Page 4 of 7
Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2008 10:01 pm
by Brad Hutchison
Will Brown wrote:You seem hysterical; do you pound your keyboard, too?
You apparently don't realize that all candidates are politicians, and as such they make political decisions. I don't believe that you can name any decision as to the vice presidential candidate that has not been patently political. Biden, who has failed repeatedly as a candidate for the presidential nomination, was clearly not picked because he was the best person to be president, but because his presence may make some of us worry less about Obama's profound lack of experience in foreign affairs.
True, but Biden compliments Obama in matters of governance. Palin compliments McCain in the election. One VP will be an asset in office, one will not.
It sure didn't take long for the Republicans to start blaming Obama for their own lack of due diligence.
Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2008 10:01 pm
by Brian Pedaci
And the
AIP hit parade just keeps on rolling....
The AIP founder, Joe Vogler, made the comments in 1991, in an interview that's now housed at the Oral History Program in the Rasmuson Library at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks.
"The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government," Vogler said in the interview, in which he talked extensively about his desire for Alaskan secession, the key goal of the AIP.
"And I won't be buried under their damn flag," Vogler continued in the interview, which also touched on his disappointment with the American judicial system. "I'll be buried in Dawson. And when Alaska is an independent nation they can bring my bones home."
At another point, Volger advocated renouncing allegiance to the United States. In the course of denouncing Federal regulation over land, he said:
"And then you get mad. And you say, the hell with them. And you renounce allegiance, and you pledge your efforts, your effects, your honor, your life to Alaska."
"Country First", huh? Excellent choice, John. Try maybe vetting your pick a little BEFORE you announce it next time.
Oh, that's right, there won't BE a next time.
Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2008 10:17 pm
by Stephen Eisel
Jim O'Bryan wrote:Stephen Eisel wrote:As Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin is responsible for $9 billion budget, and manages $13 billion in revenue. The State of Alaska employs 25,000 people.
Stephen
It is this blind loyalty that always amazes me.
Bad choice, bad first choice, bad second choice in a rage.
.
Jim, I am not a republican.. I do not blindly vote for R's. I am more of a Libertarian than a repub or Dem. After this election, I will support who ever is elected and hope that they can unite this country.
Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2008 11:22 pm
by Ryan Salo
Stephen Eisel wrote:Jim O'Bryan wrote:Stephen Eisel wrote:As Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin is responsible for $9 billion budget, and manages $13 billion in revenue. The State of Alaska employs 25,000 people.
Stephen
It is this blind loyalty that always amazes me.
Bad choice, bad first choice, bad second choice in a rage.
.
Jim, I am not a republican.. I do not blindly vote for R's. I am more of a Libertarian than a repub or Dem. After this election, I will support who ever is elected and hope that they can unite this country.
Stephen,
Jim's definition of blind - If you ever support a Republican.
Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2008 11:24 pm
by Stephen Eisel
Ryan Salo wrote:Stephen Eisel wrote:Jim O'Bryan wrote:Stephen Eisel wrote:As Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin is responsible for $9 billion budget, and manages $13 billion in revenue. The State of Alaska employs 25,000 people.
Stephen
It is this blind loyalty that always amazes me.
Bad choice, bad first choice, bad second choice in a rage.
.
Jim, I am not a republican.. I do not blindly vote for R's. I am more of a Libertarian than a repub or Dem. After this election, I will support who ever is elected and hope that they can unite this country.
Stephen,
Jim's definition of blind - If you ever support a Republican.
Ohhhh....
Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2008 11:38 pm
by Ivor Karabatkovic
Guys,
I think his definition of blind is when 8 years of horrible judgment and leadership (or lack of) isn't enough to open the eyes of the voting citizen to fresh, innovative, and inspiring ideas of the 21st century, not the broken policies and politics of the past.
I think that's what he was aiming at.
It just happened that the Republican Party is stuck representing the past instead of evolving with the evolving demands of concerned citizens. The citizens that want to trust their leader and the government, and not someone who appoints people like
Alberto Gonzales and expects the American People to put their faith in lying scoundrels.
They want a President who, in the critical time of heading into full out war, doesn't
lie 935 separate times to the people and world.
I'll add being deaf to the list as well.
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:22 am
by Stephen Eisel
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:05 am
by Bret Callentine
Am I "blind" simply because I have a differing opinion as to how to effectivly run this country?
Am I "deaf" if I hold a different interpretation as to how to best help those in need?
Am I "dumb" if my life experience has led me down a different path, with different standards and methods?
There is a big difference between "Unity" and "Conformity". Ask yourself which one you're seeking by using this type of rhetoric.
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:14 pm
by David Anderson
I'm sure this opinion has been presented before but I can't thoroughly read the previous four pages.
I agree that children should be off limits BUT this means that politicians should stop parading them up on stage.
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:50 pm
by Ivor Karabatkovic
Stephen,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqDlfDzTGeU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLY4n_LeLV4
Wasting American lives in Iraq? This was the night he announced his run for presidency on Letterman...but that doesn't sound like the message he's spreading now that he's the candidate.
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 7:59 am
by Valerie Molinski
The more I read about Palin, the more I am seeing she really isnt one to 'work with' people... more like threaten to fire:
[Former Wasilla mayor] Stein says that as mayor, Palin continued to inject religious beliefs into her policy at times. "She asked the library how she could go about banning books," he says, because some voters thought they had inappropriate language in them. "The librarian was aghast." The librarian, Mary Ellen Baker, couldn't be reached for comment, but news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire her for not giving "full support" to the mayor.
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 8:23 am
by David Anderson
I haven't posting anything serious and extensive in a while. So, here goes.
Nice compilation of video’s, Stephen.
These show that there was a unified effort to make sure Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction. Guess what, those efforts worked. However, the Bush administration ignored U.N. qualified findings that the weapons were gone and ran a successful campaign convincing 65% of Americans that the weapons indeed existed as an eminent threat to the U.S. and that Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attacks. (So much for the left-wing media bias.)
The bottom line for me is that the “no fly zone policyâ€
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 9:45 am
by Stephen Eisel
These show that there was a unified effort to make sure Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction.
lol... nice try... So Clinton lied and people died???
CLINTON: Good evening.
Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.
the Bush administration ignored U.N. qualified findings that the weapons were gone and ran a successful campaign convincing 65% of Americans that the weapons indeed existed as an eminent threat to the U.S. and that Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attacks. (So much for the left-wing media bias.)
Between weapon inspectors getting the run around by Iraq and the lack of evidence that Saddam destroyed all of his WMD's. It was a good call by Bush.
UN 1441 (clicky)
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 9:54 am
by Jim O'Bryan
Ryan Salo wrote:Stephen,
Jim's definition of blind - If you ever support a Republican.
Now there is the high road, my friend Ryan likes to preach.
You know that is not true, you know I have supported Republicans.
But why let facts get in the way of a dig.
Actually I prefer the tough love Eisel hands out.
.
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 11:20 am
by Danielle Masters
So last night was all about how great McCain and Palin are, and Palin mentioned parents of special needs children would have a friend in the White so. So I would like to know if kids will have a friend in the White House. If John McCain gets elected I would say the answer is NO.
I brought up the Children's Health care bill somewhere but I can't remember where. Anyhow I was double checking my facts and found that McCain had voted against it and he even said Bush was right in vetoing it. Also he was rated the worst senator by The Children's Defense Fund. Part of the reason he was voted so low was because he missed 8 of the 10 votes that the fund evaluates.
olitifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/426/
Funny last night I believe that Rudy said Obama voted present several times, well I think being voted the worst senator by the Children's Defense Fund is nothing to be proud of, but I guess that Palin is pro-life so obviously McCain will now be pro-children rather than anti-children.