Saturday, 11 October 2008
|0858 - Anyone who thinks McCain is just another Bush...|
...needs to read this article.
I'm not fond of McCain. I'm terrified of Obama. Why? Because at least McCain shows some restraint in his promises for government giveaways. Obama does not.
current mood: annoyed
Realistically, McCain has a fair chance of not living four years. What are your thoughts on Palin?
1) Every doctor who's spoken to the question has said McCain's disgustingly healthy.
2) Palin already has more executive experience than the Obamessiah.
3) Even if McCain were to die in office, she'd have had time to get the remaining experience she doesn't have already.
4) Her head's screwed on straight, certainly more so than the Obamessiah.
Obama got into Harvard non-legacy. He was at the top of his class. He lectured on Constitutional Law, and his students universally report that he did a very good job of helping students understand how it is that two good and intelligent people can disagree on what various parts of the constitution mean.
He ran a $250 million dollar campaign against a woman who was a shoe-in to become the Democratic nominee. He did so without "machine" support. He has since raised record amounts of money, without accepting a dime from lobbyists.
He has used this money to get a significant lead on a Republican candidate who was supposed to be a shoe-in, if Obama got the Democratic nomination.
And at no point has he attempted to polarize the political situation based on race, in fact many of his statements make clear that he is going out of his way to avoid saying anything that would divide along those lines.
Palin graduated from a mediocre school and received no master's training. Her primary achievement was getting elected to replace a man who was universally regarded as Alaska's worst governor.
She then has about a year of "executive experience" as you call it, in which she ran one of the easiest to run states in the entire world. The combination of oil revenues and low population mean that it is essentially a self-funding state. It requires so little governance that the legislature only meets for 3 months of the year. The only state that even comes close, in terms of ease of governance, is Wyoming.
It's hardly a major accomplishment.
I just have trouble accepting the idea that any intelligent person can truly believe that President Palin would be a good thing for the country.
I understand, you have your long list of memorized talking points that you've brainwashed yourself with, by reading hard-right blogs until such time as they seem centrist to you... because you've become that far gone....
But give me a break. Palin is stupid. Palin was unable to talk intelligently to KATIE FREAKING COURIC. If she can't handle some softball CBS reporter, how the hell can anybody reasonably expect her to handle the white house?
Answer: we can't.
Your preferred party screwed up this year. McCain nominated a truly awful VP pick... one of the worst in history. And I can't wait for the election to be over, so that you guys can stop lying to yourselves and the world about how great Palin is, because the fact is she makes Dan Quayle look like a Rhodes Scholar.
If Obama was such a constitutional scholar, then why can't he even get the number of states right? Wny does he utterly fail to understand the Second Amendment? Why is he having his people blatantly attack the First Amendment?
Alaska isn't the only state whose legislature meets for 3 months out of the year. So does Minnesota's. Texas' legislature only meets for 3 months every other year. That's not a measure of how easy it is to govern the state. For that matter, to one who believes, as I do, that "no man's life, liberty, or property is safe as long as the legislature is in session", having them spend less time on ways to take from honest citizens and give to those who won't work is a Good Thing.
I truly, honestly, unashamedly, and fervently believe that President Palin would be much better for the country than President Obama. Obama's showing every sign of wanting government to run the lives of the average American. That's something that's drastically, dramatically, 100% wrong. Palin would not do so.
Even better, Obama's not running against Palin. He's running against McCain. Why can't the Left acknowledge that?
Until the economic crisis hit, it looked like a competitive race. Now, I'm afraid the Democrats' crisis will sweep them into unassailable power. We're in for a repeat of 1992-1994, and it will be a disaster for our country.
It's truly ludicrous to dismiss a man's education and background based on a single misstatement. It's true, he said "I've now been in fifty ... seven states" when in fact, he meant to say that he had visited 47 of them.
Attacking him on this is as silly as the Democrats who attack McCain for having said "My fellow prisoners" during a rally. Sure, it's a stupid thing to have said... and it might be funny to laugh at, but it's not telling of anything.
Surely you can concede this point. If you can't, there's clearly no point in pretending that you're a reasonable person. So... can you concede that first point?
If so, I'll respond to the rest of your reply. If not, then I thank you for ensuring that I don't waste my time talking to a wall.
Has he corrected it since? Yeah, the number of states is a fundamental fact that any American should know and be able to repeat automatically. yes, he might have simply misspoken. Has he bothered to admit the error? Or is he truly the Obamessiah, incapable of error?
Yes, he admitted the error on the very same day.
He spoke to reporters later and said "I hope I said 100 thousand people the first time, not 100 million. I understand I said there were 57 states earlier today. It's a sign my numeracy is getting a little .... uhh..."
Your "Obamessiah" reaction seems like it's written in response to a cartoon depiction of Obama, rather than a real person. I know a lot of Obama supporters, and to be frank, I don't know any that think he's perfect or even that agree with 100% of his positions.
The media, however, treats him like he is indeed the messiah: they refuse to do any serious investigation of anything that might in the slightest way diminish his chances of being elected. If they'd scrutinized him half as much as Sarah Palin, the picture would be a lot different.
I will add that there's nothing in the world that you could say, at this point, to get me to consider voting for Obama. The man's the most left-wing nominee for President ever. He opposes all I stand for, and I oppose all he stands for.
I'm not interested in having you vote for Obama. To be frank, I don't like it when the whole country votes in one particular direction or the other.
Historically, the system appears to work best when there are some opposing ideas at work. It helps keep the worst ideas from getting implemented, regardless of whose ideas they are.
I just posted in because I have this silly dream in which people are able to hold opposing political views, but still be civil about it. And in which at least the more intelligent people would argue the matters using actual facts, rather than pointless propaganda.
Sadly, it appears that in addition to disagreeing politically, we disagree about the role of honesty in political discussion. Have fun with your lies.
What lies? Nothing I've said hasn't been sourced at least as well, and usually quite a bit better, than the New York Times' smears.
...and now you know what it's been like to listen to the left constantly smear and slam George W. Bush and his supporters for hte past 6 years or so. Civil discourse went the way of the buffalo when people started chanting "Bush lied, people died" and talking about Chimpy McBushitler. Those wounds are going to take a long, long time to heal, and no, it's not all he fault of the Bush administration. Elevating Obama to godhood, as the Left is doing, is not going to help that one tiny bit. We're going to have 4 years (hopefully, that's all) of the Left running roughshod over both civil discourse and the American economy. Don't expect those of us at the other end of the spectrum to enjoy the experience.
No, I don't agree with everything he's done. I do still think he was a far better choice than either Gore or Kerry, and would vote for him all over again under similar circumstances.
Your response indicates that you know that you're engaging in reproachable behavior. You're just excusing yourself, because some other people, people you don't respect, did the same thing to a person you admire.
"They started it" is not an acceptable defense for childish, immature behavior. For failing to treat others with respect. For repeating known distortions and lies.
That said, I thank you for your time, but it's clear there's no point discussing anything with you.
You never answered my original direct question, which was "Will you admit that an obvious mis-statement about how many states a man has visited has no bearing on his knowledge of the Constitution." You preferred to make snarky remarks about "Obamessiah."
You claim "Obamessiah" is the one who refuses to admit he is ever wrong, but all evidence says that it is actually you who is unwilling to let go of baseless partisan beliefs.
But if that wasn't bad enough, now you try to justify the vile hatred you hold for your fellow citizens by pointing out that there were a few people in the other political party who were mean to Bush.
Well... you shouldn't be surprised that people don't respect you, either. You're acting exactly like the people you claim to hate.
I repeat: WHAT "known distortions and lies"? Be specific. I guarantee that everything I've cited here has been sourced. The same cannot be said for the stuff coming out of the New York Times.
You're right. So, let's look at some other misstatements:
"[Republicans will say] 'You know, he doesn't look like those other presidents on those dollar bills, you know. He's risky'."
Last time I looked, there was only one president on the dollar bill, George Washington.
"On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes -- and I see many of them in the audience here today -- our sense of patriotism is particularly strong."
Obama sees dead people? Would that be Sixth Sense, or Weekend at Bernie's?
"the objective of this trip [to Afghanistan] was to have substantive discussions with people like President Karzai or Prime Minister Maliki or President Sarkozy or others who I expect to be dealing with over the next eight to 10 years..."
Um, it would be eight, worst case; presidential terms are four years.
Were Obama a Republican, the late night shows, Colbert, and Stewart would never let us hear the end of it.
But that, and the examples of the "great orator" Obama tripping all over himself without a TelePrompter, aren't the important thing.
Far worse are the threats to license renewal for stations that air NRA ads of which The One doesn't approve, or the "truth squad" of Missouri government officials threatening those who publish "misleading" ads about the Obamessiah. (Sorry, but it's an apt term, in view of the kitschy astroturf video of children singing his praises in the style of North Korean chldren praising the Great Leader, and the video of a paramilitary bunch of school children chanting their praise of The One.) Those, and Obama's positions on the issues, are what I find truly terrifying.
Theoretically, a president can be in for 10 years. If this happens though it won't be Obama or McCain that is in for 10 years. It'll be Palin or Biden, as to get 10 years their predecessor has to hand the reins over (one way or another) after 2 years and then they have to be elected twice.
Experience? Eh, it matters less than Judgment does, and I trust the judgment of someone who started at the bottom as a normal person and rose through the ranks over someone who started as a lawyer representing corrupt political organizations in the most corrupt city in America, short of Washington DC itself.
I really don't CARE if she has billions of qualifications. The important thing is that after years and years of being screwed by lawyers running the government, we might actually have it headed by a REAL LIVE PERSON and not a law robot. We might actually be able to roll back some of this utter filthy mess of a corrupt government we have because of "experienced" "qualified" lawyers. Obama and Biden are both just more of the same, working with the corruption in their respective areas instead of rooting it out. Obama went as far as supporting the corrupt kleptocratic Mayor Daley political machine against a parade of reformers, both democrat and republican. In fact, opposing reform is the one thing that he's been bipartisan about.
Palin actually challenged the corruption within her own party. Something that didn't win her much support within the Alaska political establishment, but managed to get her more than 76-80% approval ratings in a very libertarian state, and has gotten her support from conservatives everywhere who are sick and tired of corruption in both parties.
You can pour all the money you want to into that rathole...he's certainly trying hard to buy the election.
buying the election...
I'm not even sure what your complaint is here... modern politics dictates that a lot of money is required to win an election, and he's getting a lot from individuals. Why is that a bad thing?
Is it just bad because you're preferred candidate isn't able to raise as much as he is?
Or is it just that you're so deeply partisan that you must deem every activity Obama engages in as inherently evil, even if it's standard and required?
"OMG, Obama wears such nice ties! He's clearly trying to GQ his way into the White House!"
Re: buying the election...
No...but I find it ironic as hell, if not downright hypocritical, that the party that has complained for ages about the GOP buying elections is now unashamedly doing it itself, without even the pretense of an apology.
Except that article still makes McCain look like Bush. Conservatives have a very like/hate relationship with Bush. This articles is old news too. Conservatives hate McCain, Conservatives have hated McCain from day one, and the only brief moment where he's managed to bring them back in was when he brought in Palin, who is an economic conservative as well as a social conservative, and a reformer to boot. I'm not fond of the social conservative part, but I'd love to see an economic conservative running things again. It's been at least 20 years since we had anyone that could remotely be referred to as an economic conservative in office.