Obama has executive experience deficit

By JohnF: 9/2/08 at 6:40 a.m.; Suggest removal

As if that matters. How much "executive experience did Harry Truman or Abraham Lincoln have? How much does John McCain have?

Mr. Ahr suggests that Senator Obama somehow has less experience in government than does Sarah Palin.

Sarah Palin? Executive experience? Another RNC talking point echoed by the folks who lap them up from Fox News.

The entire state of Alaska has a population of about 700,000, or about a third of the Las Vegas valley. Alaska's population is roughly one quarter that of Brooklyn, or less than a tenth that of the Chicago metropolitan area. Wasilla, Alaska, where Palin was Mayor, is a bustling metropolis of 8,500, or about 1/4 of a square mile of Brooklyn. Or a little lass than 4% of the number of people Barack Obama represented as an Illinois State Senator.

So what is it about Sarah Palin's 20 months of "executive experience" that makes her fit to step into the Presidency should John McCain kick the bucket? Her ten years on the city council and as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska are in no way preparation for the Presidency, no matter how many ways you spin it.

By Future2012: 9/2/08 at 7:47 a.m.; Suggest removal

As a Governor and a Commander Sarah Palin is making decisions constantly that affect peoples lives, sets the States priorities, runs the services of a state, deals with the budget and finances, deals with hiring and firing, implement $40 billion international NG pipeline deal, crusades against corruption, etc.

Senators Obama and Biden make no decisions, they talk, hold hearing, and vote (if in session) as one of 100 senators following Harry Reid; and 435 representative following Nancy Pelosi, in a feebly attempt to pass a operating budget (non this year so far) and a few laws. Obama has no results to point to for his social service job sandwiched between his six figure lawyer jobs.

Remember that Obama is running against McCain, not Sarah.

By jfnance32: 9/2/08 at 7:50 a.m.; Suggest removal

Johnf is right. Experience is not that big of a deal. Otherwise Democrats would have picked someone with tons more experience than Obama. Of all the Democrats runnning for the nomination, Obama had the least experience.

Obama experience is 12 years college professor, 7 years state senator, and 3 years US senator.

That is not much experience at all. They nominate a rookie that is very wet behind his big ears.

By NVMakz: 9/2/08 at 8:10 a.m.; Suggest removal

"The entire state of Alaska has a population of about 700,000, or about a third of the Las Vegas valley. Alaska's population is roughly one quarter that of Brooklyn, or less than a tenth that of the Chicago metropolitan area. Wasilla, Alaska, where Palin was Mayor, is a bustling metropolis of 8,500, or about 1/4 of a square mile of Brooklyn. Or a little lass than 4% of the number of people Barack Obama represented as an Illinois State Senator."
xxxxxxxxx
Palin has rendered Biden moot in this election cycle. Biden's state, which he has "represented" since the Roman Empire it seems (since Palin was eight, ims) - has the same population in a much smaller, easier-to-socialize area than Palin. Let's see Biden "pick on a girl"?? Wasn't that the argument protecting Hillary?? lol...

Palin is not a socialist wealth redistributionist toward big government like Obama.

Palin has no racist churches or Black Liberation Theology in her personal and political support and upbringing.

Palin has no domestic terrorists in her past.

Palin has more experience representing her constituents (from the PTA on up) 100% of the time than Obama ha representing his State >40% of the time - while pimping himself for the next political position (running for his next position 5 of the 10 years he's been in "public" life).

What does Biden's decades of being on the wrong side of history, holding hearings and demonizing his opponents preparation for the Presidency? A lot = in the new "Obamanation".

Obama represents his racist, socialist wealth stealing Chicago-machine Democrats with LESS devotion, effort and heart than Palin does and did. Obama is an empty suit.

Democrats are LEADING with their inexperience this time around.

Also, there was no meaningful bounce to speak of - if any at all - among likely voters of that Palin's VP nod didn't wipe out. Usually, the Dem has a double-digit lead, ims. Not in 2008! It's a great relief NOT needing to plow through the lying lib-major media's puffing of the (D) POTUS candidate's "lead". Why can't this guy "close the deal"??

Obama is a very scary dude, that's why!

The Lincoln and Truman point also wipes your greater point off-the-board, eh?

By JohnF: 9/2/08 at 8:49 a.m.; Suggest removal

There goes Nance twisting words again. "Executive experience" is not that important. Obama has experience far beyond that of Sarah Palin, who is totally unqualified to be President.

NVMakz, same thing. Read. Try to comprehend. Neither Truman nor Lincoln had EXECUTIVE experience before taking over as President.

You two are trying to convince us that 20 months leading a state with a population of less than 1 million people is better preparation for the Presidency than Joe Biden's years in the United States Senate or Barack Obama's tenure in the Senate and the Illinois senate. Give me a break. Can anyone seriously imagine Sarah Palin trying to move a piece of legislation through Congress? Lyndon Johnson she is not.

It's very funny to see the Republicans backpedalling madly on the whole experience thing. After spending months telling us that Obama doesn't have the experience to be President they nominate someone with even less experience to be one heartbeat away from the Presidency. And with a 72 year old nominee, one heartbeat takes on a very large meaning.

Look at it this way. Had Sarah Palin run for the Republican nomination herself, would ANYONE have taken her seriously?

By jfnance32: 9/2/08 at 8:56 a.m.; Suggest removal

Obama just has a tiny experience of anything!!!!!!

So if you want to play the experience game, Obama loses hands down compared to anybody.

The Democratic party demostrates frequently that they choose ideology over substance time and time again.

By ksand99: 9/2/08 at 9:19 a.m.; Suggest removal

But so does Sarah Palin, jfnance32. I think it is funny that either side thinks experience is an argument anymore.

The Democrats chose substance, they chose the candidate that appealed to their core, the core that believes going into Iraq was wrong, and we shouldn't have done it in the first place. It turns out, the majority of the USA believes the same.

John McCain erased the experience argument when he chose Sarah Palin. She has less foreign policy and homeland security experience than Obama. And she has more executive experience than Obama. It washes out.

By azsk8fan: 9/2/08 at 9:36 a.m.; Suggest removal

Let's face it folks, we have not been given a viable candidate to vote for so we are, at least for the next 4 yrs., doomed.

By News1950: 9/2/08 at 9:50 a.m.; Suggest removal

OK, so "experience" does not matter according to some of these posts. Then, irregardless of the events that unfold during the next president's term (whoever that might be) I suggest the following for the respective 2012 conventions - the Democrats could nominate for president the mayor of Ismay, MT (population-25) and the GOP could nominate the mayor of Maza, ND (population-5). Then, we'll have a real answer to the question - does experience matter.

By jfnance32: 9/2/08 at 9:55 a.m.; Suggest removal

OK, so "experience" does not matter according to some of these posts. Then, irregardless of the events that unfold during the next president's term (whoever that might be) I suggest the following for the respective 2012 conventions - the Democrats could nominate for president a state senator of North Carolina and Republicans could nominate a state senator from Rhode Island . Then, we'll have a real answer to the question - does experience matter.

By ksand99: 9/2/08 at 10:13 a.m.; Suggest removal

LOL, even when someone agrees with you, jfnance32, you mock them. I'm pretty sure News1950 is a McCain supporter.

By jfnance32: 9/2/08 at 10:33 a.m.; Suggest removal

I am just reinforcing his statement with using the Obama state senator experience.

By News1950: 9/2/08 at 10:42 a.m.; Suggest removal

Thanks,jfinance32 for the support. BTW, ksand99, no need to be "pretty sure" as I happen to be a proud and long-time John McCain supporter. I voted for him in the New York Republican primary (2000) when he ran against George W. Bush after W's minions attempted to deny the Arizona senator a place on the ballot in that state.

By NVMakz: 9/2/08 at 11:36 a.m.; Suggest removal

"NVMakz, same thing. Read. Try to comprehend. Neither Truman nor Lincoln had EXECUTIVE experience before taking over as President."

YES, YOU GET IT!

The lib-corroder's attacks on Palin as un / underqualified based on her experience, executive or not VERSUS the socialist Obama or the fossil, Biden = is soon doomed to failure.

I didn't mis-read, you mis-reacted and freud-ed yourself out of your main point.
xxxx
"She has less foreign policy and homeland security experience than Obama. And she has more executive experience than Obama. It washes out."

Obama has one or two trips to the M/E as a Senator - and ONE BIG "grip and grin" this last several months. Barry and his tribe of major media anchors would NEVER got to go on their "grip and grin and massive propaganda trip"(mq) without Bush, Petraeus etc winning he war before.

Obama with "homeland security experience". LOL, LOL, LOL....... PROVE IT, RIGHT NOW!! WHAT has the puppy Obama contributed to "homeland security" in his tenure. LITTLE more than words, I'd guess...

He had a simple "how-cha-do" with some world leaders, whoo, hooo....

A cup of coffee and a photo-op, with anchors a-fawning.

WHY can't the almighty Messiah close the deal. He's in a dead heat when his also-ran-too-liberals like Algore and Kerry had big leads right now.

Obama's a scary dude, that's why.

Obama is not a playa in foreign OR domestic politics. He's an empty suit.

Trying to compare experiences RUNNING AN ADMINISTRATION, whether it be city, town or state = is more than Obama has EVER DONE.

Executive experiences vs. legislative (40% representation of IL, lol!!) given 100% are more than going for photo-ops and spinning sessions, like Barry O !
xxxxxx
"You two are trying to convince us that 20 months leading a state with a population of less than 1 million people is better preparation for the Presidency than Joe Biden's years in the United States Senate or Barack Obama's tenure in the Senate and the Illinois senate. "

Biden has been, heavy on the "has been", a fossil in the Senate for decades. He's been on the wrong side of history many, many , many times. America would have been much weaker IF Biden had had more of an impact. Thank God he's not a decision-maker in government = but just politicks and has committee assignments and responsibilities. AND, of course, gets on the "talking point express" and flies to the TV cameras.

He's a FOSSIL. She's a very promising future leader, with the future in front of her.

I suppose I could find very cool lists on how wrong for America Biden "has been", if I tried.
xxxx

By thebs: 9/2/08 at 11:49 a.m.; Suggest removal

That's funny, if Biden is a fossil, McCain is positively Proterozoic!

By ksand99: 9/2/08 at 1:34 p.m.; Suggest removal

NVMakz, I keep reading articles like this one:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,...

Where it says stuff like "Obama briefed by Israeli prime minister."

I haven't seen anything that says "Palin briefed by Israeli prime minister."

Could you find me some proof, any proof that Sarah Palin has met with any world leader, minus any President of the USA?

By ksand99: 9/2/08 at 1:38 p.m.; Suggest removal

Actually that article is really good, so I'll paste it here.

"Obama laid out the policy he would implement in regards to Iran, if elected to office in November. The prime minister's aides said Olmert felt the Illinois senator had a clear understanding of the Iranian issue and is "immersed" in the subject matter."
"The aides said that the policies Obama presented to the PM indicate he appreciates the severity of the threat at hand and also believes it must be dealt with."
"The two also discussed the ongoing peace negotiations with the Palestinian Authority. Olmert told his guest that the points of contention between the two sides are smaller than ever. The prime minister briefed Obama on the status of the core issues, with the exception of Jerusalem as it is not currently on the agenda in Israel's talks with the PA, Olmert's office said."

What is Sarah Palin's position on Israel and Iran?

What is Sarah Palin's position on Afghanistan, Pakistan and the threat of al Quaeda?

What is Sarah Palin's position on Russia and Georgia?

What is Sarah Palin's position on Russia's claim to Arctic soverignty?

See, I know Barack Obama's positions, but Sarah Palin has made no public comments on these serious issues that I can find.

Could you elaborate on her positions, since you seem to know how great of a politician she is?

By jfnance32: 9/2/08 at 1:49 p.m.; Suggest removal

Every two seconds, Obama changes his mind on foreign policy matters.

It use to be Iran is not that big of a threat.

Now Iran is a big threat.

On Iraq, in one day, we switch his positions on his time table for troop withdrawal.

In a single day, he had to change his "verbiage" about Georgia. It was pro-Russia in the morning and in the afternoon was anti-Russia.

On Afghanistan, Obama did not care about it until election time. He is charge of a sub-committee that oversees NATO. NATO is running the military operation in Afghanistan. He did not once have a session on Afghanistan. He was too busy running for president.

Also, he was part of a group of senators on a trip to the middle east. In their planned trip, they visited Afghanistan. Obama skipped that part of trip because Afghanistan was not important to him.

Now, election year...OMG...he discovers Afghanistan.

He is very naive about foreign policy. He thinks he can have a cozy talk over coffee and donuts and our enemies will be our friends.

He is very naive about nukes. He thinks countries like Russia, Iran, Pakistan and China will agree to destroy their Nukes and not hid any. And somehow find the hidden nukes.

Oooops...its is 3:00 PM... time for Obama to change his foreign policy again.

By ksand99: 9/2/08 at 1:50 p.m.; Suggest removal

Jfnance32, what is Sarah Palin's opinion of all of those issues?

What is her stand?

By jfnance32: 9/2/08 at 1:54 p.m.; Suggest removal

Sometimes, I think you guys forgot who is on the ticket.

It is McCain/Palin vs. Obama/Biden. It is the top of the ticket that sets foreign policy not the bottom of the ticket.

You guys are attacking Palin so much that you must totally think McCain is a perfect candidate.

By ksand99: 9/2/08 at 1:57 p.m.; Suggest removal

Sometimes, I think you forget that the Vice President must be able to take control at ANY TIME!

I will ask again, since she's a candidate for VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

What is Sarah Palin's position on Israel and Iran?

What is Sarah Palin's position on Afghanistan, Pakistan and the threat of al Quaeda?

What is Sarah Palin's position on Russia and Georgia?

What is Sarah Palin's position on Russia's claim to Arctic soverignty?

By thebs: 9/2/08 at 1:59 p.m.; Suggest removal

Oh Nance, a few hours ago you were comparing Palin to Obama, now it's suddenly unfair?

More double standards!

By jfnance32: 9/2/08 at 2 p.m.; Suggest removal

OK

Number of Palin Executive Decisions: 1000x's

Number of Obama Executive Decisions: 0

By News1950: 9/2/08 at 2:01 p.m.; Suggest removal

Jfnance32 - I hope Barack Obama's supporters will remove the "Obama" bumper stickers from their vehicles after his loss. Seeing "Kerry-Edwards" signs on some vehicles in Las Vegas several YEARS after the 2004 election gave me headaches.

By JohnF: 9/2/08 at 2:07 p.m.; Suggest removal

NVMakz,

It was the Republicans who attacked Obama as being inexperienced and therefore, supposedly, unqualified to be President. It is the Republicans who are trying to tell us that Sarah Palin is experienced while Obama is not because she has "executive experience." Executive experience as mayor of a town of 8,000 apparently is better preparation for the Presidency than representing about a quarter of a million in a state legislature. Certainly all of those tough decisions about whether to install a new traffic light will help Palin promote McCain's legislative agenda.

None of you Republicans out there bothered to answer my question so I'll ask it again:

If Sarah Palin (who believes that creationism should be taught in schools, who believes that women should not be allowed abortions even in the case of rape, etc.), the half-term governor of a state with a population the size of a Brooklyn block, had run for President, would she have gathered so much as a single delegate?

By the way, if you try to look up Sarah Palin's stances on the issues on the internet, all her web sites have been pulled down. Her gubernatorial campaign site is gone along with all her positions on just about everything. What are they hiding?

By News1950: 9/2/08 at 2:12 p.m.; Suggest removal

Does not matter that an article reported "Obama briefed by Israeli prime minister." If elected, the Illinois senator will support the Palestinians, not Israel. Do not forget that in his original statement on a related matter, he revealed his true sentiment, and said he supports a DIVIDED Jerusalem. Then,later, because of anger expressed by the Jewish community, he changed (surprise?) his position. Incidentally, Sarah Palin became a VP candidate only last week, did you expect her to confer with world leaders this soon? Also, PM's of foreign nations do not ordinarily "brief" VP candidates, only the presidential nominees.

By ksand99: 9/2/08 at 2:15 p.m.; Suggest removal

LOL, Jfnance32 is supporting a candidate, and he doesn't know her position on ANY of the important issues of the day!!!!! That's truly frightening!

But you said she had many executive decisions?

"Sarah campaigned in Wasilla as a “fiscal conservative”. During her 6 years as Mayor, she increased general government expenditures by over 33%. During those same 6 years the amount of taxes collected by the City increased by 38%. This was during a period of low inflation (1996-2002). She reduced progressive property taxes and increased a regressive sales tax which taxed even food. The tax cuts that she promoted benefited large corporate property owners way more than they benefited residents."

"The huge increases in tax revenues during her mayoral administration weren’t enough to fund everything on her wish list though, borrowed money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt, but left it with indebtedness of over $22 million. What did Mayor Palin encourage the voters to borrow money for? Was it the infrastructure that she said she supported? The sewage treatment plant that the city lacked? or a new library? No. $1m for a park. $15m-plus for construction of a multi-use sports complex which she rushed through to build on a piece of property that the City didn’t even have clear title to, that was still in litigation 7 yrs later--to the delight of the lawyers involved! The sports complex itself is a nice addition to the community but a huge money pit, not the profit-generator she claimed it would be. She also supported bonds for $5.5m for road projects that could have been done in 5-7 yrs without any borrowing."

"While Mayor, City Hall was extensively remodeled and her office redecorated more than once."

So she increases taxes, and leaves the government $22,000,000 in debt, AFTER getting $27,000,000 in earmarks?

What a fiscal conservative!

By ksand99: 9/2/08 at 2:23 p.m.; Suggest removal

Here are the words of a resident of Wasilla know knows Sarah Palin's "executive experience" better than any of the right-wing people on this website apparently do:

"As an oil producer, the high price of oil has created a budget surplus in Alaska. Rather than invest this surplus in technology that will make us energy independent and increase efficiency, as Governor she proposed distribution of this surplus to every individual in the state."

"In this time of record state revenues and budget surpluses, she recommended that the state borrow/bond for road projects, even while she proposed distribution of surplus state revenues: spend today's surplus, borrow for needs."

I think NvMakz said: "Palin is not a socialist wealth redistributionist toward big government like Obama." Obviously that isn't true!!!!

By jfnance32: 9/2/08 at 3:15 p.m.; Suggest removal

At least she has made executive decisions.

Here is a list of Obama's executive decisions.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
etc......

By ksand99: 9/2/08 at 3:22 p.m.; Suggest removal

So you support her executive decisions?

You support her raising taxes on the families of Wasilla by increasing the sales tax?

You support her wasteful spending on a indoor ice arena which has lost money.

You support her raising taxes on the oil companies?

You support her executive decision to take a balanced budget in Wasilla and leave it 22,000,000 in debt?

So all that, and she has NO POSITIONS on international affairs? You want this woman to be a heartbeat away from the presidency?

LOLOLOLOLOL!

By jfnance32: 9/2/08 at 3:29 p.m.; Suggest removal

Did you support Obama's executive decisions?

I guess you can not disagree with them for there are none.

By ksand99: 9/2/08 at 3:34 p.m.; Suggest removal

But jfnance32, if you cannot tell me the positions of candidates you support, why should I expect you to know any executive decision that Obama has made!!!

LOLOLOLOL!!!!!

Just keep going into the booth and selecting the candidate with the R next to their name!

To think Sarah Palin might be the second-most powerful person in the United States, but we have no idea what her positions are on Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, North Korea, etc. etc. etc.!!!!!!!

By thebs: 9/2/08 at 3:43 p.m.; Suggest removal

Hey, ksand99, it's ok.

Stop baffling them with hard questions like "What is your candidate's position on Iran?" Why would the Republicans need to know that?

In case you missed it, Rick Davis, McCain's campaign manager announced that this election isn't about those pesky "issues." It's about freakin' personalities.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/...

"Rick Davis, campaign manager for John McCain's presidential bid, insisted that the presidential race will be decided more over personalities than issues during an interview with Post editors this morning."

"This election is not about issues," said Davis. "This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates."

Obviously this isn't about the issues... why else would they have nominated a Veep choice that stumps their own supporters?

By jfnance32: 9/2/08 at 4:16 p.m.; Suggest removal

Obama has a very strong background in.....uh..........mmmmmmmm....uhhhhhhhh...mmmmmmm.......

Foreign policy? No can't be that he only been a part-time senator for 3 years

Economy policy? No can't be that he only been a part-time
senator for 3 years

Executive decisions? No, he never did that

Chicago corrupt politics? Yep, we have a winner!

Did I guess right?

By ksand99: 9/2/08 at 4:27 p.m.; Suggest removal

Your candidate threw the experience argument out the window when he chose Sarah Palin for the republican ticket.

I know most, if not all of Barack Obama's positions.

You can't even tell me what Sarah Palin's positions are on Iran or Afghanistan. On North Korea or Pakistan. Or Israel. She has no known position on Israel. That's scary.

You just blindly support her because she is a republican.

And when I give you information about her executive experience, which you seem to think is so important, that she ran the city of Wasilla into the ground with 22,000,000 in debt for a town of 7000, that she increased taxes on citizen and oil companies, you don't care?

You think that's great?

If that's the kind of executive experience you think we need, I fear for you and I fear for our nation!!!!

We already had one republican take up from a surplus to a crushing debt, we don't need another!

By jfnance32: 9/2/08 at 5:17 p.m.; Suggest removal

Obama has zero executive experience.

He did nothing either as a US Senator...no major accomplishments.

It is very hard to pick apart a list of zero accomplishments.

He was the only state senator to be against a bill that would have given human legal rights to babies born from botched abortions.

He is does nothing in his life but win the Democratic nomination.

By News1950: 9/2/08 at 5:26 p.m.; Suggest removal

Obviously, the old expression- "the best defense is a good offense" is a popular strategy in business and POLITICS. That is the exact tactic a self-conscious (about HIS lack of experience) Barack Obama and his campaign operatives are using in their attacks on GOP VP nominee Sarah Palin. I don't know about Barack Obama supporters, but I ALWAYS voted for the TOP of a presidential ticket, not the bottom half. In view of the Democrats' tactics, I guess they do not have a problem with John McCain only Sarah Palin! Funny group those left-wingers...

By thebs: 9/2/08 at 5:45 p.m.; Suggest removal

True, News1950, people vote for the top of the ticket, not the bottom. Nance has made quite an issue out of executive experience... so much that he thinks having some executive experience seems to trump knowing what the frak is going on in Iran or Afghanistan.

And apparently, Palin has tons of executive experience, leaving the town she governed mired in debt.

Let's keep in mind that both Obama and McCain are sitting Senators, and their executive experience combined is nothing to sneeze at.

But answer a question for me: how is asking for a candidate's political positions an "attack?"

By jfnance32: 9/2/08 at 6:12 p.m.; Suggest removal

Obama has very little experience in anything but being a college professor and a slum lord lawyer.

He does not have any significant experience on foreign policy or economy policy.

He does not have any executive experience.

McCain has significant foreign policy experience.

Palin has some executive experience.

Obama had to get a McCain-like person to be his VP to gain some foreign policy credentials. Somebody who voted for the war. Obama said the war decision disqualified McCain as being a foreign policy expert. Boy....talk about having things both ways.

Obama has accomplished very little as a US Senator. Can anybody name any major thing he did as US Senator?

ZERO.........

At least you are attacking Palin because she has actually done something.....shocker!

She stood up to her own party's establishment.

Obama embraced Chicago corrupt politics.

McCain fights with his own party in DC.

Obama has kissed his butt's party in DC.

No courage there in Obama.

Obama core fundraiser in South Chicago was the biggest convicted crook there. That crook help him buy his first house.

Obama stinks!

By thebs: 9/2/08 at 6:27 p.m.; Suggest removal

See, lift a mirror to Nance's face to expose his double standard, and he'll dump word after word, letter after letter of his debunked talking points.

Rhetoric in the face of solid fact: he doesn't have a clue of the political positions of the candidate he supports.

The height of his rhetorical brilliance: "Obama stinks!"

Yes, elementary school taunts are all he has left.

He apparently thinks executive experience means the world, but can't name five executive decision McCain has made.

He holds that executive experience in a high regard, but apparently thinks "record debt and a ballooning budget" = great executive experience.

He thinks she stood up to her own party, when in fact she hired lobbyists to get $27 million in earmarks with the help of indicted Senator Ted Stevens.

And he has the gall to ask anyone else about Obama's executive experience when he can't name a single foreign policy position of Sarah Palin?

I guess it's pretty easy for Nance to discount the intellectual rigors of the Presidency and just select any old Republican for the job, but I'm pretty sure the rest of us expect more.

By News1950: 9/2/08 at 6:37 p.m.; Suggest removal

The left-wing, pro-Barack Obama, mass media (New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, et al) is so infuriated (and intimidated) that John McCain has chosen a pro-life, NRA life-member, University of Idaho graduate (NOT, liberal colleges Harvard or Columbia) as his VP selection, that these agendized entities have launched despicable, off-the-wall, attacks against Sarah Palin even to the (low) point of CNN and CBS questioning her availability to lead because she is a MOTHER (of five children). Can you imagine, the uproar from now silent "feminists" if CNN or CBS had questioned a LIBERAL, female, politician's ability to lead because she had children and a family? NO! Or, has any of these media sources questioned Barack Obama's ability to be President because he has small children at home? NO! If Sarah Palin has a pet dog, she had better hide the animal because the media will be after that next!

By ksand99: 9/2/08 at 6:58 p.m.; Suggest removal

They don't have to attack her personal life, they can just point out how absolutely ridiculous it is that the republican national committee will nominate and accept Sarah Palin as the vice president pick when they have NO IDEA WHAT HER STANDS ARE ON THE ISSUES!!!!

They don't know where she stands on any international issue, on national security, on the economy. etc!!!!

She raised taxes on the residents of Wasilla and left them 22,000,000 in debt, and all I hear from FOX news is that she's a "reformer!"

That's not the kind of reform we need! We're just getting away from Bush, who took us from a record surplus to a record deficit in two terms!

They say that McCain's economic plan will result in the largest national debt ever in the history of the United States. Given Sarah Palin's track history with taking a balanced budget, increasing spending and increasing taxes and creating a debt, she's looking even worse than McCain!

But who knows, because she hasn't told us anything about her beliefs or her platform. The republicans are just gonna pat her on the back and throw her onto the ticket!

None of the staunch republicans on this website can tell me where she stands, why should I believe that McCain himself knows where she stands.

Someone please explain to me why, given they don't know anything about her, why she isn't just a token female?

By jfnance32: 9/2/08 at 8:28 p.m.; Suggest removal

Why would the Democrats nominate somebody that is so close to the crooks in South Chicago?

Why would they nominate somebody who had the biggest crook in South Chicago be his core fund raiser for years?

Why would they nominate somebody who had the biggest crook in South Chicago buy him a house?

By News1950: 9/2/08 at 8:34 p.m.; Suggest removal

Thebs, the mainstream media, obviously INCENSED by the CONSERVATIVE political positions of Sarah Palin (e.g. pro-life, pro-2nd Amendment, etc.) have sunk to ATTACKING her MOTHERHOOD and pregnant daughter (READ Sally Quinn's column in the Washington Post or Maureen Dowd's column in the New York Times) where as if the VP nominee had been a liberal female those "feminist" columnists and left-wing media would have praised her as a strong woman who supported her daughter and family. Ipso facto - the "DOUBLE-STANDARD" is blatanly used by these liberal acolytes in their coverage of Sarah Palin.

By thebs: 9/2/08 at 8:49 p.m.; Suggest removal

Nance, 18 million Democrats cast their vote for Obama. If you can't discern the clear difference between 18 million voters and the singular decision-making of McCain, then you are truly hopeless.

News1950, mainstream CONSERVATIVE commentators, radio hosts and bloggers continue to slander Obama's religion, his family, etc. I believe the commenter named 'GOD' today, less than a few hours ago, asked something about Obama's mother, who is DECEASED.

Nance constantly talks about Obama's brother, and just LIED saying that Rezko bought Obama a house. That's just a blatant lie. I don't see you condemning him.

Before you paint the "mainstream media" as attacking Mrs. Palin, consider what mainstream Democrats have had to contend with for over a year. Lies and slander, OVERT racism, questioning one's patriotism, and then tell me about the mainstream media.

Tell me about FOX and the madrasah lies. Tell me about FOX and the "terrorist fist jab," or "Obama's baby mama."

Spare me the righteous indignation about the liberal media. For every godawful comment about Mrs. Palin's family (which I still regard as atrocious and out-of-bounds), there's volumes of that stuff that has come from the wacko right about Obama and his family.

By jfnance32: 9/2/08 at 9:49 p.m.; Suggest removal

theBS is correct.

The biggest crook in South Chicago did not buy Obama a house.

The biggest crook in South Chicago help Obama buy a house. The biggest crook in South Chicago only helped but not directly buy the house.

I am glad that theBs corrected me.

Also, the biggest crook in South Chicago was a core fund raiser for Obama for years.

Oh well...I am sure that the voters could care less about this.

They do not care if the future possible president had close connections to the biggest crook in South Chicago.

By News1950: 9/2/08 at 10:24 p.m.; Suggest removal

Thebs, I appreciate your disassociation from the vicious attacks made by the "elite" media against Sarah Palin and her family. But, several facts for your edification, the Chicago Sun Times, hardly a "conservative" publication, reported Barack Obama apologized for his many dealings with now-convicted felon Tony Rezko. Also, Barack Obama in his "Audacity of Hope" novel, admitted that he attended both Catholic and MUSLIM schools. Now, I don't know about you, but I attended 12 years of Catholic school and during my entire school-life, I HAD to FOLLOW the precepts and tenets of Catholicism. Incidentally, my "indignation" has an empirical foundation based on personal examination of all media sources.

By thebs: 9/2/08 at 11:12 p.m.; Suggest removal

Hey Nance, regail me again with your complete knowledge of Sarah Palin.

FAIL!

Can't name a single position she has on foreign policy.

The worst voters are the one who blindly set aside their principles and just vote for the D or R.

Nance has obviously not quite learned that lesson... his knowledge of his own candidates is as shallow as a kiddie pool.

News1950, that you would continue the smears against Obama just means you're more of the same.

Lump you in with Nance, who has to lie to make a point.

Keep on believin' all the crap Rush and Rove have to offer. Obviously, a serious review of the candidates' positions, rather than childish rumor and innuendo, isn't your forte.

Not all of us get our political info from Weekly World News.

Empirical foundation? Yeah, whatever Faux News and O'Reilly have to bloviate in your direction. They continued to repeat the madrassa story when they knew it was false.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/70240

News1950, it makes me sick that people are attacking the Palin family. It makes me angry that you would help perpectuate slander.

Obviously, you're more of a "do as I say, not as I do," kinda person.

By ksand99: 9/2/08 at 11:37 p.m.; Suggest removal

Thebs didn't "correct" you, jfnance32.

They caught you lying, yet again.

It is sad you cannot tell the difference.

If that's the best you've got, just no knowledge of your own candidate and lies about your opposition, I have no worries about McCain's defeat in November!

By jfnance32: 9/3/08 at midnight; Suggest removal

You are right kSand99.

Obama having the biggest South Chicago crook as his core fund raiser in the past is no big deal.

It is not a big problem either that the biggest South Chicago crook help him buy a house.

You do not need to worry.

The voters do not care about such things otherwise the Democrats would have never nominated him.

By News1950: 9/3/08 at 5:23 a.m.; Suggest removal

Thebs - you have my sincerest sympathy as obviously, you are a mislead and misinformed ideologue posting your "talking points" (e.g. "Faux News" and "O'Reilly") from far-left SMEAR sites (i.e. the Daily Kos, Media Matters, etc.). Barack Obama will appear on Thursday's edition of "The Factor with Bill O'Reilly." Why don't you tune in and find out how a fair and intelligent interviewer (Bill O'Reilly) operates, unlike fanatical left-wing bomb-throwers Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews? Or, are you like many others on the left, critical of Bill O'Reilly without viewing a single edition of his program?
Incidentally, NEWSWEEK is owned by pro-Barack Obama NBC News and operated by a former "monitor" at the THE DAILY KOS. Enjoy YOUR Kool-Aid!

By NVMakz: 9/3/08 at 8:32 a.m.; Suggest removal

"1950":

Just call "the bs" and "99" "debunked", or some variation of it "debunkalicious"(?). It's the word he overuses, usually when starts spiking the ball on his own 30 yd line, lol!! His "jones" word for sure, usually to prop up blown-out arguments.

Yeah, mis-spell some words and make up some, like "bleaitudinal stutterances" or "Lib-Bogusistic Brainfarts"the like. Send them after your spelling. He and the libs focus on the mini-micro around here; while I and mod-cons around here go macro and bomb from above. Let them starve on "pick-ed nits"!

Liberals back the cult-of-personality candidate. At the election, the facade of this puppy will be stripped away.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iv6t3vBdK...

Sarah Palin, who speaks tonight, can do what Obama did - be a blank slate in introduction to who she is and how powerful she can be. She seems to be able to sell herself. She's gonna blow the fossil, Biden UP in debates. She should demand 12-15 of them = call him out.

Sarah Palin ALSO has more experience than "Boner John" Edwards when HE was Kerry's VP wingman last time. Cheating on Elizabeth, with cancer of some verasicity - disgraceful!. A first-term Senator with NO executive experience except counting his mega-millions from suing people and keeping the hair-gel industry alive.

Libs are LEADING with their mega-inexperience this time around. Barry can't "close the deal".

Instead of a first-term Senator as the "Jackass' " VP candidate = they move the rookie to the POTUS spot. RICH.

Obamacons move out Hillary - and allow Palin to be the first VP in history. Gotta piss off da-libcorroders, big time. RICH.

Watch Sarah P tonight.

Sarah Palin: Frontier Political Woman.

By laguna: 9/3/08 at 10:14 a.m.; Suggest removal

Palin has really gotten the 'lefties' scared. That makes her an even better pick. They see their gov. welfare bennies flying out the window.

By News1950: 9/3/08 at 10:22 a.m.; Suggest removal

Amen! The liberal Democrats and their sycophants in the mass media are scared to death of a pro-life, pro-2nd Amendment, conservative, courageous, FEMALE politician so they resort to ageism (re. John McCain) and sexism (re. Sarah Palin) in effort to sink the GOP's chances for victory. Then, you have the phony "feminists" that support women, but only if those women have the same leftist, political views that can be found among members of NOW and NARAL.

By PatriciaLV: 9/3/08 at 11:29 a.m.; Suggest removal

So, "News1950", "feminists" are just supposed to blindly support any woman?

And that's not sexist? LOL.

BTW, who said anyone was "scared to death of a pro-life, pro-2nd Amendment, conservative, courageous, FEMALE politician"? In fact, the only people I see mentioning ANY of this are the ones who allegedly "support" her.

As to that 2nd Amendment thing, I'll tell you the same thing I've told other right-wing mouthpieces on these and other boards .... every LIBERAL I know not only owns a gun, they know how to use it.

"Pro-life" is a misnomer created by the right-wing. You aren't "pro-life"; you're anti-choice. About time you all called it for what it really is.

"Conservative"? Don't make me laugh. Unless, of course, you equate "conservative" with "leaving mountain-high deficits". If that's the case, she's apparently in "good" company: Bush I, Bush II, Reagan.

"Courageous"? What makes her "courageous"?

More talking points being spewed and strawmen being constructed. Don't you people EVER debate actual issues?

No, I don't suppose you can now, can you?

By News1950: 9/3/08 at 11:56 a.m.; Suggest removal

PatriciaLV - No, "feminists" do not have to support every woman, but ironically, they ONLY seem to support women of their identical political philosophy. The notable fact that Sarah Palin is a strong, successful, businesswoman AND politician who is also, raising a family does not matter with liberal feminists because she has CONSERVATIVE values (e.g. a pro-life position). But, these same feminists did not have a problem supporting Hilary Clinton who stood by her cheating husband, a decision anathema to any REAL feminist, simply because the NY senator had those shared liberal positions. A TRUE feminist would support a smart, successful and courageous woman (i.e. Sarah Palin) irregardless of the woman's position vis-a-vis the abortion issue. So, feminists, instead of being intimidated by a woman like Sarah Palin, APPLAUD her successes without the vicious criticizms, and vote for Barack Obama and his liberal platform if you desire to do so.

By PatriciaLV: 9/3/08 at 12:01 p.m.; Suggest removal

Again, that makes no sense. Why would ANYONE support ANYONE with whom they fundamentally disagreed on issues that are important to them?

Who's playing the "sexist" card here? And who's building strawmen?

Please answer my other questions (e.g., what makes her "courageous").

BTW, Hillary is NOT a Liberal; she's DLC which is (at best) Republican "lite". I'm so tired of the "Liberal" label being tossed about by people who have no real clue as to its meaning.

By PatriciaLV: 9/3/08 at 12:02 p.m.; Suggest removal

FWIW, I'm really not trying to be obstinate here. I simply want to know the foundation(s) upon which you are making your claims. These are genuine questions.

By News1950: 9/3/08 at 12:04 p.m.; Suggest removal

Ksand99 - When you say..."I know Barack Obama's positions" (but not Sarah Palin's), what you mean is that you know the Illinois senator's positions at PRESENT because his positions have moved back and forth like the trees during Hurricane Gustav. Tomorrow afternoon , Barack Obama will appear on "The Factor with Bill O'Reilly." Then, we'll see if he can (finally) espouse a solid position on ANY issue unlike the indecisive and ineffectual performance he gave at the Saddleback Church Forum last month.

By News1950: 9/3/08 at 12:22 p.m.; Suggest removal

PatriciaLV - "Courageous" can describe Sarah Palin's successful efforts to oppose the corrupt and entrenched Republican (and Democratic) politicians in Alaska. "Courageous" can describe the decision she made to carry her last pregnancy to term despite the fact she knew the difficult future of raising a Down's syndrome child. Incidentally, if you are open-minded (apparently, you're NOT) you can admire (or respect) a person without "supporting" that person's political philosophy (e.g. Sarah Palin's pro-life position). I have admired (or respected), but not supported, many liberal icons during my life (e.g. JFK, FDR, etc.) On another matter, if as you say, I'm not pro-life, but anti-choice, then someone of the opposite position is NOT pro-choice, but pro-abortion. Every woman that ever had an abortion was NOT pro-choice because their only and final decision was to have an abortion. Thus, if the ONLY decision for those women was to have an abortion, then ipso facto, they are PRO-ABORTION.

By News1950: 9/3/08 at 12:34 p.m.; Suggest removal

Oh, come on PatriciaLV, put the Kool-Aid down, please! Hillary Clinton is a LIBERAL by ANYONE'S definition of the term. Or, is the "in" phrase now "progressive?" Basically, liberals believe in big-government, entitlement programs, taxes, abortion and are anti-gun and anti-death penalty (remember uber-liberal Barack Obama's derisive "clinging to their guns and religion" statement). Does Hillary Clinton disagree with any of those positions? Of course, she does NOT!

By PatriciaLV: 9/3/08 at 1:50 p.m.; Suggest removal

Well, News, I never said I didn't admire the decision to carry that child to term. This isn't what this is about. Many women have made that decision; yes, that IS courageous. Is that a qualification for higher office? I don't think so.

Many politicians have gone against their own & the opposition party; again, that is courageous, but not a qualification for higher office. Well, not THE qualification anyway. Admirable, rare, but not entirely unique. But again, yes, courageous.

Are they the only two things that make her "courageous"?

The only ones drinking Kool-Aid around here are the ones who can ONLY seem to spew talking points ostensibly in defense of their candidate.

Sorry, but it would appear that pertains to you.

Hillary is only a Liberal by right wing standards. As I said on another thread, the right wing has moved so far to the right that anyone slightly to the left of Hitler is considered "liberal".

"Every woman that ever had an abortion ..." Wow; that's quite the construct. Have you SPOKEN WITH "[e]very woman that[sic] ever had an abortion"? Somehow, I doubt it. The fact is there are MANY so-called conservatives who are pro-choice, just as there are many liberals who are pro-life. Of course, neither talk radio nor Fox "news" would EVER mention that because it goes against their mantra of "we decide so you don't have to".

You say "anti-gun"; well just what does that mean? Do you mean "anti-ALL guns"? I don't know of many who espouse that. Do you mean "anti-having-free-access-to-(e.g.)AK47s"? Well, yes, I know a lot of people who espouse that.

"believe in abortion" .... Oh boy; there's that made-up phrase. I know of NO ONE who "believe[s] in abortion", but I know a LOT of people - from BOTH sides of the aisle - who believe in CHOICE. If your religion precludes a belief in choice for you, that's your right. Your right, however, does NOT include forcing that belief on anyone else. No one forces anyone to have an abortion; but by making it illegal you force your beliefs on the entire nation.

Is the Pentagon part of the government? If so, then you can't really call the last three Republican presidents anti-big government now, can you? Did creation of the Dept. of Homeland Security make the government smaller? I don't think so. There goes that stereotype.

Anti-death penalty? For most of the people I know it's a case-by-case basis. I will say this, however; you'd better be damn sure you've got the right person. And when you consider just how many convictions nationwide have been thrown out, not due to technicalities but due to the fact that OOPS! we've got the wrong person .....

I won't even dignify the Obama's quote remark with a response. You've obviously NOT heard or read the ENTIRE context.

By PatriciaLV: 9/3/08 at 1:52 p.m.; Suggest removal

Sorry but that should read "If your religion precludes a belief in abortion ....."

Sorry about that.

By thebs: 9/3/08 at 1:54 p.m.; Suggest removal

NVMakz, that's really rich coming from someone who admitted they have NO IDEA what Palin's political positions are.

Then you carpet bomb your own candidate and discount his legislative experience?

"Introducing, sponsoring or co-sponsoring bills and speeches are NOT accomplishments at all." - Makz

There is no REAL RESULT from those actions, not accomplishments." - Makz

Never thought you'd be so down on your own candidate.

NVMakz, the Republican enthusiasm gap, personified.

By PatriciaLV: 9/3/08 at 2:28 p.m.; Suggest removal

Oops ... missed one.

"entitlement programs" Semantics, I suppose; yes, they are technically "entitlements" but the only group I know of that uses that term is (you already know the answer to this one) the right wing.

I was taught from early on that it is my duty as a human being to help those less fortunate or who cannot help themselves. Part of that was (admittedly) being raised a Catholic, but my parents were instrumental in that particular lesson - and they taught by example. I have always given of myself - be it time or money or whatever I could because that's my duty to my fellow human being.

Is that a "liberal" concept? I would hope not exclusively. I would hope that was a HUMAN concept and one to which people should strive.

Is there fraud in such (government) programs? Yes. Is it rampant? One can make a (rather strong) case that yes, it is. But it's not exclusive to one political group or to one entity.

There is plenty of corruption in corporate "entitlement programs". In fact, I'd daresay that corporate "entitlement programs" cost We The Taxpayers a damn sight more than what the right wing ever-so-fondly refers to as "welfare queens".

Again, not exclusive to one side or the other, as the right wing STRONGLY believes in corporate entitlement programs yet they STRONGLY oppose "people-based" entitlement programs.

I wonder how they reconcile that particular disconnect .....

By News1950: 9/3/08 at 3:15 p.m.; Suggest removal

PatriciaLV - "Are they the only two things that make her courageous?" Yes, and you'll learn more on her fortitude during her address to the RNC delegates this evening. Incidentally, name ONE thing "courageous" done by Barack Obama? Did not have the courage to walk out of a church (in 20 YEARS) ministered by a left-wing, anti-American fanatic. Only did so, after his campaign was in danger due to his association with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. On many occasions, in the Illinois and US Senate he voted "PRESENT" in order to avoid committment (either pro or con) to a particular piece of legislation. During the Saddleback Church Forum, he could not give a single definitive answer to any of the questions. In one lamentable instance making a cavalier and evasive response..."that's above my pay grade." No, Sarah Palin has more courage than Barack Obama will have in a lifetime. On another point, I had a 12-year Catholic school education and I do believe in assisting people who can not (not, WILL NOT) help themselves in life. But, I do not believe in expensive, ill-conceived, government entitlement programs that Democrats use to secure the votes of their their electorate (can you say...BRIBE). I, like the Democrats, could spend SOMEONE ELSE'S money all day too!

By PatriciaLV: 9/3/08 at 3:39 p.m.; Suggest removal

OK. Do you believe in expensive, ill-conceived government entitlement programs that Republicans use to secure the votes (and financing!) of their electorate (yes, BRIBE)? After all, isn't that what corporate entitlement programs are? And hasn't the CURRENT government been spending all of OUR money all day, everyday, for the past seven-plus years? Where does McCain differ from that? (Seriously; I don't see it, but I could be missing something.)

There's "courage" and then there's "fortitude" and NEITHER ONE taken by themselves is a qualification for higher office. Sorry that point seemed to be lost on you.

Why is it OK to take Palin's word for it in her speech, but when Obama speaks it's "just a speech"? Isn't what's good for the goose good for the gander, too?

You cherry-pick Obama "quotes" completely out of context and claim that's what he's all about. The same can be done for McCain, Palin, Biden, Bush, Cheney, Clinton (both of them), Gore, you, me, ANYONE. Doesn't mean anything unless it's backed up by actions.

ALL politicians do what's politically expedient. Doesn't make it right, but it's there.

To simply point out one side's use of that nasty little habit while overlooking the other side's equal use of it is disingenuous at best.

Unless you're running for your second term, I don't think ANYONE has enough experience for that job so I don't know why this is such an issue for people. (It's one of those media-created "non-issues" like earthtones.)

FWIW, neither candidate inspires me very much. They're both politicians; McCain's not a "maverick", just a grumpy old man, and Obama seems to be a little too DLC for my tastes. I haven't quite made up my mind.

Fortunately, here in good ol' Nevada we have this wonderful option called "None Of The Above Candidates". I've used it often in the eight-plus years I've lived here.

By PatriciaLV: 9/3/08 at 3:40 p.m.; Suggest removal

BTW, despite the fact that we seem to disagree on almost everything, this is quite an enjoyable conversation. Thank you for that; it's refreshing.

By News1950: 9/3/08 at 5:17 p.m.; Suggest removal

PatriciaLV, you're quite welcome. Yes, it has been an interesting discussion as you made some very valid points. I will continue later, but now, I have the RNC (and Bill O'Reilly) on TiVo, so I have to go. But, I'll check back after Sarah Palin's much-anticipated speech tonight. I hope she does fantastic! Good-bye...

By NVMakz: 9/3/08 at 6:08 p.m.; Suggest removal

"NVMakz, that's really rich coming from someone who admitted they have NO IDEA what Palin's political positions are."

Trying to milk a point already awarded to "99" = pathetic. It's been a long time since you can say that you've had a win, and now is not one of those times either. It's a dry board for your lies!
xxxx
"Then you carpet bomb your own candidate and discount his legislative experience?"

You are a liar! Pure and simple. Desperation is your address, it is!
xxxx
"Introducing, sponsoring or co-sponsoring bills and speeches are NOT accomplishments at all." - Makz"

Unless they become LAWS, they are hopechange and changehope and vapors - Barry's record of vapors.
xxxx
"There is no REAL RESULT from those actions, not accomplishments." - Makz"

Thanks for agreeing with me re: Obama, the subject.
xxxx
"Never thought you'd be so down on your own candidate."

You are a liar!
xxxx
"NVMakz, the Republican enthusiasm gap, personified."

The last gasp of "the bs' "poison spew of lies, obfuscation and hollow lead-helmet liberals. The wait ends!

By thebs: 9/3/08 at 6:29 p.m.; Suggest removal

"Introducing, sponsoring or co-sponsoring bills and speeches are NOT accomplishments at all. There is no REAL RESULT from those actions, not accomplishments." - NVMakz

Yes, clearly you just carpet-bombed McCain. You just threw his legislative career out the window. All that time, 26 years, bill after bill, amendment after amendment, meaningless... according to you.

Now wonder you're so disinclined to promote McCain! Enthusiasm gap, proven. You've even shied away from Palin's positions. Let's call it 'deep shame.' LOL!

So what have the Republicans got? A "tax-and-spend and borrow some more" debt-laden foreign policy-free VP and... John McCain, who has apparently accomplished nothing in the past 26 years, according to Makz.

This will be a CAKEWALK for Obama/Biden.

By News1950: 9/3/08 at 9:09 p.m.; Suggest removal

Re. Sarah Palin's RNC VP acceptance speech: I have followed political conventions (both Republican and Democrat) since 1968 (Nixon vs. Humphrey) and I have NEVER seen a VP nominee from either party receive a more enthusiastic reception from the delegates or make a more poignant and powerful acceptance speech than the oration delivered by Sarah Palin tonight.