Friday, August 29, 2008

Just What The Doctor Ordered

Sen. John McCain's selection of Gov. Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate is a stroke of genius. She got where she is fighting the good ole boys in Alaska and doing what is right. She is a true believer in open, honest and limited government. She is the product of a working class family, and she understands the concerns of ordinary Americans. She's a proud mother who chooses life, even when that child is inflicted with Down Syndrome, a decision which was not above her pay grade. Hats off to Sen. McCain. He chose a person all Americans can count on to keep him on his heels to do what is right for America. No more business as usual. This is the ticket for change, not Obama-Biden.

30 comments:

Dick Pimpton said...

Election over ... Obama wins!

artfuggins said...

You forgot to mention what a homophobe she is and the acts she has taken to deny rights to gays and lesbians of Alaska.

Advance Indiana said...

She is not a homophobe and her record makes that clear. Queerty.com does a good job summing up her position:

"While she opposes gay marriage - as all the national contenders do - Palin's frequently come out in support of her gay friends and insists she's open to discussions on discrimination legislation. Palin told an Alaska newspaper that she's "not out to judge" gay people. She went on to say that she believes "that honoring the family structure is that important," and would thus oppose a gay marriage measure. She previously supported a 1998 bill to ban gay marriage. Despite her opposition to same-sex nuptials, Palin helped move Alaska toward a more inclusive frontier in 2006 when she blocked a bill that would have prohibited gay benefits in the state."

I know it must really hurt you, but the only candidate on either presidential ticket who has actually made an executive decision to extend same-sex benefits is Gov. Palin.

joeshmoe said...

Thank you John McCain!!! You just made my day. I was worried you would pick Romney and have a good shot at winning. Instead you chose someone w/ less experience than Obama, you freaking hypocrite!!!!! Less than two years as a governor and the part-time mayor of a city smaller than Noblesville doesn't cut it. I pray to God you don't die in office, you Old Bum, if so God help this country!!!

small-question said...

Here's my take which one can take or leave:

1. I'm incredibly troubled by her past support of teaching Intelligent Design in SCIENCE CLASS. Apart from the religious issue, it's nonsensical to teach an unprovable premise as being just as valid as known science. Before you say "points of view" or "teach the controversy", think about this, if I say 1+1=5, should that be taught in math class?

2. If this was SAM Palin, would we even been having this discussion? I guess the GOP isn't against a little tokenism when needed, huh?

3. In terms of foreign policy and commander in chief thresholds, this selection is utterly ludicrous. Do you HONESTLY think that Palin is actually more qualified to plot military strategy than either Obama or Biden?

4. That ongoing ethics investigation is rather troubling. Before you scream "Rezko", may I remind you that Palin is CURRENTLY under investigation.

5. I know that people love a folksy accent and garbled syntax, but for the love of god, it's not pronounced "noocuelar".

6. Considering this blog's past ridicule of Biden's and Andre Carson's academic histories, I'm not really sure that someone with a B.A. in journalism is really someone with the academic resume to handle complex issues that would come with the office of VP.

In short, this is an unserious, idiotic selection that is so transparently phony and pandering on its face, that it speaks VOLUMES about Mr. McCain's real character. He clearly is willing to do or say anything in order to get elected. Says a lot about how he might govern, and not favorably.

Concerned Taxpayer said...

First they say McCain is too old. They they don't say anything when he picks an "old" man for VP.

Then they say McCain's pick for VP is "too young."

They don't say anything when it is pointed out that Obama has NO experience. Then they complain that McCain's VP choice has no experience.

Which is it?

Maple Syrup Maven said...

To quote Slate.com, Palin is "the shaky choice of a campaign desperate to seem younger and hipper and daring".

Shofar said...

Points to remember:

1. Palin is NOT running against BO, McCain is. McCain has the experience, Obama does not.

2. Palin may siphon off some of the 18 million Hillary voters that feel betrayed, thus the Dem screed against her.

3. Palin does have executive experience, albeit small in comparison to others, by virtue of her having been a mayor and governor, this is something that neither BO, Biden or McCain can say.

4. There have been far less qualified VP choices over the years, some from our own state, and those choices have had little or no impact on the running of country.

5. She is obviously a feisty person, having sent a letter to Harry Reid in June of this year demanding that drilling be allowed in ANWR.

6. She is not a "token" in this day and age, because if she is then the Dems put up their own token in Obama.

To joeshmoe, thanks for admitting that BO does not have experience, its about time someone on your side said it.

To smallquestion, intellectual honesty requires open and honest debate. The vitriolic arguments against ID and for Darwinism show that there is no honest debate, but rather a shoving of one idea down the throats of the population.

Further, you complain that McCain "is willing to do or say anything in order to get elected", however you forget all the people that BO has thrown under the bus during the run up to his ascendancy. His grandmother, "a typical white person", Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, Rezko, Ludacris, I am sure there are others that don't come to mind right now.

BO was and is a fantastic student of Saul Alinsky, and his campaign is nearly straight out of Rules for Radicals. Demonize your opponent, ridicule your opponent etc. Read the book, and open your eyes.

garyj said...

I can't wait until Nov. 5th. The TV airways will be filled with commercials about what your kids must have for Christmas, telling you that "she wants diamonds", and that every store in town has "the lowest prices"
The mute button will be used a lot in the next 9 weeks, the video stores will have record rentals, and people will be arguing over which candidate is going to do the best job compared to which one is telling all lies.

Seems a little foolish to spend 30-40 million to get a job that pays only $400,000.00.
Wilson-Art, when did you stop doing research before open you typeing? You're usually pretty good at getting your facts. (at least your version of the facts)

small-question said...

Shofar.

Seriously, dude, do you honestly believe that Intelligent Design should be taught in a science class? It's not an issue of evolution being "shoved down" anyone's throat. Mounds of fossil evidence show that evolutionary processes have occurred across all species. Not that people like you have any clue about either what Darwinism actually says or realize that many biologists who study evolution don't slavishly agree with Darwin's original theis.

However, Intelligent Design can't be taught as science for the simple fact that it can't be scientifically observed or tested.

One can make a decent philosophical argument for a higher power (Aristotle's unmoved mover argument for instance), but again, that's not science. Can you do a DNA swab for God? Nope. Can you definitively PROVE scientifically that God exists. Of course not. That's why science is science and religion is FAITH. What's next, will you demand that anatomy classes in medical schools start teaching about the soul?

I'm sorry, Shofar, but if Palin truly believes that Creationism should be taught as a hard science, then she is singularly unqualified to be in higher office. How in the hell could a McCain administration possibly be a leader in improving educational standards or training the next generation of biologists if they ascribe to such an ignorant interpretation of science?

Before you get your knickers in a twist, I happen to believe in the existence of a higher power in regards to cosmology. HOWEVER, I'm not ever going to insist that my philosophical beliefs be substituted for hard science.

Palin is a lightweight, put on the ticket specifically to fool ignorant people into voting against their own interests. The idea that some of you people actually think that she is even remotely qualified for this position would be kind of weirdly endearing if this election weren't so deadly serious.

Dick Pimpton said...

Hey, Shofar, comparing Obama to Saul Alinsky isn't a bad thing. At least he had the guts to stand up to mainstream Liberals. Read, re-read "Rules for Radicals" if you don't believe me.

Lance Rasmussen said...

"The idea that some of you people actually think that she is even remotely qualified for this position would be kind of weirdly endearing if this election weren't so deadly serious."

Let's say for the sake of argument that Palin was running against Obama for POTUS. What makes Obama any more qualified to run than her? Does 2 years in the Senate count for more than 2 years as governor? No snark, what's your take on that?

small-question said...

Lance, yes, Obama has more experience than Palin. Serving an Illinois state senate district then holding a Senate seat counts a hell of lot more than less than two years as a governor of one of the least populous states in the country. By your "experience" metric, would Jesse Ventura would be the most "qualified" candidate compared the four candidates on the two tickets. Do you actually know Palin's actual positions on anything? What is her opinion of our two wars? Where does she stand on how diplomacy should be conducted? If she's a proponent of home schooling, will she be objective when it comes to our public schools? Where does she stand on health care? Why did she support Pat Buchanan's campaign in 1996 and 2000 (according to Buchanan himself). Why did she feel that Creationism should be taught in public schools? Does she favor a complete ban on all abortions?

To Gary's point, if she's not a homophobe, than why is she specifically against gay marriage, apart from her belief that God is against it? Where does she stand on Social Security? Is she in favor of torture? Does she agree with the policies at Guantanamo Bay?

You all can complain about Obama being a blank slate (even though he's been nationally prominent for nearly four years), but I find it disingenuous that GOP people are apparently unwilling to ask basic questions about a candidate who might be elected vice-president in 10 weeks? Additionally, I find it concerning that McCain apparently only met her in person literally one time before last week. So does he make this many important decisions with such little thought or reflection? Or, is Palin simply a cynical prop? Considering that some on this blog were willing to engage in all manner of wild speculation about Obama (including some pretty vicious rumors), the fact that Gary and the other GOP'ers are unwilling to ask even BASIC questions about this woman is extremely troubling.

Advance Indiana said...

small question, I worked for an Illinois state senator when I was in college who had been in the state senate for years. He had no college education and couldn't spell worth a damn. I spent several years fighting him after I left his office in disgust because of all the illegal things he was doing. He spent years trying to block me from employment in Springfield before one of his many personal scandals forced his resignation. The Illinois legislature is a complete cesspool. Service there means very little. There is always at least one member under indictment at any given time. As a state senator, Obama illegally pocketed close to $120,000 from a small corporation for which he was supposedly serving as general counsel but oddly never disclosed on his statement of economic interest. It's no secret he performed no legal work for that corporation. He needed the money to bail himself out of the credit card debt he and his wife accumulated after he ran and lost to Bobby Rush for Congress. Obama's buddy Tony Rezko is sitting in a jail cell in Chicago thinking long and hard about how many years he wants to spend in prison. The Sun-Times says he's made numerous trips to the U.S. Attorney's office in recent weeks, winning a sentencing delay until a few days before the election. Obama must be very worried.

small-question said...

Gary, respectfully, do you think that it might be good if the country actually got to learn about what Ms. Palin's positions are on the actual issues, instead of just being told by Sean and Rush "home run. slam dunk". It's a huge leap of faith to vote for someone who is a heartbeat away from the Presidency who literally has NO national or international exposure of any kind until today. Maybe she's a prop for this campaign, maybe she's a raving zealot, maybe she'll be a slavish yes-woman for the administration. How do we know? Hell, how does McCain know? They personally spoke how many times before last week? Once?

As for the Rezko stuff, I have this to say. Gary, throughout this entire election cycle, you've frequently engaged in rampant speculation about how such and such bombshell scandal was just around the corner, and sure to bring Obama down etc. etc. Remember the "whitey tape", Larry Sinclair, and others. Each time you said that the "game changer" was coming, it didn't. It's actually a clever ploy. Talk about how all the coming scandals are just around the corner, and the low information voter laps it up. Sure, it doesn't matter that at no time has Obama been proven to have done anything illegal with Rezko, nor has it even been proven that he did. Then again, I'm sure in your heart of hearts you believe that Michelle Obama called people "whitey" and that Barack murdered a gay choir director while praying to Mecca.

Either way, you all really should try to find out what Ms. Palin actually believes before you tout her as the next big thing. Two months isn't long enough to vet someone for this important of a position.

Shofar said...

Dick,

As a former leftist, one who did read and re-read Alinsky, along with Mao, Machiavelli, Marx etc., and as one who 30 years ago agreed with Saul as to his means, motives and operations I can no longer side with that kind of thinking.

Perhaps it is that I have grown up enough to realize that as long as the government is responsible for me, or anyone, they simply have control over me and everyone.

During the course of my maturation, I have learned, albeit the hard way, that no one is responsible for me but me. Thusly, I have rejected all of the left's ideas and ideology, and have become more of a radical libertarian.

The government, in any form, is a danger to the individual. The only purpose government has is to protect its citizens from violence and fraud, and the government receives it power from the "consent of the governed."

The left,the Dems and the progressives have for to long used tactics that are counter to a free thinking society. They have used the courts to mandate social, economic and governmental policy bypassing legislative and executive purview. They have used ridicule, deception and out right lies to further their agendas, all the while claiming victim status.

The right, the GOP and their ilk have done just as bad a job in governing. Using the pretext of terrorism as a reason to erode the rights of the individual. Removing from the states the rights guaranteed the states in the 9th and 10th Amendments to the Constitution (although the left is just as guilty on that one).

Thomas Paine put it well, and it is the ideal that I hold the most dear, "That government is best which governs least."

Advance Indiana said...

I know how Sarah Palin got elected. She fought higher taxes and corrupt politicians. She brought down a corrupt Governor, Attorney General and state party chairman of her own political party! She's an outsider who doesn't accept business as usual. Her record in government proves this. Obama claims to be about change, but he can't cite a single example where he laid aside partisanship and crossed the aisle to work with Republicans. He chooses someone as his running mate who's been in Washington longer than all but two other senators. You can make fun of the Rezko and Sinclair stories all you want. I've studied the Rezko-Obama house deal. It's corrupt influence peddling. The U.S. Attorney has prosecuted similar cases in the Northern Illinois district. Whether he's ever ultimately prosecuted will not change my mind. Obama pocketed at least $300,000 tax free from Rezko to help purchase that home. You will never convince me otherwise. People like you always scoffed at the womanizing allegations against Bill Clinton. The msm refused to cover those stories. Guess what, they all turned out to be true. You can ignore the Joe Biden-Larry Sinclair connection, but it's bone-chilling to people who have seen what these corrupt political types are capable of doing. Donald Young's murder is unexplained and very odd. You have a man saying he was talking to him about a relationship between him and Obama. It is not disputed Obama knew this man well after attending the same church for 20 years. The man is inexplicably shot multiple times in his home two weeks before the Iowa primary and nobody can figure out a motive. Do I ask questions? You bet I do.

Bart Lies said...

"Two months isn't long enough to vet someone for this important of a position."

Probably true, since they still haven't sorted out Barry's COLB after 6 months.

Shofar said...

Small question,

As to your comments regarding ID v. evolution. I do agree that at the micro level there is evolutionary change, however I do not buy totally into the macro theory. Thus the need for debate.

It is not unlike the arguments made for global warming/climate change. One segment of the scientific population has asserted that there is no debate, man has caused global warming. However, there are over 31,000 scientist, including 9000 Ph.D.s who disagree (http://www.petitionproject.org/).

In the interest of intellectual honesty and openness, the debate of ID v. evolution should be allowed to continue. No matter what your philosophical bent is, to turn off your hearing aid after you have made your point is intellectually dishonest.

One of my biggest problems with Darwin and Darwinism is that his theory was used to justify massive killings. The full title of his book was On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. It was his theory that emboldened people such as Sanger, Hitler, Stalin, Mao and others to engage in eugenics, racial/ethnic cleansing etc.

If man is nothing more than a blind accident, then the reality is that man is nothing. If man was designed by a higher being, then man has an innate worth, and therefore is worth protecting.

mackenzie197 said...

Small Question,

Apparently you don't know the enormous difference between beinga legislator and being the head of a state executive branch. The latter provides much better experience to be President

Michael said...

Obama is more experienced in national security than Palin?!?! That is funny. Didn't The One say that Iran and North Korea are "tiny" countries that pose no threat to the US? Isn't The One the moron who said that he would order the US military invasion of Pakistan to find Osama Bin Laden?

McCain donned his country's uniform proudly and suffered for it. Palin's son volunteered for the US Army is being deployed to Iraq on 9/11.

The One and Biden both actively supported efforts to deny our troops the means and materiel that they needed to stand in harm's way, let alone pursue victory. Shameful.

Palin is the Commander of the Alaskan National Guard. The One commanded the staff of the Hahvahd llllaaaaaaaaw review.

Palin governed for eight years (from the age of 32) a municipality of 9500 residents. The One was a community oooooorganizer (whatever the H that is) during which he accomplished... well..... nothing.

Palin stood up to corrupt leaders and politician of her own party at great risk to her political future, and for the good of her state.

The One cowardly did nothing, sitting mute for 20 years while the leader of his church spewed hate filled racist America hating garbage from the pulpit. All to protect his political hide.

Palin actively supports the exploration and exploitaion of oil and natural gas reserves in the North Slope basin in an effort to secure America's energy future. The One and Biden actively oppose this, and instead seek to impose higher taxes on oil and significanly higher energy costs on working Americans.

Palin chose to welcome an innocent special needs child to the world. The One would have allowed it to die, and wouldn't think of "punishing" his daughter with a baby.

And Obama is supposed to be the qualified one??? Good Lord.

To any neutral observer, it is beyond question that Palin is more qualified to be US PRESIDENT that The One is or could ever hope to be.

Sean Shepard said...

I am not a Republican but, differences in policy preferences aside, I like this pick for McCain.

Don't underestimate the attraction a lot of women might have to being able to vote for someone like them. I don't expect a bunch of Hillary supporters to suddenly get religion (pun intended) and become Republicans even for a day, but a few might.

Shofar ... I appreciated some of your comments the most in this thread. I always wonder what people 2000 years from now will think about the knowledge of this era and what we taught our children. Think about how far ahead we are than people 2000 years ago, how fast technology accelerates and what people 2000 years from now might think?

It always occurs to me that man, presently, has the power to create life ... perhaps not "from scratch" but certainly by remixing what is already existing. Where will we be 50 or 100 years from now? I hope to live long enough to find out.

artfuggins said...

Micheal, you missed two points...she was only a a part time mayor and left the town in a horrible financial mess and, 920 is currently under an ethics investigation for her actions in the governor's office started by the republlicans in the Alaska legislature. She has already changed her story publicly several times as to the facts in that investigation There are emails and phone recordings that prove her to be a major liar.

gnwmann said...

the republicans are going to spend the whole convention trying to explain who this woman is, while the media ignores the issues and problems that mccain has.

is that the point?

btw, is there a single woman on this forum? i'd like to know if women vote for the vagina or on the issues. maybe we'll find out.

IPBprez said...

artfuggins - when you post such meanderings about governmental successes or failures, ALWAYS MAKE SURE to post a link to where you read that evidence. Otherwise, you are just using smear-speech.

EVERYONE - Here's a thought for the masses: "If your stance is righteous, then it WILL sell itself. One has no need to 'find fault with others' to win a debate on any issue, as long as their position is found to be righteous"

IN THIS CASE - I have read nothing but tripe on this blog when it comes to the defense of Barry Obama or Joe Biden. If it wasn't the MSM foisting Biden up on a tree stump, being from the elite-ist northeast, then no one would ever know who the guy is. They embellish his very small accomplishments and censor his incredible failings. THAT, my friends if propaganda!

You can tell the Left is scared - of this pick for GOP-VP. First thing they start to do is compare Obama to Palin(??) Last I heard, McCain (not Palin) was running for POTUS against Obama. Comparisons of Biden vs Palin will come hot-n-heavy as totally Pro-Biden by the MSM, out of shear desperation. Biden has no productive legislation that wasn't laden with taxation. He is as 'business as usual' as it gets in Politics - so much for CHANGE.

Palin has tons of evidence to quite the opposite. Course, you won't hear ABC, CBS, CNN or NBC & MSNBC ever tell you about it. These MS TV outlets have nothing but the "let's find fault with others" protocol to use - folks, it's called DECOY CONVERSATION.

For one second, let's go ahead and compare Obama against Palin. Obama has only -143- days in the U.S. Senate. That's not even 6 months, let alone a whole year of tenure to brag about. In those 143 days, he has voted for nothing. Therefore, he has NO TRACK RECORD to spout as great achievement(s) nor be blamed for the failure of.

In order to win the Senate seat in Illinois, Obama had everyone else struck from the voting choice list, so he was able to run un-opposed. In other words, he knew he couldn't win unless the voting was RIGGED. THAT, by itself, smacks of Saddam Hussein voting conditions in IRAQ. It's also a tactic that sleazy Lawyers use to get criminals off when it's well known they've committed murder. Skip the placation, please.

By contrast, GOVERNOR Palin has been running (the business of) Alaska for almost two years. Last I counted she's been the Leader in Alaska for over 400+ days - that's at least 2.5 times as long as Obama has been a no-show Senator.

HEAR THIS WELL - being a Senator is not the same as running a Business - that's why almost NO SENATORS EVER GET ELECTED TO POTUS.

There has been no Senator elected to the White House since JFK - and if it wasn't for the Hollywood effect - Nixon would have been President in 1960. Everyone who listened to the debates on Radio were SURE Rchard Nixon had won, hands down - only the pictures of a tanned JFK actually got him elected. And, LBJ hated the young whipper-snapper for it, the whole time.

Governor Palin has shrunk the government need to tax the citizens and rid the good-ol-boy network of cronyism, whch many on this blog push innuendo to defend. And, yes, when you work to find fault with someone who has run corruption out of politics, you are defending cronyism. I give a dam(n) whether you like to hear it, or not.

Whether your blogname is artfuggins, or joeschmoe, or even small-question - you should always post weblinks to support you slams against anyone in politics that you disagree with.

Everyone hear should be proving their righteousness by highlighting only the successes your preferred candidate has.

Hear the real stories of IRAQ at Michael Yon's website: http://www.michaelyon-online.com/ (psst, it's known as boots on the ground)

You want to read both sides of politics and decide for yourself? Go to: www.realclearpolitics.com and stay away from sites like Salon.com(A DNC supported website, btw)

Remember - finding fault with others, using sneer tactics, is an admission of fear on your part - and now everyone can see you sweating!

iPOPA said...

Wow. That's all I can say. Advance Indiana has dogged Obama for his lack of experience, and it does three 180s on Governor Palin.

Seriously, does ANYBODY reading this blog think that AI would not have eaten Gov. Palin for lunch had Obama's VP pick had her experience?

Serving two years as the executive of a state that is smaller than Indianapolis after serving as a Mayor of a city that is smaller than Danville doesn't impress me. Even the Alaska press corps, while speaking favorably about her fight for openness in government, said this experience doesn't translate to being able to run the federal government.

Doesn't anybody remember how much grief Bill Clinton took for being "just a small state governor?" Arkansas has five times the population of Alaska, folks!

Seriously, there is a reason that I can't find a single president or vice-president who was the mayor of a major city (which is basically what Alaska is).

Do I think this was politically smart? I'd call it political genius in the following respects: (1) she might swing independent women voters without strong pro-choice views and, thereby, close the gender gap that generally benefits the Democratic Party; (2) she can shore up McCain with the NRA, as she is a lifetime member;
(3) she'll help McCain re-establish his "maverick" label because he selected someone who isn't pedigreed Republican establishment; (4) she'll serve as McCain's built-in expert on Alaskan oil, so when she talks about how opening up ANWR will not hurt any critters but could reduce gas prices, she'll have an air of credibility that you don't get from a lower 48 state politician. Oh, and did I mention that she looks good on TV?

But political genius isn't the same as good for the country. Seriously, AI, you think Governor Palin fits McCain's stated single most important criteria of "ready to serve as President?"

Sorry, but I don't see it. If Obama dies of lung cancer, I won't lose a minute of sleep. If McCain dies of skin cancer, I'll be terrified for the country.

When you said she was a great pick, you meant politically only, I'm assuming.

www.ipopa.blogspot.com

HOOSIERS FOR FAIR TAX said...

I have hope, now.

artfuggins said...

ipbprez, your numbers dont add up. Obama has been in the senate for 3 3/4 years....please post the blog where you can prove that he has only been in the senate for 143 days...............neither you nor Gary nor McCain can sell this perhaps nice woman governor to the American public especially if either of the two state investigations result in indictments. Investigations initiated by republicans.

Jeff said...

Hmm, well I read all of the comments and then looked at the Constitution and this is what I discovered. All of the candidates discussed are eligible to run. None of the other criteria discussed are required. With discussions like these it won't be long before no one will run for any office. Come on let's all get a grip here because no one and I mean no one is prepared to be President until they ARE!

Peace

Jeff said...

Oh, and Gary check out the National Down syndrome Socieity or National Down syndrome Congress or rely on my for info on this.

Trig is not inflicted with Down's Syndrome....it's Down syndrome and it is only one small part of what makes up his whole personality. Sorry but a pet peave. Great posts on Palin.

Peace