Vice President Palin

[dave1001 0]

So, I got home from work today and remembered 'oh yeah, McCain was going to announce his VP choice today'. When I read the news I was very much surprised, I did not expect the republican VP candidate to look like this at all:

 

 

I'm curious now, what does everyone else think of this?

 

I have mixed reactions myself. It's pure stagecraft, but it's so well done I cannot help but consider it awesome. Also MILF, etc. Only problem is that her actual experience and views are questionable - but this election is continually getting further and further detached from the question of 'who would be better to run the country?' than ever, not that the real issues have ever been a focus... Meh. I still think McCain-Palin would be preferable to Obama-Biden if only because in the former the chief of executive of the country would have more real experience in the world and in politics than the latter, and I don't really care 100% for the policies endorsed by either side.

[Windows V 0]

Whatever the case, there is literally no excuse not to vote for president this year.

[IconOfEvi 0]

Basically, every side is in the negatives, except for McCain now, who is slightly less in the negatives, who chose a conservative milf (don't let her son catch me saying that :ph34r:). But still, basically, McCain also shot himself in the foot with this, like he has done so many times before. Except now it is irrevocably shot. His main strong point, that he is experienced, is now compromised. I mean, hell my male side is cheering that he chose her (and she doth look very good), but my rational side is basically saying, the road hath been paved for Obama now. Which is a very very bad thing. Before, it looked like Obama was gonna def win this...now it seems there is nothing stopping him.

 

And I agree with dave - when your 'right wing' candidate is basically the same as the 'left wing' one except he overtly promises endless war and illegal immigration (as opposed to Obama's covertly) (Fight The World, Invite The World). Oh, and job losses. This has gotta be a first.

 

And I couldn't disagree more Windows V - when the candidates are this lame as hell, they make me want to vote for Bush, instead of facing either of these nincompoops. It's basically Bush III or Carter II, except with neither of both's good stuff (admittedly, Carter was a little weak in the 'good stuff' dept), and their horrible qualities magnified a hundred fold. Basically, unless my opinion changes magically by voting day, my op is the same as it has been since the start of this farce in 2006 - I'm just voting for every other position and policy on the ballot. No way I'm throwing these asshats a vote.

[Windows V 0]

I disagree with your avatar.

[IconOfEvi 0]

 

You don't like Katrana Prestor :(?

 

 

[Kaiser_Smeghead 0]

This has got to be the biggest political gimmick ever. Its so easy to tell that McCain is trying to siphon off the crazy former hillary clinton supporters from joining Obama's camp, but I doubt that is going to happen since this Palin lady doesn't have nearly the experience that Hillary did, plus Palin is apparently highly conservative when it comes to things like abortion.

[Windows V 0]

You don't like Katrana Prestor sad.gif?

 

Woah, I couldn't even tell that was a chick from looking at your avatar. She looks all beastly. No offence to whoever drew that, the rest of the family looks nice.

 

This has got to be the biggest political gimmick ever. Its so easy to tell that McCain is trying to siphon off the crazy former hillary clinton supporters from joining Obama's camp, but I doubt that is going to happen since this Palin lady doesn't have nearly the experience that Hillary did, plus Palin is apparently highly conservative when it comes to things like abortion.

 

Well, yeah, choosing the vice-presidential nominee has always been about balancing the ticket, since the VP does......nothing. (Which makes it all the more hilarious when you hear Palin talk about breaking the glass ceiling.)

Edited August 30, 2008 by Windows V

[IconOfEvi 0]

Well if McCain kicks the bucket, she breaks the ceiling, neh?

 

She looks all beastly

Erm...nevermind. Any WoW players here care to explain :)?

[Andre27 0]

I think it may actually make this election interesting.

 

Obama was hyped: the first black president, smooth talker, wants reforms, very little to no experience foreign affairs.

Obama's running mate (forgot the name): more conservative, but well versed in foreign affairs.

 

McCain: experienced, for a republican on the left side, pretty old.

Palin: female, known as a reformer, from her work as governor a hands-on approach, little experience in foreign affairs.

 

Both sides will appeal to certain interest groups.

 

From what i've seen Obama promises a lot, but doesn't have a solid basis to support that financially. Obama will probably try to dump a lot of issues on the EU plate.

 

I don't think that the solutions presented by McCain are the way to solve the US domestic crisis, but his ideas for foreign affairs seems more solid than Obama's.

 

I'll get some sleep first and rant some more tomorrow.

[Korona 0]

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas...4251235557.html

 

I thought that this analysis was very good.

 

 

I am also pretty clueless about why anyone doesn't like Obama. He is a real nice change from the small minded retards you see throughout US politics. They seem like interlectual adolescents next to Obama. Probably because that's what they are...

[IconOfEvi 0]

I am also pretty clueless about why anyone doesn't like Obama. He is a real nice change from the small minded retards you see throughout US politics. They seem like interlectual adolescents next to Obama. Probably because that's what they are...

This harkens back to what I said about him being the world's candidate, not ours...

 

From what i've seen Obama promises a lot, but doesn't have a solid basis to support that financially.

Wait from what way are you saying that? Are you saying policy wise, he's promising a lot but won't actually be able to deliver? (I think that's what you meant, in which case you're right) Or are you saying candidate wise, he doesn't have as good a financial base as McCain because he's so progressive? Because if its the latter, I must deign to tell you that he is absolutley loaded, flush with wads and wads of cash, and it mostly from fat cat bribes donations.

[Andre27 0]

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas...4251235557.html

 

I thought that this analysis was very good.

 

 

I am also pretty clueless about why anyone doesn't like Obama. He is a real nice change from the small minded retards you see throughout US politics. They seem like interlectual adolescents next to Obama. Probably because that's what they are...

 

He's too cocky, a know-it -all.

 

I am also pretty clueless about why anyone doesn't like Obama. He is a real nice change from the small minded retards you see throughout US politics. They seem like interlectual adolescents next to Obama. Probably because that's what they are...

This harkens back to what I said about him being the world's candidate, not ours...

 

From what i've seen Obama promises a lot, but doesn't have a solid basis to support that financially.

Wait from what way are you saying that? Are you saying policy wise, he's promising a lot but won't actually be able to deliver? (I think that's what you meant, in which case you're right) Or are you saying candidate wise, he doesn't have as good a financial base as McCain because he's so progressive? Because if its the latter, I must deign to tell you that he is absolutely loaded, flush with wads and wads of cash, and it mostly from fat cat bribes donations.

 

I was referring to the former.

 

 

[Korona 0]

What has he said that is cockey Andre? Is it something he said or just this mysterious "aura" people seem to get off him? I got the opposite impression from him. He seems pretty humble, constantly willing to listen to hecklers, to downplay his own role in his campaign, to praise his campaign team and his supporters. I think that people confuse having the courage of your convictions with being cocky. Believing in what you say is surely a prerequisite for any decent politician? How can it be a character flaw?

 

 

The idea that he couldn't deliver social reform in the richest country in the world in nonsense. Socialised healthcare for example, just about every other western nation seems to afford it, why not the US?

 

I see a lot of the "he's the worlds candidate, not ours" type rubbish, and it sounds like xenophobic sour grapes to me. If I lived in a country as hated internationally as the US I would be pretty excited that there was a candidate who could repair all those broken bridges. I don't see a saber rattling hawk like McCain appealing to the rest of the world in quite the same way...

I appreciate that a lot of USians don't like him but it's seems to be based on hyper-cynicism.

[Torlek 0]

The idea that he couldn't deliver social reform in the richest country in the world in nonsense. Socialised healthcare for example, just about every other western nation seems to afford it, why not the US?

Probably because we have over 3 times the population of any other western nation. Direct costs may only grow at a linear rate but the cost of the bureaucracy to keep track of it all would grow at an exponential rate. Plus the people here are already blase enough about their health. If we gave them the notion that daddy government would take care of it all for them free of charge our rate of preventable chronic health problems would skyrocket.

 

I see a lot of the "he's the worlds candidate, not ours" type rubbish, and it sounds like xenophobic sour grapes to me. If I lived in a country as hated internationally as the US I would be pretty excited that there was a candidate who could repair all those broken bridges. I don't see a saber rattling hawk like McCain appealing to the rest of the world in quite the same way...

I appreciate that a lot of USians don't like him but it's seems to be based on hyper-cynicism.

Part of the problem people have with people like you approving of Obama is demonstrated in you using the incorrect term USians to describe us, they feel you threaten our identity and if you approve of the candidate he must threaten our identity too. We always seem to have a greater proportion of stupid people who want to speak their mind.

[Korona 0]

Explain to me how a beurocracy grows exponentially as population expands? If anything the reverse is true. Economies of scale would drive down costs. The arguements against universal heathcare are disproven by 60 years of the NHS. If just about every other Western country can do it, the US certainly can.

 

As for the second point... you are joking right? Are people in the US really that insecure?

[IconOfEvi 0]

The idea that he couldn't deliver social reform in the richest country in the world in nonsense. Socialised healthcare for example, just about every other western nation seems to afford it, why not the US?

Besides the fact they can't afford it and are borrowing against debt to afford the promises of the demagogues because of delusion, so will we. Hell, in 2007, we spent...one second...~US$1,257,000,000,000 of a ~US$2,800,000,000,000 budget on Social Security (586.1 billion), Medicare (394.5 billion), and Medicaid (276.4 billion) alone. Thats about half, correct? AND WE DON'T EVEN HAVE SOCIALIZED HEALTH CARE. Thats not counting things like Veteran Benefits (which should be high, admittedly. But, as per usual government bureaucracies, it is terribly mismanaged, in a supreme understatement). For retrospect purposes, the Defense Dept got US$548.8 billion, FOR EVERYTHING. And that INCLUDES basing forces around the world, especially in and around said industrialized countries, which in turn allows them to spend and expend very little on defense and the military (in financial terms or otherwise) and thus bring on the nanny state!

 

The arguements against universal heathcare are disproven by 60 years of the NHS

If thats all you can get from 60 years of that festering wound (pun unintended), then thank God we don't have socialized healthcare here.

 

As for the second point... you are joking right? Are people in the US really that insecure?

EDIT - the following is a rant.

 

While I divest heartily from McCain's philosiphy, why would I want to repair the so called broken bridges of the world? To repair the bridges, you have to ask how they we're broken. And for that, much of that hatred, that Ameriophobia can go back to the Second Gulf War, despite the fact much of the world participated in the conflict too. The (Western) world hates American hegemony. The Second Gulf War reminds of deeper wounds in the Western psyche, namely that they hate how America reminds them of a time when they we're strong and didn't have to be subservient (in a sense) to someone else, when they we're the top of their world and ruled the nations of the world, when they we're the world. And so I say...cry me a river. Keep the stupid bridges blown forever, for all I care. For all its faults and how disagreeable it is, US hegemony has been better than any other that has been, and will likely be so for the future evermore.

Edited September 1, 2008 by IconOfEvi

[dave1001 0]

Speaking of idiots who open their mouths, I have a few things to say:

 

Why doesn't the US have socialized health care? Population size is probably the biggest reason we don't. If our government was producing successes in smaller ventures such as medicare or the veteran's administration the idea might be more appealing to the majority of the population, but those programs have major failings and when medical care is actually provided it's sub-standard in comparison with the private medical industry. If you give someone ten dollars to invest wisely and they squander it, you're not going to repeat the experiment by giving them one hundred dollars. And as Icon correctly points out, the existing programs are also headed towards financial failure even without adding anything more.

 

As far as why Americans get upset by Europeans commenting on our politics, it's just annoying. People from Europe do not live here, are not citizens, do not get a say in our political process, and don't have to deal with the results of our process in the same way - so why do they feel a need to comment on what is exclusively our business? Sure, the results of the election here will have a great impact on the rest of the world, but the election is not about how the US should behave relative to other nations, it's about US citizens choosing the best leader to advance the interests of the USA. When people from other countries comment on our politics they tend to miss that, and make comments that are all the more irritating for not really being applicable to the election from our perspective.

 

Finally, Icon - strong opinions are great, ranting posts are not.

[Rattuskid 0]

I'll get some sleep first and rant some more tomorrow.

 

I thought you were the one who adamantly didn't give two shakes of a shit about American politics? I liked that Andre better, at least he didn't try to fluff things he knew next to nothing about.

 

Are you saying policy wise, he's promising a lot but won't actually be able to deliver?

 

I've told someone else this, but here goes again.

 

I'd rather vote for someone who promises me things I love and who will never deliver on them than someone who promises me things I can't stand and makes good on every goddamn one.

 

 

Edited September 1, 2008 by Rattuskid

[IconOfEvi 0]

promises me things I love

Tits and beer?

 

promises me things I can't stand and makes good on every goddamn one.

Sadly...you're probably right on this one >_<. I have no doubt McCain will make good on his statements that the industrial jobs will ever come back and endless war. And he's probably going to fuck Iraq up too, landing us there for 100 years. If anything, he means to extend bases (empire) there, that is no doubt.

 

The two are so similar on so many aspects, I dunno how I can justify voting for one over the other. Basically, its a matter of one candidate being covert about the plan (and then accidentally slipping) or being overt about the plan (and then trying to backtrack). AND THE PLAN IS SAME FOR THEM. A good example is the NAFTA debacle. While McCain had nothing but praise for the equivalent of the AIDS virus of the United State's economy, Obama pretended he'd revise it (note he never said scrap) it, and then spokesmen were secretly caught telling Canada he won't touch it when in office.

Edited September 1, 2008 by IconOfEvi

[IconOfEvi 0]

And this is why you don't pick someone purely to shore up your moral failings. i lold irl.

 

 

[Count von Phoib 0]

Continue here.