Is Palin failin' ? or OMG McCain wins with Palin !! pt. 2 - Page 5 - 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 09-03-2008, 07:57 PM   #81
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 03:30 AM
Uh oh.
A Hillary defector, 17,999,999.00 to go



http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/20...s-john-mccain/
__________________

diamond is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 07:58 PM   #82
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 03:30 AM
__________________

diamond is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 08:02 PM   #83
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 02:30 AM
not a big fan of Ann

but this time

the right wing screw ball

may be more right

than many on the left

Quote:
THE BEST MAN TURNED OUT TO BE A WOMAN
by Ann Coulter
September 3, 2008

John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, as his running mate finally gave Republicans a reason to vote for him -- a reason, that is, other than B. Hussein Obama.

The media are hopping mad about McCain's vice presidential selection, but they're really furious over at MSNBC. After drawing "Keith + Obama" hearts on their denim notebooks, Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews stayed up all night last Thursday, writing jokes about Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, the presumed vice presidential pick. Now they can't use any of them.

So the media are taking it out on our brave Sarah and her 17-year-old daughter.

They claimed Palin was chosen only because she's a woman. In fact, Palin was chosen because she's pro-life, pro-gun, pro-drilling and pro-tax cuts. She's fought both Republicans and Democrats on public corruption and does not have hair plugs like some other vice presidential candidate I could mention. In other words, she's a "Republican."

As a right-winger, Palin will appeal to the narrow 59 percent of Americans who voted for another former small-market sportscaster: Ronald Reagan. Our motto: Sarah Palin is only a heartbeat away!

If you're going to say Palin was chosen because she's a woman, you're going to have to demonstrate that the runners-up were more qualified. Gov. Tim Pawlenty seems like a terrific fellow and fine governor, but he is not obviously more qualified than Palin.

As for former governor of Pennsylvania Tom Ridge and Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman, the other also-rans, I can think of at least 40 million unborn reasons she's better than either of them.

Within the first few hours after Palin's name was announced, McCain raised $4 million in campaign donations online, reaching $10 million within the next two days. Which shortlist vice presidential pick could have beaten that?

The media hysterically denounced Palin as "inexperienced." But then people started to notice that she has more executive experience than B. Hussein Obama -- the guy at the top of the Democrats' ticket.

They tried to create a "Troopergate" for Palin, indignantly demanding to know why she wanted to get her ex-brother-in-law removed as a state trooper. Again, public corruption is not a good issue for someone like Obama, Chicago pol and noted friend of Syrian National/convicted felon Antonin Rezko.

For the cherry on top, then we found out Palin's ex-brother-in-law had Tasered his own 10-year-old stepson. Defend that, Democrats.

The bien-pensant criticized Palin, saying it's irresponsible for a woman with five children to run for vice president. Liberals' new talking point: Sarah Palin: Only five abortions away from the presidency.

They claimed her newborn wasn't her child, but the child of her 17-year-old daughter. That turned out to be a lie.

Then they attacked her daughter, who actually is pregnant now, for being unmarried. When liberals start acting like they're opposed to pre-marital sex and mothers having careers, you know McCain's vice presidential choice has knocked them back on their heels.

But at least liberal reporters had finally found someone their own size to pick on: a 17-year-old girl.

Speaking of Democrats with newborn children, the media weren't particularly concerned about John Edwards running for president despite his having a mistress with a newborn child.

While the difficult circumstances of Palin's pregnant daughter are being covered like a terrorist attack on the nation, with leering accounts of the 18-year-old father, the media remain resolutely uninterested in the parentage of Edwards' mistress's love child. Except, that is, the hardworking reporters at the National Enquirer, who say Edwards is the father.

As this goes to press, the latest media-invented scandal about Palin is that McCain didn't know her well before choosing her as his running mate. He knew her well enough, though admittedly, not as well as Obama knows William Ayers.

John F. Kennedy, who was -- from what the media tell me -- America's most beloved president, detested his vice president, Lyndon Johnson.

Until Clinton interviewed Al Gore one time before choosing him as his vice presidential candidate, he had met Gore only one other time: when Gore was running for president in 1988 and flew to Little Rock seeking Clinton's endorsement. Clinton turned him down.

To this day, there's no proof that Bill Clinton ever met one-on-one with his CIA director, James Woolsey, other than a brief chat after midnight the night before Woolsey's nomination was announced.

Barring some all-new, trivial and probably false story about Palin -- her former hairdresser got a parking ticket in 1978! -- the media apparently intend to keep being hysterical about McCain's alleged failure to "vet" Palin properly. The problem with this argument is that it presupposes that everyone is asking: "HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?"

No one's saying that.

Attacks on McCain's "vetting" process require the media to keep claiming that Palin has a lot of problems. But she doesn't have any problems. Remember? Those were all blind alleys.

Unfortunately, for the ordinary TV viewer hearing nonstop hysteria about nonspecific "problems," it takes a lot of effort to figure out that every attack liberals have launched against Palin turned out to be a lie.

It's as if a basketball player made the winning shot in the last three seconds of the game and liberals demand that we have a week-long discussion about whether the player should have taken that shot. WHAT IF HE MISSED?

With Palin, McCain didn't miss.
deep is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 08:04 PM   #84
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2isthebest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vision over visibility....
Posts: 12,332
Local Time: 06:30 AM
If Ann Coulter says it, you know it's wrong.
U2isthebest is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 08:29 PM   #85
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,455
Local Time: 05:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
not a big fan of Ann

but this time

the right wing screw ball

may be more right

than many on the left
Can't stand Ann...but I've got to admit that in this circumstance she's right on the button.
Harry Vest is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 08:34 PM   #86
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 06:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
M-

Gallup is not the most reliable polling data-they usually poll "registered voters" only.

Here's a cpl of suggestions for you:

Count polls with likely voters-that's usually more accurate.
Count the polls that include Nader Barr etc, becuause they usually swing elections.

Get back to us.



<>
None of the polls you mentioned matter.

Polls that matter are polls of likely voters with all candidates---but broken down by state. National polls are useless, save for swaying public opinion. When the final result of the election is based on electoral votes, it doesn't matter if all of Alaska votes for McCain or if all of Delaware votes Obama, nor if the national polls have a 46-45 race. If 60% of California is for Obama and 52% of Ohio is for McCain....that tells us more of what November 4th is going to show, as well as where the work currently needs to be focused.
__________________
Utoo is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 08:49 PM   #87
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 03:30 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Utoo View Post
None of the polls you mentioned matter.

.
the type of polls do matter was my point for accuracy sakes.

listen ive been voting since 1980, i know how the electoral process works.

you should look at a polls that have all the canidates listed, plus likely voters vs reg voters w only 2 choices is not the best model- was my larger point.

it will come down to a few states and how a few electoral votes fall as it has the last few elections.
<>
diamond is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 08:51 PM   #88
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 06:30 AM
^Gotcha, my bad.
__________________
Utoo is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 08:59 PM   #89
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 06:30 AM
Hot mic catches GOP strategists trashing Palin pick

(CNN) – Prominent Republican analysts Peggy Noonan and Mike Murphy became the latest victims of an open microphone Wednesday, caught after a segment on MSNBC trashing John McCain's pick of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate.

Noonan, a Wall Street Journal columnist and former speechwriter for Ronald Reagan, and Murphy, a campaign strategist and onetime aide to John McCain, can both be heard expressing disbelief with the pick of Palin after they apparently thought they were in a commercial break.

“I come out of the blue swing-state governor world, Engler, Whitman, Thompson, Mitt Romney,” Murphy said during the mishap which has since been posted on YouTube. Murphy later flatly says of the pick, "It's not going to work."

Noonan is heard going even further, saying of the presidential race, "It's over."

"I think they went for this — excuse me– political bulls–t about narratives," Noonan also said. "Every time the Republicans do that, because that's not where they live and it's not what they're good at, they blow it."

Murphy, who was a senior adviser to John McCain's 2000 presidential bid, also adds, "You know what's really the worst thing about it? The greatness of McCain is no cynicism, and this is cynical."

UPDATE: Writing on the Wall Street Journal Web site, Noonan apologizes for using profanity and says she was not claiming McCain's campaign was "over."

"In our off-air conversation, I got on the subject of the leaders of the Republican party assuming, now, that whatever the base of the Republican party thinks is what America thinks. I made the case that this is no longer true, that party leaders seem to me stuck in the assumptions of 1988 and 1994, the assumptions that reigned when they were young and coming up," she writes. "The first lesson they learned is the one they remember," I said to [MSNBC's Chuck] Todd — and I'm pretty certain that is a direct quote. But, I argued, that's over, those assumptions are yesterday, the party can no longer assume that its base is utterly in line with the thinking of the American people. And when I said, "It's over!" — and I said it more than once — that is what I was referring to."

__________________
Utoo is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 09:13 PM   #90
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,395
Local Time: 06:30 AM
Ann Coulter sure as hell gets this right:

Quote:
As for former governor of Pennsylvania Tom Ridge and Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman, the other also-rans, I can think of at least 40 million unborn reasons she's better than either of them.
really, that's all it comes down to.

McCain wanted Lieberman. we know this. the Republicans said they'd freak out if he picked someone who doesn't believe in forced pregnancy. thus, they tried to go for broke and picked Palin.

it's a gimmick designed to please the base.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 09:20 PM   #91
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 02:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Ann Coulter sure as hell gets this right:



really, that's all it comes down to.

McCain wanted Lieberman. we know this.
You have convinced me.

And if he is elected,
I believe he would have no problem appointing Lieberman to a cabinet post.
deep is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 09:38 PM   #92
Blue Crack Supplier
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,555
Local Time: 03:30 AM
I have a question for y'all, and no one has to answer it.

But is a marriage forced upon two children due to an unplanned pregnancy more sacred than the marriage of two lesbians who've been in a monogamous, committed relationship for 20 years?

'Cause if it is, I'll need an explanation, please.
martha is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 09:41 PM   #93
ONE
love, blood, life
 
zonelistener's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: six convenient metro locations
Posts: 14,747
Local Time: 05:30 AM
Big Grin

Quote:
Originally Posted by martha View Post
I have a question for y'all, and no one has to answer it.

But is a marriage forced upon two children due to an unplanned pregnancy more sacred than the marriage of two lesbians who've been in a monogamous, committed relationship for 20 years?

'Cause if it is, I'll need an explanation, please.

I asked this in the last thread, and no "conservatives" answered me.

It seems VERY hypocritical to me from a party that PREACHED the sanctity of marriage not even four years ago.
zonelistener is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 09:44 PM   #94
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 02:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by martha View Post
I have a question for y'all, and no one has to answer it.

But is a marriage forced upon two children due to an unplanned pregnancy more sacred than the marriage of two lesbians who've been in a monogamous, committed relationship for 20 years?

'Cause if it is, I'll need an explanation, please.
Is this about Obama's parents

and his opposition to same sex marriage ?
deep is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 09:47 PM   #95
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,395
Local Time: 06:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
and his opposition to same sex marriage ?

he supports it in CA, though.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 09:51 PM   #96
Refugee
 
toscano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,032
Local Time: 03:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by martha View Post
I have a question for y'all, and no one has to answer it.

But is a marriage forced upon two children due to an unplanned pregnancy more sacred than the marriage of two lesbians who've been in a monogamous, committed relationship for 20 years?

'Cause if it is, I'll need an explanation, please.
If the Dems want to win they won't get drawn into making the election about gay marriage, regardless of the circumstances of Palin's kids' marriages.
toscano is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 09:56 PM   #97
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,395
Local Time: 06:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by toscano View Post
If the Dems want to win they won't get drawn into making the election about gay marriage, regardless of the circumstances of Palin's kids' marriages.


in fairness, it was the Republicans who made the 2004 election about that.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 09:59 PM   #98
Refugee
 
toscano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,032
Local Time: 03:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
in fairness, it was the Republicans who made the 2004 election about that.
And my point is that the Dems let them, an unpopular War, a down economy, and they allowed the Republicans to make the election about gay marriage and swift boat.
toscano is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 10:01 PM   #99
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,395
Local Time: 06:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by toscano View Post
And my point is that the Dems let them, an unpopular War, a down economy, and they allowed the Republicans to make the election about gay marriage and swift boat.


i don't disagree.

at least we've progressed in 2008. we'll have marriage equality in CA by the end of the year.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 10:04 PM   #100
Blue Crack Supplier
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,555
Local Time: 03:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
Is this about Obama's parents

and his opposition to same sex marriage ?

Sure. It can be.

But you didn't answer, did you?
__________________

martha 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 05:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×