U.S. Politics, Part 2

[lost_grrl]

Since the other thread was getting to be so long and since it seemed to break lately, we will start anew.

Here is the article that broke it all (copy and pasted, not directly imported)
Here is the URL

Originally Posted by RichPundit

Palin Is Ready? Please.
McCain says that he always puts country first. In this important case, that is simply not true.

Fareed Zakaria
NEWSWEEK
From the magazine issue dated Oct 6, 2008
Will someone please put Sarah Palin out of her agony? Is it too much to ask that she come to realize that she wants, in that wonderful phrase in American politics, "to spend more time with her family"? Having stayed in purdah for weeks, she finally agreed to a third interview. CBS's Katie Couric questioned her in her trademark sympathetic style. It didn't help. When asked how living in the state closest to Russia gave her foreign-policy experience, Palin responded thus:

"It's very important when you consider even national-security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United States of America. Where—where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to—to our state."

There is, of course, the sheer absurdity of the premise. Two weeks ago I flew to Tokyo, crossing over the North Pole. Does that make me an expert on Santa Claus? (Thanks, Jon Stewart.) But even beyond that, read the rest of her response. "It is from Alaska that we send out those …" What does this mean? This is not an isolated example. Palin has been given a set of talking points by campaign advisers, simple ideological mantras that she repeats and repeats as long as she can. ("We mustn't blink.") But if forced off those rehearsed lines, what she has to say is often, quite frankly, gibberish.

Couric asked her a smart question about the proposed $700 billion bailout of the American financial sector. It was designed to see if Palin understood that the problem in this crisis is that credit and liquidity in the financial system has dried up, and that that's why, in the estimation of Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and Fed chairman Ben Bernanke, the government needs to step in to buy up Wall Street's most toxic liabilities. Here's the entire exchange:

COURIC: Why isn't it better, Governor Palin, to spend $700 billion helping middle-class families who are struggling with health care, housing, gas and groceries; allow them to spend more and put more money into the economy instead of helping these big financial institutions that played a role in creating this mess?

PALIN: That's why I say I, like every American I'm speaking with, were ill about this position that we have been put in where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health-care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy, helping the—it's got to be all about job creation, too, shoring up our economy and putting it back on the right track. So health-care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans. And trade, we've got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, scary thing. But one in five jobs being created in the trade sector today, we've got to look at that as more opportunity. All those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is a part of that.

This is nonsense—a vapid emptying out of every catchphrase about economics that came into her head. Some commentators, like CNN's Campbell Brown, have argued that it's sexist to keep Sarah Palin under wraps, as if she were a delicate flower who might wilt under the bright lights of the modern media. But the more Palin talks, the more we see that it may not be sexism but common sense that's causing the McCain campaign to treat her like a time bomb.

Can we now admit the obvious? Sarah Palin is utterly unqualified to be vice president. She is a feisty, charismatic politician who has done some good things in Alaska. But she has never spent a day thinking about any important national or international issue, and this is a hell of a time to start. The next administration is going to face a set of challenges unlike any in recent memory. There is an ongoing military operation in Iraq that still costs $10 billion a month, a war against the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan that is not going well and is not easily fixed. Iran, Russia and Venezuela present tough strategic challenges.

Domestically, the bailout and reform of the financial industry will take years and hundreds of billions of dollars. Health-care costs, unless curtailed, will bankrupt the federal government. Social Security, immigration, collapsing infrastructure and education are all going to get much worse if they are not handled soon.
And the American government is stretched to the limit. Between the Bush tax cuts, homeland-security needs, Iraq, Afghanistan and the bailout, the budget is looking bleak. Plus, within a few years, the retirement of the baby boomers begins with its massive and rising costs (in the trillions).

Obviously these are very serious challenges and constraints. In these times, for John McCain to have chosen this person to be his running mate is fundamentally irresponsible. McCain says that he always puts country first. In this important case, it is simply not true.

Here is the URL http://www.newsweek.com/id/161204

[tailhook]

Originally Posted by lost_grrl

Since the other thread was getting to be so long and since it seemed to break lately, we will start anew.

Here is the article that broke it all (copy and pasted, not directly imported)
Here is the URL
Here is the URL http://www.newsweek.com/id/161204

Leave it to Rich to go and break the thread!

Originally Posted by brotherofdes

i can't be bothered to look through the last 25 pages worth of debate, but i do hope that all you americans here will not make the Effin' Stupid mistake of electing another prez!bush mad you americans look like idiots because a president speaks for the country... he not only effected you're country but mine too, as a brittish guy alot of my friends went to iraq fighting bush's war.... fighting his "daddies" war. will make america a less crazy place, under clinton europeans liked america, and clinton was great, the worst thing he is remebered for is getting something from monica!if only bush would be remebered for something like that apart from all the times he has sounded like a fool and started fights.... ughhh!Please vote obama, the last thing this world needs is usa with an old age pensioner as president! that guy is a crazy old fool anyone can tell, and i hate the racist, homophobic and xenophobic views of republicans, they are against obama for some as little reasons as his middle name is hussein! who cares about his policies if he has a eastern middle name right hicks?please show americans are capable of making the right choice! thank you all!

Um wow.

A) Wall of Text 4tl.
B) Its hard to take you seriously when you misspell British.
C) I'm gonna party like its 2001! As in.. thats about how dated the gripes in your post are. All the way down to "daddies" war. Wow.. just shake the cobwebs off that one.

-TH

[lost_grrl]

Originally Posted by tailhook

Leave it to Rich to go and break the thread!

I told Rich that his computer must have gotten tired of all the politics so it refused to let him post one more political word.

[BrotherOfDes]

Originally Posted by tailhook

Leave it to Rich to go and break the thread!



Um wow.

A) Wall of Text 4tl.
B) Its hard to take you seriously when you misspell British.
C) I'm gonna party like its 2001! As in.. thats about how dated the gripes in your post are. All the way down to "daddies" war. Wow.. just shake the cobwebs off that one.

-TH

A) i tried to use paragraphs but im new here
B) im used to spelling Scottish, sorry if i offended you with a type error
C) i brought up some memorable reasons why your country needs a change

D) Obama will win

E) America has messed up politics, all we here them talking about is laws against gay weddings and abortions when they should sort out why it has such a bad gun problem and why the worlds "superpower" needs an economic bail out!

[tailhook]

Originally Posted by BrotherOfDes

A) i tried to use paragraphs but im new here
B) im used to spelling Scottish, sorry if i offended you with a type error
C) i brought up some memorable reasons why your country needs a change

D) Obama will win

E) America has messed up politics, all we here them talking about is laws against gay weddings and abortions when they should sort out why it has such a bad gun problem and why the worlds "superpower" needs an economic bail out!

A) Bullet points are fun.
B) You didn't offend. It was just hard to take you seriously. It would be like if I started typing about Amerrricans.
C) Aye.. they were very memorable. So memorable I remembered them from 7 years ago. Ya got anything new?
D) Well... either him or McCain will be president.. so at least you have a 50-50 shot of being right.
E) If you want to take a shot at us about those evil guns.. are we going to address Britain's knife problem? I wholly agree that knives should also be absolutely outlawed! Cutting food won't be a problem in that we'll turn all food into a uniform paste. After that lets take on the evil baseball bats, cars, purses and any other blunt instrument that could be turned into a weapon. Lets turn our world into padded houses replete with completely adult-proof items where everybody has been made safe from their own human nature. Thats the ticket!

-TH

[RichPundit]

This is simply a cut/paste of my post that was LOST by my Newsweek post. I was in several bands, choir, and wrestling in high school, so never had the time to learn to type ... this post took much time and effort! Trust you enjoy, even TailHook who will be appropriately very disappointed on Nov 5th - RichPundit


First, much earned and deserved kudos to our TTS Moderator LOSTGrrl for actively working and fixing this thread that my Newsweek post broke!

Some rich thoughts:

• Hope she can restore the Newsweek post which adds to our growing pile of knowledgeable, respected, and active Pundits who are screaming that Sarah Palin is unacceptable as our VP. Incredibly, elder Republican Conservative George Will not only has written columns about McCain's "Un-Presidential" behaviours and inept VP candidate Sarah Palin, Will is now making thoughtful, prepared public speeches that Palin is unacceptable as our VP! This clearly portends to me that a large number of conservative Republicans will not vote for McCain/Palin, resulting in a much lower turnout on Nov 4th than typical for that significant Republican base ... both admirable and Patriotic!
• 2
• fyi. Bewildering to me, albeit not unexpected, yesterday I connected with a best buddy from Alabama with a PhD Polymer Science from USouMiss who now lives in Georgia. While we always agree on football ("Roll Tide!"), I rarely agree with his NeoCon rantings. In his words, he strongly supports the McCain/Palin ticket in spite of McCain ... he LOVES Sarah Palin - Whew!
• 3
• Political Free Market Works. No doubt that until recently, our Republicans clearly have rabidly refused any contact with our enemies at any level without "preconditions" including Israel talking to Syria. This was not true for Republican Nixon who with Kissinger went to China, or Bush 1 who with Jim Baker made diplomacy his succesful centerpiece. Republicans have recently discovered again in our free market of political ideas system that that makes good sense [Churchill at the White House: "Jaw, Jaw is always better than War, War"] ... this is a very good thing for all!
• 4
• Point of Information [ref: "Robert Rules of Parlimentary Procedures"]. Republican Bush's $700+ BILLION "Bailout"/"Rescue" is only the 2nd largest executive branch move by our government towards Socialism, the largest was Republican Nixon's Wage & Price Controls.
• 5
• Looking more and more like a Democratic landslide on Nov 4th as deservedly earned by our inept Republicans. However, the HUGE pile of Republican created disasters with ZERO successes are likely unfixable in the immediate future which will be painful for all ... thank you Republicans. However, I am a rabid believer in a free market government with strong competition of ideas for balance and innovation. A landslide by any party, particularly in these crisis times, is NOT a good thing for anybody. The Republicans recently demonstrated this principle during their loong rule of all three branches of our American government including both houses of Congress.

Namaste - RichPundit

[Calena]

Far be it from me as non US-citzizen to tell you guys whom to vote for president. But I can ask you to please give the world a competent president for a change, can't I?

Bill Maher said it best: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHovtS_QWI4

[tailhook]

Originally Posted by RichPundit

This is simply a cut/paste of my post that was LOST by my Newsweek post. I was in several bands, choir, and wrestling in high school, so never had the time to learn to type ... this post took much time and effort! Trust you enjoy, even TailHook who will be appropriately very disappointed on Nov 5th - RichPundit

Don't forget I don't really have a losing horse in this race. I certainly push on McCain given Palin and they'd be my preference but if its Obama.. well.. I can live with that. If you recall, I supported Obama pretty hard at the start of the year. My feelings there didn't really change that much. And if its a landslide.. I was predicting that back when you were claiming Obama wasn't electable :P.

Originally Posted by RichPundit

Hope she can restore the Newsweek post which adds to our growing pile of knowledgeable, respected, and active Pundits who are screaming that Sarah Palin is unacceptable as our VP.

Yesterday's news. They aint saying that no more. Once again, where the rubber met the road was going to be the debate performance, and she has received good reviews from across the political spectrum(excepting far-lefties who for whom only a withdraw from the race would have been considered a great debate performance) and great reviews from within the party.

My own feelings... I thought she presented herself well, had good energy, but had the tendency to stray off-topic. She held her own though, especially with Biden giving a better-than-average performance.

Originally Posted by RichPundit

Incredibly, elder Republican Conservative George Will not only has written columns about McCain's "Un-Presidential" behaviours and inept VP candidate Sarah Palin, Will is now making thoughtful, prepared public speeches that Palin is unacceptable as our VP! This clearly portends to me that a large number of conservative Republicans will not vote for McCain/Palin, resulting in a much lower turnout on Nov 4th than typical for that significant Republican base ... both admirable and Patriotic!

Once again... yeaterday's news. Jeese Rich.. we had a VP debate.. did you watch or where you mourning the Brewers loss?

Originally Posted by RichPundit

In his words, he strongly supports the McCain/Palin ticket in spite of McCain ... he LOVES Sarah Palin - Whew!

Sounds about right

Originally Posted by RichPundit

Political Free Market Works. No doubt that until recently, our Republicans clearly have rabidly refused any contact with our enemies at any level without "preconditions" including Israel talking to Syria. This was not true for Republican Nixon who with Kissinger went to China

Nixon going to China was preceded by a shifting of philosophy by China to be more open to the West along with lots of advance diplomacy. Nixon and Kissinger didn't just show up there on a whim to go have a sit down.

Originally Posted by RichPundit

Republicans have recently discovered again in our free market of political ideas system that that makes good sense [Churchill at the White House: "Jaw, Jaw is always better than War, War"] ... this is a very good thing for all!

Are you seriously trying to suggest that Obama should sit down with Ahmadinajid without preconditions? It will not happen.

Originally Posted by RichPundit

Point of Information [ref: "Robert Rules of Parlimentary Procedures"]. Republican Bush's $700+ BILLION "Bailout"/"Rescue" is only the 2nd largest executive branch move by our government towards Socialism, the largest was Republican Nixon's Wage & Price Controls.

Of course, you failed to mention that the Wage & Price Controls were a disaster. The biggest thing for me with this bailout and buyup of housing is that just like when FDR did it.. there are definitive dates for the government to divest themselves. We don't need Obama thinking it would be really cool to turn this into the worlds largest government housing project.

-TH

[lost_grrl]

Tail...just a heads up...the post of Rich's that you just spent so much time responding to and saying "that is yesterday's news" was, quite literally yesterday's (even a couple of days ago) news. He simply re-posted his last post in the other politics thread. He even said that (albeit in tiny print).

Oh and by the way...As the Obama/Biden camp have been saying Ahmadinajid is not the person in Iran that is in charge of security and foreign relations and so he would not be the person to sit down with about those issues anyhow. But even if he were, it is simply not true that sitting down to discuss something with someone who holds the opposite view means that you agree with them! You and I are "sitting down" to discuss things and nobody could think that we agree on some of these topics.

Interestingly, the American Experience on Reagan re-ran on PBS the other night and it talked a lot about the meeting between Reagan and Gorbi. They certainly head diametrically opposed view points at that time, yet those talks were instrumental in breaking up the USSR and improving US-Russian relations.

As for the VP debate, Palin did better than I expected, but she certainly didn't win any points in my view. The debate was still won by Biden. The only criticism I have about Biden's performance was that a couple of times he sounded very much like a Senator. What I mean by that was that he got a little bogged down in the procedural aspects of governing.

Palin, although she did better than I expected, still did the same thing she had done in all of her interviews, but just with a little more finesse. If she didn't have an answer to a question she would say, "But I wanna go back to [three questions ago] when we were talking about energy". Her foreign policy answers and her answer about agreeing with Chaney's warped view on the powers of the VP were, in my opinion, quite damaging. She really screwed up on the Afghanistan question about the troop surge, getting not only the Commander's name but also his position on the Iraqi troop surge strategy. And while some pundits thought her "folksy" language was effective, I thought it was just too phony. I watched on CNN and the little focus group dialed SEEMED to go down in response to her attempts to act like one of the people with her "heck"s and "gosh darn"s. One thing I noticed absolutely...every single time she started on the "We are mavericks" road the dial went WAY down. Too bad they couldn't see the reactions of the focus group as they spoke!

[BrotherOfDes]

like the spanish dude said, please just vote for someone who is worthy of the job! the world doesn't need another warlord, if McCain gets in then i can see a war with iran immediatly, you can tell he is off his head on sleeping tablets anyway! Bush was the worst president in the usa's history, at least he can't win again!