McCain's trend

[Drew Dowdell]

Bingo... doesn't matter what political party, she is totally unqualified to be president. This makes McCain's judgment look very poor---the Repubs have many more qualified women--Christine Todd Whitman, for example? Or men--why not Tom Ridge? Mitt Romney?

Whitman is too pro-Polar bear and anti-drilling.

Ridge is too pro-choice.

Romney makes McCain look poor by comparison.

[Oracle of Delphi]

the idea of self determination, brought up in the The Treaty of Versailles, has been behind these movements. i think.

AIP on wiki.

There is also a Hawaiian sovereignty movement, it consists of organizations and individuals seeking some form of sovereignty for Hawaii. Generally, the movement's focus is on self-determination and self-governance for people of whole or part Native Hawaiian ancestry or, in some cases, for "Hawaiian nationals", without regard to race or ancestry. In some instances the focus also includes redress from the United States for the 1893 overthrow of Queen Lili'uokalani, and for what is seen as a prolonged military occupation beginning in 1898 with the annexation of the Republic of Hawaii to the United States, and continuing until the present day. The movement generally views both the overthrow and annexation as illegal, and holds the U.S. government responsible for these actions.

Read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaiian_sovereignty_movement

Aloha Y'all!

[pow]

Generally, that stuff happens BEFORE being offered the job of Vice President.

This isn't about Palin at all. This is McCain's first Presidential decision. He needed to pick someone who was a suitable vice president for a 74 year old 5 time face cancer survivor.

Palin is the Governor of a state with a total population equal to that of Nashville Tennessee; less than the population Allegheny County where Pittsburgh is located. In that one regard, Dan Onorato, Allegheny County's Executive is more qualified than Palin to be Vice President.

Palin was mayor of a town of 6,000..... less than most small state colleges.

Palin has fired or attempted to fire anyone who opposes her. Including a the well respected city librarian who refused to remove books from the library that Palin found offensive. Remind you of anyone?

In addition to all that, I find it odd how McCain chose someone he had only met with once. What if they're completely not compatible with each other?

IMO this was a very short-term political decision, a gimmick made to sway Clinton supporters.

Edited September 2, 2008 by empowah

[Satty]

Anyone notice there has been no media coverage of Obama since Palin was announced? I guess if McCain wanted some media time, it worked. Unfortunately for him, there is nothing about Palin or any of the subsequent news that is going to sway undecided voters to his side.

[FAPTurbo]

Unfortunately for him, there is nothing about Palin or any of the subsequent news that is going to sway undecided voters to his side.

She's pretty hot. I'm sure that'll sway some people.

[Camino LS6]

This is getting interesting.

[Oracle of Delphi]

I hate to say this, but I'm getting a White Trash vibe from Palin's whole family, coming from Texas I know that vibe well. As for McCains wife Cindy, I agree with moltar, Stepford wife vibe thing going on there, kind of freaky.

Edited September 2, 2008 by Pontiac Custom-S

[ocnblu]

The difference here is a scary one: the Democrats have their total neophyte at the TOP of their ticket. The Republicans have theirs at the bottom. Obama is nothing but pretty words. His proposals all suck assholes. You guys don't know $h!.

[Satty]

She's pretty hot. I'm sure that'll sway some people.

Horny, middle aged men aren't a big enough demographic to give McCain a jump in the polls. Palin was brought in to appeal to women, specifically Hillary voters. She's conservative enough to appeal to the 20-30% of people who still think Bush is competant, and she lacks a penis, which McCain hopes will bring in the 18 million people who voted for Clinton. I really doubt that will happen, because I'm willing to bet most of those voters had at least some idealogical reason for voting for Hillary, since Palin is the complete opposite of Clinton on just about every issue possible, she's not going to pull anyone in. Besides, nobody votes for the VP, they vote for the name on top. McCain really needed to pick someone closer to the center if he wanted to win, because (as has been noted above) he's 72 and has had cancer. Palin will never win a presidential election, she makes Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul look moderate, the big question is, will people be comfortable with her inheriting the job, because the odds are that she will.

Obama, on the other hand, went with someone who has been a Senator longer than McCain and doesn't have a far-left record.His only real blemish is that he says dumb things at bad times. Biden, like Palin, will never win a presidential election, he cant get the mainstream recognition that an Obama or a Clinton or a McCain or a Guilani could get because he doesn't have the high profile history. Plus, he's inda old.

[ocnblu]

The top of the ticket is all that matters, and it is no contest for people with more than half a brain. McCain 2008. Obama is hot air and nothing more. Anyone who buys his bull$h! will rue the day if he becomes president. Mark my words.

[Oracle of Delphi]

Speaking of Senator Clinton, I was very Anti-Hillary in this election, so much so, that I donated heavily to her Democratic political opponent (I gave the legal limit).

However after watching her concession speech in D.C., seeing her and Bill Clinton's speeches at the DNC, and also seeing how much she is doing for Obama. I will vote for her for President at some future time, should she decide to run again. She has been nothing but Grace Under Fire, since she ended her campaign. I sent an E-Mail telling her as much today. So see political views can and do change, at least for me they do.

[Satty]

Over the last 7.5 years, I've seen people I care about have their lives go to $h! because of the "strong" economy. These are people who were unable to live comfortably working 2 jobs because of the cost of health insurance and health care. People who had to drop out of college because the costs went up but government loans became less obtainable and other forms of financial aid became more difficult to get. I cannot, in good conscious, vote for a man who has said repeatedly that he supports the man responsible for these policies.

Nothing has been done in 7.5 years to address immigration or energy, two things Bush campaigned on in 2000, also 2 things that would make us safer as a nation. But the government can find out what books I've checked out from the library.

Again, Obama may not be perfect, but he has that not George Bush quality that I find appealing in a candidate, the same appeal McCain had in 2000. Too bad he couldn't keep it up.

[ocnblu]

Oh my God, don't get me started on the Clintons. They are sooooo over. And I am sooooo glad.

[Robert Hall]

The top of the ticket is all that matters, and it is no contest for people with more than half a brain. McCain 2008. Obama is hot air and nothing more. Anyone who buys his bull$h! will rue the day if he becomes president. Mark my words.

Dude, I thought you were gay. How could anyone gay support a Republican? They hate gays. The Republican party is the party that embraces racist, intolerant bible thumper trash like Donald Wildmon, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, etc...

Edited September 2, 2008 by moltar

[ocnblu]

Oh bull$h!. I'm looking at the bigger picture. You should, too. Besides, look at everything that has happened in the last few years as far as gay rights go while Bush was in power, despite what you say about Republicans "hating" gays (I know he has spoken out against some of what has happened, but yet gay rights keep advancing, my point is, it hasn't mattered). Look at the stats for the RNC delegates... between those that support marriage and those that support civil unions, they make up a decisive majority. Another stereotype blasted to hell. Edited September 2, 2008 by ocnblu

[Robert Hall]

Oh bull$h!. I'm looking at the bigger picture. You should, too. Besides, look at everything that has happened in the last few years as far as gay rights go, despite what you say about Republicans "hating" gays. Look at the stats for the RNC delegates... between those that support marriage and civil unions, they make up a decisive majority. Another stereotype blasted to hell.

I could never support the Republican party....too many religious zealots, too many gun kooks, too many racists. I can't support their anti-science, anti-technology, worldview. F*ck them. These are the retards that won't support stem cell research. That try and push 'intelligent design' in the schools. That waste billions on pointless wars. That oppose universal healthcare. F*ck them.

Edited September 2, 2008 by moltar

[ocnblu]

Dude, more bull$h! from you on this. You don't know what you're talking about. Obama doesn't believe in gay marriage either. I suppose he's a bigot? Whatever. Oh please, Obama has trumpeted his religious views as well, you don't remember? My mind will not change. Obama is bad for America, he's nothing of substance. He is his own myth... he is dangerous. Thinking people will vote McCain. Edited September 2, 2008 by ocnblu

[Robert Hall]

Dude, more bull$h! from you on this. You don't know what you're talking about. Obama doesn't believe in gay marriage either. I suppose he's a bigot? Whatever. My mind will not change. Obama is bad for America, he's nothing of substance. He is his own myth... he is dangerous.

Whatever, the Democratic party is hell of lot better for the American people as a whole than 8 more years of 'conservative' nonsense. McCain is a tired old man that should be out playing golf. A vote for him is vote for the past.

Edited September 2, 2008 by moltar

[ocnblu]

George Bush has not been a fiscal conservative, but he is no match for the capacity for Democrats to give a handout to every non-deserving cause known to man. Democrats only know how to spend money on bull$h!. Universal healthcare? How will it be paid for? Taxes! Don't be so dim. Universal healthcare is waaay too big an expense for the federal government to pay for. I pay too many taxes now for bull$h!. I want McCain in there.

You mistakenly call him a tired old man. I see someone who stands up for what he believes, and a man who is in the real world... not some far-off, pie-in-the sky dreamland like Barak Obama. He has proposed nothing of substance. NOTHING.

Edited September 3, 2008 by ocnblu

[pow]

[Robert Hall]

George Bush has not been a fiscal conservative, but he is no match for the capacity for Democrats to give a handout to every non-deserving cause known to man. Democrats only know how to spend money on bull$h!. Universal healthcare? How will it be paid for? Taxes! Don't be so dim. Universal healthcare is waaay to big an expense for the federal government to pay for. I pay too many taxes now for bull$h!. I want McCain in there.

Better to raise taxes to pay for things meaningful to the citizens. Better than wasting money on pointless wars. I despise the 'conservative' BS.

[ocnblu]

You wouldn't be able to afford it. I know I couldn't. Dream on.

[Satty]

You do know that McCain isn't planning on lowering your taxes right?

[ocnblu]

And Obama is? Please, he doesn't have a clue of what he is even talking about. It's all a dream to him.

[Satty]

Tax policy center analysis of the two tax plans. Assuming Obama's plan goes through as advertised, you and I would pay less. If McCain's plan goes through, my future in-laws pay significantly less. I'd rather I pay less. Either way the national debt goes up.

And for the record, I'm not a huge fan of not taxing seniors making under $50,000, simply because thats a huge chunk of revenue.

Edited September 3, 2008 by Satty

[Enzora]

A quick overview of each candidate's tax proposals can be seen HERE.

And I think that very few, if any, of the current members of Congress are truly against gay marriage. Most who say they are are just pandering to their constituencies.

[Robert Hall]

Let's just agree to disagree and move on. Like I said, I could never support Republicans...the party as it stands today is far, far too right wing for me. They offer nothing that appeals to me---I'm a straight, well-educated, well-traveled atheist upper middle class white guy that is pro-choice, pro-technology, pro-science, pro-gun control, anti-war and a car enthusiast... the Democratic party, while by no means perfect, is a better fit for my beliefs and views.

Peace, word out.

Edited September 3, 2008 by moltar

[ocnblu]

It's gotta happen, eventually, no matter who's in office. It is equal rights under the Constitution... anything less is discrimination. We are talking about two consenting adult humans.... not Bubba and his sheep. Get real. There are plenty of Democrats who are against Gay Marriage... yet it is the GOP that is reviled for it.

[Satty]

There will never be a federal amendment regarding gay marriage (or abortion, for that matter). Many states have amendments. Missouri has one that only covers marriage, not civil unions. The reason states have these amendments? Because they brought the base out to vote, and while voting to keep gays from marrying, they also happened to vote for Bush. Convenient.

[ocnblu]

Uh huh... every single one of them who voted against gay marriage voted for Bush. Bull$h!.

[Satty]

Exit polls suggested otherwise. I'd have to go look it up, but it was some crazy-high number.

Click 70% of voters who said there should be no legal recognition of same sex couple voted Bush. Thats just one poll I dug up quickly, I'll look for others, but I remember hearing numbers in the 60-80% range.

64% in the CNN poll

NBC also puts it at 70%

Fox's website is a PITA to navigate, so I cannot find 2004 exit polls right now.

Edited September 3, 2008 by Satty

[Drew Dowdell]

Over the last 7.5 years, I've seen people I care about have their lives go to $h! because of the "strong" economy. These are people who were unable to live comfortably working 2 jobs because of the cost of health insurance and health care. People who had to drop out of college because the costs went up but government loans became less obtainable and other forms of financial aid became more difficult to get. I cannot, in good conscious, vote for a man who has said repeatedly that he supports the man responsible for these policies.

Nothing has been done in 7.5 years to address immigration or energy, two things Bush campaigned on in 2000, also 2 things that would make us safer as a nation. But the government can find out what books I've checked out from the library.

Again, Obama may not be perfect, but he has that not George Bush quality that I find appealing in a candidate, the same appeal McCain had in 2000. Too bad he couldn't keep it up.

After 7 years of GOP tax cuts guaranteed to produce a rising tide of increasing wealth for all, the median income is lower than when Bush started making it better. More kids got left behind in poverty. The rich got richer. But this data was before the economy went to pot; maybe we need to cut taxes on the rich a bit more.

[loki]

There will never be a federal amendment regarding gay marriage (or abortion, for that matter). Many states have amendments. Missouri has one that only covers marriage, not civil unions. The reason states have these amendments? Because they brought the base out to vote, and while voting to keep gays from marrying, they also happened to vote for Bush. Convenient.

you have to realize, that the gov't first got into marriage because of incest and such. if the gov't stopped marrying people, these amendments would be even more silly. marriage began as a religious ceremony, because tribes frankly are not a gov't. so again, if you want to be able to be gay and marry, find/start a religion that it's ok to do that.

[Drew Dowdell]

And Obama is? Please, he doesn't have a clue of what he is even talking about. It's all a dream to him.

Calculate your own Obama tax cut.

Keep in mind that Bush raised your taxes and McCain will raise them again further. Oh the dollar amount of your taxes might be lower, but the value of your dollars is lower as well. Wonder why the price of oil is double what it was 4 years ago? There are twice as many dollars chasing it.

Bush has <and McCain will> raised your taxes by the huge debts he has created, you just haven't gotten the bill yet.

If you're against government spending, that's fine, but don't pretend that the Republicans are in any way, shape, or form, fiscally conservative. My opinion is, if you're going to spend trillions of dollars of tax payer money, at least spend it domestically on things like infrastructure, education, research, etc.

[Drew Dowdell]

George Bush has not been a fiscal conservative, but he is no match for the capacity for Democrats to give a handout to every non-deserving cause known to man. Democrats only know how to spend money on bull&#036;h&#33;. Universal healthcare? How will it be paid for? Taxes! Don't be so dim. Universal healthcare is waaay too big an expense for the federal government to pay for. I pay too many taxes now for bull&#036;h&#33;. I want McCain in there.

You mistakenly call him a tired old man. I see someone who stands up for what he believes, and a man who is in the real world... not some far-off, pie-in-the sky dreamland like Barak Obama. He has proposed nothing of substance. NOTHING.

Bush has spent $600 billion dollars on the Iraq war.

$600 Billion would build enough algae ethanol refineries to completely replace gasoline as a transportation fuel source in this country PLUS pay for enough wind generation to power every household in the U.S and there would still be a few billion left over to completely overhaul Amtrak.

[ocnblu]

Dream.On.Drew.

[Drew Dowdell]

Dream.On.Drew.

What, exactly, did I post that was incorrect?

[Satty]

$600,000,000,000

Thats a lot of zeros. Thats a lot of sick Americans getting healthcare. Thats a lot of alternative energy. Thats a lot of a lot of things. But on the bright side, Bush is starting to come around to Obama's foreign policy plans. Remember when diplomacy with Iran and a timeline to get out of Iraq were asinine?

[ocnblu]

Barak Obama is a dangerous Leftist. He has no experience, and his proposals scare me and a lot of other thinking people. Vote McCain.

[Drew Dowdell]

Barak Obama is a dangerous Leftist. He has no experience, and his proposals scare me and a lot of other thinking people. Vote McCain.

McCain is a shoot first ask questions later kind of guy who won't change his mind later even when presented with new evidence. McCain admits he knows nothing about economics. McCain's tax policies continue to favor the rich at the expense of the middle class.

People keep forgetting. McCain has little to no executive experience. He's been a Congressman and Senator his whole career. He got the nomination by default. And Palin is the only executive decision we have to go on to judge his fitness for the office.

I mean: we have all just watched his decision-making process in real time: the whole country.

Do you really want that level of competence and thoroughness in the White House? In wartime? When making decisions about Iran and Russia? The prospect is terrifying.

To have your first presidential decision to be this bad, and to have your decision-making process and executive skill revealed as Michael Brown-level: how can he recover?

[loki]

$600,000,000,000

Thats a lot of zeros. Thats a lot of sick Americans getting healthcare. Thats a lot of alternative energy. Thats a lot of a lot of things. But on the bright side, Bush is starting to come around to Obama's foreign policy plans. Remember when diplomacy with Iran and a timeline to get out of Iraq were asinine?

or that's a good down payment on the debt/social security hole we have dug.

Barak Obama is a dangerous Leftist. He has no experience, and his proposals scare me and a lot of other thinking people. Vote McCain.

i'll prolly not vote for McCain, but othewise i totally agree. both think cap and trade is a good idea. it will pull in more money to D.C. and because of it, wither our economy more... or at least the ones that don't get gov't handouts.

[Satty]

The same national debt that increased from the early 80's until the mid 90's, then started decreasing significantly until 1/20/2001?

[ocnblu]

Oh sure, Satty. More bull&#036;h&#33;. On THAT DATE? McCain is not perfect, but he is much, much better than the alternative. Vote McCain. Think about it. Edited September 3, 2008 by ocnblu

[Satty]

I have thought about it. And I would like to be able to keep my house, and the one car we're making payments on, and the second car we may or may not be making payments on, and I'd LOVE to be able to finish paying for school and I'd love to have to pay less out of pocket for medical care and I'd love to see my son go to a school that employs qualified teachers and pays them a decent wage, and I would love to see him go to college without having to shell out $100k. I dont think all of that is possible with McCain.

[loki]

McCain is a shoot first ask questions later kind of guy who won't change his mind later even when presented with new evidence. McCain admits he knows nothing about economics. McCain's tax policies continue to favor the rich at the expense of the middle class.

yes, McCain is a go getter whether he's right or wrong.

...favor the rich, those are the people that can create jobs easily, give a lot to charities, make big scholarships... you make it sounds like they are the enemy.

the real enemy is a federal gov't with people in it that don't know where to stop, more, more, more. these people are on both sides of the "aisle", but more so on the left, because it's liberal ideology that if there's a problem, it's gov'ts job to solve it.

[Satty]

Actually, from the Treasury Department's website:

Outstanding public debt 1/19/2001: 5,727,776,738,304.64

Outstanding public debt 1/18/2002: 5,922,321,839,074.39

Looks like a $200,000,000,000 or so increase in the first year.

Added the link.

Edited September 3, 2008 by Satty

[ocnblu]

Ha... how are you going to be paying less for healthcare if it becomes a burden on the Federal government, and in turn, all of our taxes? I agree something needs to be done about the spiraling cost of healthcare... but Federalising it will only bog everything down... it will make things worse.

Going after fraud and waste in regards to healthcare is a mission I would support. And I believe McCain and his running mate have shown a propensity to attack corruption. Think about it. Vote McCain.

Edited September 3, 2008 by ocnblu

[Satty]

Leaving it as it is, or putting another tool in office isn't going to bring costs down.

And the national debt rose appx $1.5 trillion between 1993 and 2001, but decreased as a percentage of GDP. So the government owed more money, but there was also more money in the economy. It rose almost $4 trillion between 1/20/01 and 8/31/08 and went up significantly as a percentage of the GDP. In fact, since Eisenhower, the debt has decreased as a percentage of the GDP during every administration except Reagan and the two Bushes.

[FAPTurbo]

Man, I am so happy I live in Canada. Those debt numbers are positively scary.

[Drew Dowdell]

yes, McCain is a go getter whether he's right or wrong.

...favor the rich, those are the people that can create jobs easily, give a lot to charities, make big scholarships... you make it sounds like they are the enemy.

the real enemy is a federal gov't with people in it that don't know where to stop, more, more, more. these people are on both sides of the "aisle", but more so on the left, because it's liberal ideology that if there's a problem, it's gov'ts job to solve it.

Actually the real enemy is the income disparity. Read my sig. It's not that the wealthy need to be taxed more, it's that they need to stop outsourcing jobs to the point that Americans can no longer afford to buy their products. Real income has been stagnent since the 70s. The only reason we seem wealthier these days is because of the massive expansion of credit. Credit is collapsing fast.

While I don't think we'll enter another great depression, we are precariously close to the same situation in wage disparity, credit contraction, deflation, and unemployment as we were in 1929.

It's not that I think that the wealthy need to be taxed more... its that cutting their taxes will do nothing to help the situation in this country.

edit: cut the taxes on the people with the most propensity to spend.. the ones that have been hit most by the economic situation.... the middle class.