

This is more what I was referring to in my previous post. McCain hasn't yet been able to excite the social conservative base enough to guarantee them coming out to vote, and thus has had to keep appealing to them rather than work towards the centrist vote.

All these complaints on McCain not reaching out to choice voters would be akin to railing on Obama for not naming a pro-life running mate to try and get the evangelical moderates/independents. I doubt many of you would be advocating that. Yet, it's somehow vital for McCain to bring in a pro-choice person to go after a voting block (strong pro-choice) that he really had no chance with to begin with.

I haven't seen anyone try to argue that a pro-choice VP would have been the best way for McCain to go, and I think Lieberman would have been a horrible choice for him. Romney probably would have been the best, but after the homes gaffe I think putting another very rich guy on the ticket was a non-starter. I don't have any feelings one way or the other about Palin, except for assuming from the little I've read that as a strong social conservative we're not on the same page issues-wise. ;)

[Crim]

Anyhoo, looks like astrosfan is currently toting the rock, so I'll just watch for a while.

giggles

[Alan T]

Then my apologies to Danny. I had assumed that as the answer came to my direct comment to him that he was replying. I should take more care.



I haven't attacked her pro-life stance at all and certainly criticise those who condemn her for her choice to take her last pregnancy to full term. It has no place in determining her suitabilty for the VP position. I have merely suggested that Clinton voters are unlikely to transfer their vote to her because of her pro-life position (along with gun law, global warming, drilling in ANWR etc). I would think that reasonable.


Mac,

The second part of my comment was directed more at astrofan than you, sorry if I was confusing in how I worded it. I understand where you are coming from.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Christ, guys, bastardizing Hussein Obama's name into something resembling a terrorist's name is not racist, unless that's just what you choose to see in SFL Cat's posts.

Well I'll be damned.

A post that actually illustrates a f'n clue when it comes to crap like this. Who is actually capable of figuring out that there's nothing about race involved in seeing a liberal neophyte as Commander-In-Chief is one of the things Middle Eastern terrorists dream about. And who hasn't overlooked the rather obvious fact that Biden is a white guy that is also subject to the same play on naming similarity.

Nothing against you Crim at all, it's just kind of shocking to see after all of the absurd bedwetting bullshit over the past few several pages of this thread.

[DanGarion]

The sad part about this years election is that it has now come down to a spectacle of two outcomes.

Is America more racist or more sexist.

Vote for the black guy and America hasn't fully accepted equal rights.

Vote for the woman and American hasn't fully accepted civil rights.

In all honesty if there was a viable independent candidate this would be the year to run. Too bad there isn't. (and no I'm not making this comment because I'm racist or sexist, it would just be nice to see more the a two party system).

[Crim]

I was telling my wife this morning, I'm glad of the Palin pick and the Biden pick, because I think it takes away some of the non-issue talking points from each side, and thus I'm hoping (naively, I know) that this will force the candidates and most of their surrogates to speak more to the substantive issues, and lay off the "no experience" and "Washington career politician" crap.

[Noop]

hxxp://www.dailymotion.com/relevance/search/Mccain/video/x684qb_mccains-never-ending-war_news

......

[Toddzilla]

Handicapped children are paid for by us. They are a burden on society. Unless you are wealthy and can cover all the expense with having a child that is handicapped, it does indeed effect all of us.

I'm not saying we should force people to have an abortion. I'm saying, I have a right to not vote for them.

If you know that your child is going to be handicapped and you have it anyway, that is not logical. In fact it is stupid.

This lady would force woman who are raped to have the child.

This lady would force an incestious baby to be born.

This lady would force everyone who had a down's syndrome baby to carry it to term.

I repeat again, 97% of people terminate the baby. I want our leaders to use sense, not emotion or religous beliefs in their decisions.:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

My daughter has cerebral palsy.

You don't pay for her - I do. She's not a burden on anyone. And not having her in my life would be the greatest tragedy.

Never so clearly has someone that knows nothing about what they're talking about said more offensive, ignorant bullshit that you just did.

Seriously, shut the fuck up.

[Noop]

Some of you are a bit sensitive.

[Arles]

A lot of us agree that those hot buttons are the most important things to that block and to that end he satisfied them and probably guaranteed that evangelical vote....ok. However, trying to spin it as anything but, IMO, is disingenuous.
That's a bit of a scarecrow. The main reason for this VP vote was to rally the base (and I've said so numerous times). The main difference between Palin and someone like Huckabee or Romney is that she can also pinch off a few moderates that may have been thinking about sitting this one out or were undecided. And, while not PC, it's a demographic issue. If you are a moderate woman who does not vote entirely on the abortion issue, Palin is much more attractive choice than Romney or Huckabee. So, the republicans got a double-dip with this choice - they improve their standing with the base and stand a greater shot at attracting moderate women.

IMO, the VP doesn't "lose" votes by himself/herself. The biggest thing a VP nomination does is offer an olive branch from the top of the ticket to a certain group. In Obama's case, he reached out to those worried about his foreign policy experience. So, by naming Biden, he helped put some of those fears at ease by showing good judgment and naming someone to compliment his weakness. The exact same can be said about McCain and social/fiscal conservatives. For that reason, I don't think VP policies/experience/votes mean that much (outside of their main archetype). All VPs can do to help the candidate is be likable - and I think both Biden and Palin can come off as likable if they are smart.

[DaddyTorgo]

Some of you are a bit sensitive.

I can understand and fully support the sensitivity of those that have special needs children in this case though. 100%

[molson]

I can understand and fully support the sensitivity of those that have special needs children in this case though. 100%

Sure, but at the end of the day, jerkoffs on a message board aren't worth getting upset about. (And at some level, that's all any of us are on FOFC).

[JPhillips]

Easier said than done. When you feel like someone is indirectly attacking your child it's natural to want to fight back. Todd's not going to drive to Astros' house and beat him up, but calling him out is well within his rights IMO.

[molson]

Easier said than done. When you feel like someone is indirectly attacking your child it's natural to want to fight back. Todd's not going to drive to Astros' house and beat him up, but calling him out is well within his rights IMO.

He's definitely right to call him out - I just hope he's not upset about it a second after he leaves this thread, because it's not worth it.

[Crim]

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

My daughter has cerebral palsy.

You don't pay for her - I do. She's not a burden on anyone. And not having her in my life would be the greatest tragedy.

Never so clearly has someone that knows nothing about what they're talking about said more offensive, ignorant bullshit that you just did.

Seriously, shut the fuck up.

Todd has more authority to speak to issue than most of us. This is not about some of us being "sensitive."

[Crim]

Sure, but at the end of the day, jerkoffs on a message board aren't worth getting upset about. (And at some level, that's all any of us are on FOFC).

I resent this. Jerkoff isn't what I am. It's what I do.





Oh, wait a sec...

[DaddyTorgo]

I resent this. Jerkoff isn't what I am. It's what I do.





Oh, wait a sec...

LMAO

[Young Drachma]

What if the kid wasn't hers and was her 16-year old daughter's kid and they did it to protect the family name and their conservative credentials?

Just a thought.

[astrosfan64]

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

My daughter has cerebral palsy.

You don't pay for her - I do. She's not a burden on anyone. And not having her in my life would be the greatest tragedy.

Never so clearly has someone that knows nothing about what they're talking about said more offensive, ignorant bullshit that you just did.

Seriously, shut the fuck up.

Did you do the test before she was born?

This is exactly the response that I think is complete and utter bullshit.

I don't need emoitonal outbursts from people. Whether or not you have a special needs kid doesn't make you an authority on the subject of testing.

It doesn't make you an authority on the science and prevention of such births. If you would of known at 15 weeks and aborted the fetus, then you wouldn't of even known the daughter you obviously love now.

Since we are all going down the emotional personal experiences route. I guess I should qualify myself then as Todd has.

We had a test for downs and it was determine through the procedure that my child "boy" would have down syndrome. We aborted the fetus.

If we would of carried the baby to term, I would of obviously fell in love with my child. Instead, we aborted our "glob" of cells. And a year later we got pregnant again. This time the child did not have downs. He was born healthy and is progressing ahead of schedule.

Do I wish my first glob of cells was perfect? Of course, but it wasn't. I'm not so attached to a glob of cells or fear god to bring a child with disadvantages to the world.

Life expectancy of a downs child is 53 (this is one without heart problems)
At best the IQ will reach 85 (somewhat normal life can be mainstreamed in school)

Todd, you may find this hard to believe. But, I wish the best for you and your daughter and family.

But, that doesn't change my opinion that it is not logical to not abort a glob of cells that are not "correct". I don't want a leader that acts from "religious" beliefs on topics that should be decided by logical decisions.

[DaddyTorgo]

Did you do the test before she was born?

This is exactly the response that I think is complete and utter bullshit.

I don't need emoitonal outbursts from people. Whether or not you have a special needs kid doesn't make you an authority on the subject of testing.

It doesn't make you an authority on the science and prevention of such births. If you would of known at 15 weeks and aborted the fetus, then you wouldn't of even known the daughter you obviously love now.

Since we are all going down the emotional personal experiences route. I guess I should qualify myself then as Todd has.

We had a test for downs and it was determine through the procedure that my child "boy" would have down syndrome. We aborted the fetus.

If we would of carried the baby to term, I would of obviously fell in love with my child. Instead, we aborted our "glob" of cells. And a year later we got pregnant again. This time the child did not have downs. He was born healthy and is progressing ahead of schedule.

Do I wish my first glob of cells was perfect? Of course, but it wasn't. I'm not so attached to a glob of cells or fear god to bring a child with disadvantages to the world.

Life expectancy of a downs child is 53 (this is one without heart problems)
At best the IQ will reach 85 (somewhat normal life can be mainstreamed in school)

Todd, you may find this hard to believe. But, I wish the best for you and your daughter and family.

But, that doesn't change my opinion that it is not logical to not abort a glob of cells that are not "correct". I don't want a leader that acts from "religious" beliefs on topics that should be decided by logical decisions.

who decides what is "logical" and what is not hmm?

[Crim]

And the winner in the "From way the hell out in left field category... envelope please...

...DARK CLOUD!!!"
*thunderous applause*

What if the kid wasn't hers and was her 16-year old daughter's kid and they did it to protect the family name and their conservative credentials?

Just a thought.

first I thought, "wtf?", then I thought, "heh that's funny", then I thought, "is he kidding", and then I thought, "where the hell did that come from?", then I thought "well, whatev, I guess he's just throwing it out there," then I thought, "he deserves some kinda award or something."

Then I posted.

[Noop]

What if the kid wasn't hers and was her 16-year old daughter's kid and they did it to protect the family name and their conservative credentials?

Just a thought.

I just read that but passed it off as a rumor but apparently this story has legs. I remember one of the reporter commenting on the fact that for someone who has just had a child she looks great.

Interesting.

[Crim]

Yeah, so, astrosfan, I don't have a problem with the decision you and your wife made at all. And I'm glad that you then had a healthy baby after that. I'm sure that was a tough time for you both, most especially your wife.

My problem is the way you've been assigning approval or disapproval to the actions of others, and presenting your POV as the only logical, correct way of looking at it.

I tell ya what, your "disabled children are a burden on society" schlock really stunned me. That's the angle that I, and I think several other posters, were taking offense to.

I mean, all aboard the eugenics train, ya know?

[Crim]

I just read that but passed it off as a rumor but apparently this story has legs. I remember one of the reporter commenting on the fact that for someone who has just had a child she looks great.

Interesting.

Dammit if this isn't just something DC came up with out of jest or something, then he'll have to abdicate his award!

[Noop]

I also would like to add that she has been accused of using her power to do interesting things.

[JonInMiddleGA]

And as the sub-plots thicken ... it strikes me that they're fairly relevant to the thread. Illustrations that it isn't our political parties or labels that create the divisions, they just reflect them.

[Noop]

hxxp://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4647965.ece

An article talking about the rumors.

[DanGarion]

What if the kid wasn't hers and was her 16-year old daughter's kid and they did it to protect the family name and their conservative credentials?

Just a thought.

Is she hot?

[Noop]

Is she hot?

If I was under the age of 18 I would do her.

[Arles]

Well, considering downs syndrome is most common among people who give birth over the age of 35, I'd say that the odds are with the baby being hers (and not her 16-year old daughter's).

[John Galt]

Well, considering downs syndrome is most common among people who give birth over the age of 35, I'd say that the odds are with the baby being hers (and not her 16-year old daughter's).

I really think people shouldn't be investigating this story (not to pick on you Arles - your post was just the last one). I just don't think it is anyone's business. People will say she made it an issue by her stance on abortion or by using her family story for political gain. I disagree. Some things should just stay outside of the public domain. Another example was when the media looked into Justice Roberts' foreign adoptions and found nothing. If Palin made this choice, that is between her and her family regardless of the office she seeks.

[Young Drachma]

Ouch. From the article Noop posted.

Even her mother-in-law, Faye Palin, who said she was still thinking of voting for Mr Obama, sounded sceptical. "I'm not sure what she brings to the ticket, other than she's a woman, and a conservative."

[SFL Cat]

But Chief, it was that "stubborn defense" that, in my mind, earned the spurning of SFL Cat. I called him a "racist tool" only after he made it clear that his joke wasn't innocent at all.

(to be fair, he could have been called a "tool" far sooner based upon his many ridiculously bad posts in this thread).

JG calling someone out as a "tool." I find that very amusing.