Is Palin failin' ? or OMG McCain wins with Palin !! pt. 2 - Page 48 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-12-2008, 05:07 PM   #706
Blue Crack Supplier
 
dazzledbylight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: in the sound dancing - w Bono & Edge :D
Posts: 33,002
Local Time: 10:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
JOHN MCCAIN IS AN HONORABLE MAN WHO IS A STRAIGHT TALKER.

JOHN MCCAIN IS AN HONORABLE MAN WHO IS A STRAIGHT TALKER.

JOHN MCCAIN IS AN HONORABLE MAN WHO IS A STRAIGHT TALKER.

JOHN MCCAIN IS AN HONORABLE MAN WHO IS A STRAIGHT TALKER.

JOHN MCCAIN IS AN HONORABLE MAN WHO IS A STRAIGHT TALKER.

JOHN MCCAIN IS AN HONORABLE MAN WHO IS A STRAIGHT TALKER.



maybe if you typed that out 100,000 x's maaayyybbbeee I'd begin to have a shadow of a doubt that he's become a much less honorable man in these past 7 years or so.


then again......


MAYBE NOT!
__________________

__________________
dazzledbylight is offline  
Old 09-12-2008, 05:14 PM   #707
Blue Crack Supplier
 
dazzledbylight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: in the sound dancing - w Bono & Edge :D
Posts: 33,002
Local Time: 10:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
not to worry! for all the fretting that's going on over how Palin has embarrassed herself in the Charlie Gibson interview, damage control has already begun.

Ms. Palin will do her next interview with this guy:


GASP!!!


Holds out her cross & garland of garlic!



of course! Who else!



When's EL ELbow's turn?
__________________

__________________
dazzledbylight is offline  
Old 09-12-2008, 05:16 PM   #708
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,290
Local Time: 10:56 AM
Are these people for real??

Quote:
Q: Can you honestly say you feel confident having someone who hasn’t traveled outside the United States until last year, dealing with an insurgent Russia...

MCCAIN: Sure...Alaska is right next to Russia. She understands that.
She concurs:

Quote:
Pressed about what insights into recent Russian actions she gained by living in Alaska, Palin told Gibson, "They're our next-door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska."
What a lunatic.
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 09-12-2008, 05:40 PM   #709
Refugee
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Posts: 1,415
Local Time: 03:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Are these people for real??



She concurs:



What a lunatic.
I can see the moon from my window. I guess that makes me an astronaut.
__________________
Golightly Grrl is offline  
Old 09-12-2008, 05:50 PM   #710
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,451
Local Time: 09:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
erm, she said -- on 9/11 of all days -- that the soldiers were going to IRAQ to



no one in Iraq "planned and carried out" the attacks of 9/11.

and if you want to be totally obtuse and claim that they're fighting AQI, well AQI didn't exist on 9/11, and in fact didn't exist until the US invaded Iraq.

there is no one in Iraq right now who had anything to do with 9/11.
What no one ever seems to figure out is that people like Palin and McCain think most Islamics are "terrorists" - therefore Iraq which is predominatly Islamic is a "terrorist state". I don't think people like us will ever be able to change minds like that.
__________________
Harry Vest is offline  
Old 09-12-2008, 05:58 PM   #711
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 10:56 AM
one of the nice things about working from home is watching Chris Matthews go ballistic about Palin's interview.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-12-2008, 06:28 PM   #712
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,451
Local Time: 09:56 AM
Speaking about "ballistic" here's an interesting article about the media's reaction to the Palin pick.

Why They Hate Her
__________________
Harry Vest is offline  
Old 09-12-2008, 07:12 PM   #713
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 04:56 PM
^ It's the usual hysterical conflation of email chains with the blogosphere with the tabloids with the TV networks with the major newspapers, as if they were the Borg and moved in lockstep dictated from the (in this case) librul-feminist hive-mind.

Reminds me a bit of the contrived tantrum Bush Sr.'s campaign threw over the pounding Dan Quayle (another late-in-the-game 'shock' pick) got from the media, which they too milked for sympathy points, though there wasn't as much of a 'Card' to play in Quayle's case.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 09-12-2008, 07:21 PM   #714
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 09:56 AM
I want to know more about this wolf problem.

Are they like wolves with sharks tied to their backs?

And when the sharks open their mouths, they spit killer bees out?
__________________
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 09-12-2008, 07:23 PM   #715
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 04:56 PM
No, it's worse than that, they have this nasty habit of surviving on moose and caribou, which people also like to hunt.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 09-12-2008, 07:55 PM   #716
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 03:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by namkcuR View Post

It applies here. Despite all of the things Saddam was doing to his own people, he, and Iraq, never did anything to us to warrant an invasion. Therefore, there is a serious ethical question about the merits of invading a country that hasn't done anything to you. That doesn't mean you ignore it. You keep a close eye on their activities, you give special importance to any intelligence you get regarding the region(you know, instead of ignoring a briefing entitled, 'Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.'), you be prepared to defend yourself should they try anything, and even be prepared to retaliate in the event that they succeed with anything and if there is absolutely no other course of action to take. But don't go invading them before they've done anything.

No, I think the Bush Doctrine is reactionary, reckless, and fear-based.
The problem is that Saddam is not in that category. He had already invaded and attacked four of his neighbors unprovoked. Used WMD on his neighbors. After he invaded and attacked Kuwait, Israel, and Saudi Arabia in 1990-1991, he was required to verifiably disarm of all WMD in addition to other meeting other conditions of the Gulf War ceacefire agreement and multiple other UN resolutions. Whether or not there would be further military action against Saddam was dependent on his compliance with the UN resolutions stemming from his illegal invasion of Kuwait. He remained in violation of the resolutions and the ceacefire and the only means by which the international community could successfuly enforce the resolutions was through military force.

As Colin Powell said at the time, the Bush doctrine is primarily a restatement of past US security policy since the end of World War II.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 09-12-2008, 08:36 PM   #717
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,451
Local Time: 09:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
^ It's the usual hysterical conflation of email chains with the blogosphere with the tabloids with the TV networks with the major newspapers, as if they were the Borg and moved in lockstep dictated from the (in this case) librul-feminist hive-mind.

Reminds me a bit of the contrived tantrum Bush Sr.'s campaign threw over the pounding Dan Quayle (another late-in-the-game 'shock' pick) got from the media, which they too milked for sympathy points, though there wasn't as much of a 'Card' to play in Quayle's case.
Ya ya ya...but it's working!!!!!!
__________________
Harry Vest is offline  
Old 09-12-2008, 09:24 PM   #718
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 01:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
i disagree with the current US position. proposing Georgia for membership in NATO reflects a blindness to the consequences of the first two rounds of NATO expansion and defies elementary strategic logic.

all it does is serve to bait the Russians and kill the strategic cooperation we're going to need from them to deal with Iran and North Korea. and the more Russia feels threatened, the more power Putin is free to consolidate.
Pin the quote on the candidate

"I have consistently called for deepening relations between Georgia and transatlantic institutions, including a Membership Action Plan for NATO, and we must continue to press for that deeper relationship,"
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 09-13-2008, 12:35 AM   #719
ONE
love, blood, life
 
namkcuR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kettering, Ohio
Posts: 10,290
Local Time: 10:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
The problem is that Saddam is not in that category. He had already invaded and attacked four of his neighbors unprovoked. Used WMD on his neighbors. After he invaded and attacked Kuwait, Israel, and Saudi Arabia in 1990-1991, he was required to verifiably disarm of all WMD in addition to other meeting other conditions of the Gulf War ceacefire agreement and multiple other UN resolutions. Whether or not there would be further military action against Saddam was dependent on his compliance with the UN resolutions stemming from his illegal invasion of Kuwait. He remained in violation of the resolutions and the ceacefire and the only means by which the international community could successfuly enforce the resolutions was through military force.

As Colin Powell said at the time, the Bush doctrine is primarily a restatement of past US security policy since the end of World War II.
What I said was the Saddam never did anything to US. You have said nothing to disprove that. Whatever he did to his neighbors or to his own people is besides the point, it doesn't change the fact that he never did anything to us.
__________________
namkcuR is offline  
Old 09-13-2008, 10:14 AM   #720
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 08:56 AM
Pertinent article:

ABC's Gibson grilled Palin hard, but it may backfire
By MARTIN SIEFFPublished: Sept. 12, 2008 at 11:47 AMOrder reprints | Print Story | Email to a Friend | Post a Comment WASHINGTON, Sept. 12 (UPI) -- There were no surprises, no knockout zingers, but also no bloopers Thursday night in Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's first TV interview since becoming the Republican vice presidential nominee.

Charles Gibson of ABC News was out for blood and inherently applied a double-standard compared with the kid gloves George Stephanopoulos used on Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois on Sunday night.

Gibson was out to embarrass Palin and expose her presumed ignorance from the word go. By contrast, when Obama referred to his "Muslim faith" on Sunday and did not correct himself, Stephanopoulos rushed in at once to help him and emphasize that the senator had really meant to say his Christian faith.

By contrast, Gibson tried to embarrass Palin by referring to her Christian faith in asking people to pray for U.S. soldiers in Iraq. Palin countered by pointing out she was following the precedent set by Abraham Lincoln.

Palin also expressed her support for Georgia and Ukraine joining the U.S.-led NATO alliance. That statement was predictable and consistent with the current policy of the Bush administration. The policy has dangerously raised tensions with Russia, but Palin is hardly alone in the conservative/Republican consensus in expressing her support for it.

Palin's assessment of foreign policy was competent and not embarrassing. Although she initially exhibited ignorance of the Bush Doctrine on pre-emptive strikes that has been a central pillar of U.S. foreign policy after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, she recovered quickly and then made the case clearly. Tactically, she made the mistake of trying to be friendly and informal with Gibson, who assumed a superior, professorial and critical stance toward her. She would have been far better going on the attack to rattle him.

The double-standard Gibson applied to Palin, compared with the uncritical media platforms repeatedly offered to Obama, who has had zero executive experience running anything, was especially striking. ABC and Gibson focused on Palin as if she were running right now for the presidency rather than the vice presidency. He and other media pundits, by contrast, have never asked the Democratic vice presidential nominee, Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, if he has ever had to make a decision on anything.

Gibson's aggressive approach appeared to take Palin by surprise: He was clearly attempting to put her on point by presenting her as having extreme religious views. This again, however, appears to be a double-standard, as Palin grew up in the Assemblies of God, one of the largest Christian denominations in America with 16 million members, and is now a member of the Wasilla Bible Church. Even now, Obama has yet to receive any comparable grilling on his 20-year attendance in the congregation of the notoriously racist Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

The focus on Palin's faith and family, as well as the controversy over Obama's "lipstick on a pig" comment in Virginia earlier this week, confirmed the swift demise of civility in the 2008 presidential campaign. This is especially ironic, as both Obama and his Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, owed their victories over Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York in the Democratic primary race and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani in the GOP one to their perceived inclusive tolerance, uplift and vision compared with their main opponents.

In the long sweep of U.S. political history, the worst dirt that has been thrown at either of the presidential candidates pales compared with the claims that Thomas Jefferson had fathered a child by a black slave in the 1800 campaign -- the newspaper editor who published the accusations eventually was found dead floating in a canal -- or the false claims by Republicans in the 1944 campaign that President Franklin D. Roosevelt was senile. FDR by that point was indeed a dying man, though he did not know it, but he was mentally as sharp as ever.

The context of the increasingly desperate -- and ugly -- attacks on Palin and her alleged lack of experience is that the Obama bandwagon, which swept all before it from the Iowa caucuses through the end of June, is now stalling badly and, even more worrying for the Democrats, the malaise may be spreading to the congressional races.

The latest USA Today/Gallup poll has the Democrats only 3 points up on the Republicans on the question of which party people would vote for today in their congressional district.

Indeed, the Obama campaign is now saying it is ready to take the gloves off against McCain. They rolled out a new ad Friday mocking McCain as out of touch and old-fashioned, even though it was McCain who picked a young woman as a running mate while Obama opted for an old white guy who's been sitting in the Senate for 36 years. With more than 50 days still to go until the actual election, it appears dangerously early in the campaign for the Obama camp to go negative, especially as so much of his appeal has been based on rising above the old negatives to begin with. Isn't it early in the campaign to resort to that? Is it a sign of panic?

Whatever her inexperience and other shortcomings, Palin did not fall into that trap in her ABC interview. At no point did she appear fearful or threatening. Gibson's aggressive questioning on her religion and her son's coming military service in Iraq, by contrast, runs the risks for the Democrats of strengthening support for Palin among working-class, married women, especially those with husbands or sons serving in the military.

The pattern of previous presidential election interviews and debates has always been that individuals who come across as intellectually superior, arrogant and condescending forfeit support that goes to their perceived victims. This dynamic played a crucial role in propelling George W. Bush into the White House eight years ago. It remains to be seen if Gibson's perceived arrogance and condescension will give Palin another boost. It certainly didn't help the Democrats that ABC's chief political correspondent, Stephanopoulos, who had rushed to Obama's aid only four days before, was wheeled on to discuss her interview with Gibson as soon as it was concluded.

Liberal Democrats predictably will cite the interview as evidence that Palin is not prepared for the vice presidency. Republicans will equally predictably cite it as evidence that she is. How centrist voters will react to it remains to be seen. One thing is clear: This isn't a transformational election on either side. Whoever wins, the ugly old cultural and political divisions in America remain -- and they are deeper than ever..
__________________

__________________
diamond is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com