Kelly the Dog Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 Why would the governor of a state spend a whole lot of time on International Policy? You up for a job on MSNBC? Because she is an American citizen? The question asked of her was whether she was in favor of the surge or not. She said she didn't know, she hadn't thought about Iraq. She heard that there was "some deployment" on the news. And then said she blinded supported whatever the President did. It was embarrassing, IMO. I am not knocking the fact that she wasn't meeting with world leaders, she really wasn't even following what was going on in the world.
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 I wonder if John borrowed of those little blue pills from Bob Dole Viva Viagra
Alaska Darin Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 Because she is an American citizen? The question asked of her was whether she was in favor of the surge or not. She said she didn't know, she hadn't thought about Iraq. She heard that there was "some deployment" on the news. And then said she blinded supported whatever the President did. It was embarrassing, IMO. I am not knocking the fact that she wasn't meeting with world leaders, she really wasn't even following what was going on in the world. So the Chief Executive of a state that's got huge issues to deal with wasn't wasting time following international issues and said she supported the President's decision? You think maybe she was prioritizing on what was important to her job/day-to-day life? Nah. She's just unqualified for the job but two guys who've never done ANYTHING in ANY Executive Position are gonna do just swell. You know, because they've spent time in the Beltway shaking hands and kissing babies.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 Nah, instead you'll support someone who clings to socialism and pandering. You're way better than those people. That has zero to do with the equation or what we were talking about here. Thanks for playing as you would say. I said there that I surely approve of Christians and any religious person being part of national politics, and I surely approve of people from small towns being part of national politics, and I surely approve of people who support the right to bear arms as being part of national politics. What I don't approve of is someone who "clings to their Bible". That's it. Yeah, because population is what everything is about. There are almost no challenges in Alaska that are like the rest of America because we have so few people and everything here is obviously a really simple undertaking. But Governor Palin is the ignorant one, right Pete? Got any other really bankrupt arguments filled with soundbytes for us? And throughout American history, the most complete answer to the question of "What exactly does a VP do?" is: Not a whole hell of a lot. But you keep clinging to that cheerleader thing you've got going with Obama/Biden. Because they're way different than the rest of the Washington bureaucrats. I am not badmouthing the state of Alaska. I have great feelings about Alaska and have close relatives who were born there and live there. I think being governor of a state that has 670,000 for a year and a half is a nice start on experience. I don't think it's the same as being governor of a much bigger state. I would have said the exact same thing about someone even from Delaware like Biden is or Rhode Island or South Dakota. Being governor of a state like that for only a year and a half with ZERO foreign policy experience to me does not make you qualified to be President. And yes, I know all about Obama's experience or lack thereof.
BuffaloBorn1960 Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 I surely think people from small towns with strong religious foundations and fervent support for the second amendment should have a place in national politics. I'm not sure about clinging to their Bibles, no. I don't think someone clinging to their Bibles should be VP. I also don't think that ANYONE that is a journalism major, and has had a year and a half of governorship of a state with 670,000 people in it, which would be the 17th largest city in the US, should be in the most important position in the entire world. And for the candidate for that position to say she is the most qualified person for it, which he just did. A person, Palin, who said flat out, "I haven't thought much about Iraq". A person who six weeks ago, said "What exactly does the VP do?" Yes.. much better to rely on a state legislator, who through the political machine and general incompetence of the candidates he oppsosed wins election to the senate.... He then immediately begins his run for the presidency instead of working for the people that elected him... and when he does show... up he votes left of Ted Kennedy... Yeah he would be my choice for president.. lol at least Pallin has run a small town, a business, and a state ....no matter how small it may be (population) or how great its land mass... Lets get a chance to know the fair lady before we bash her on superfical judgements...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 So the Chief Executive of a state that's got huge issues to deal with wasn't wasting time following international issues and said she supported the President's decision? You think maybe she was prioritizing on what was important to her job/day-to-day life? Nah. She's just unqualified for the job but two guys who've never done ANYTHING in ANY Executive Position are gonna do just swell. You know, because they've spent time in the Beltway shaking hands and kissing babies. Now you are denegrating OBama and Biden's experience, not much different then McCain's experience politically. That being said her response was lacking because she probably was trying to be a team player, may personally disagree with some of Iraq from what I have read and was not going to say anything not according to script. Problem is it came off sounding niave. Once again, a politician unwilling to show a spine in the face of a difficult if not potentially embarrassing question. A better response could have been that I have had some concerns about Iraq, but obviously not been directly involved in FP decisions and as VP will defer to John McCain as part of his team. I will make my views known to him in an appropriate manner.
Alaska Darin Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 That has zero to do with the equation or what we were talking about here. Thanks for playing as you would say. I said there that I surely approve of Christians and any religious person being part of national politics, and I surely approve of people from small towns being part of national politics, and I surely approve of people who support the right to bear arms as being part of national politics. What I don't approve of is someone who "clings to their Bible". That's it. Who exactly "clings to their Bibles"? I am not badmouthing the state of Alaska. I have great feelings about Alaska and have close relatives who were born there and live there. I think being governor of a state that has 670,000 for a year and a half is a nice start on experience. I don't think it's the same as being governor of a much bigger state. I would have said the exact same thing about someone even from Delaware like Biden is or Rhode Island or South Dakota. Being governor of a state like that for only a year and a half with ZERO foreign policy experience to me does not make you qualified to be President. And yes, I know all about Obama's experience or lack thereof. Alaska is likely a more challenging state to run than all but a handful out there. It has all the same issues as any lower 48 state only they're spread out basically from California to New York. But you go ahead and pretend you know what the hell you're talking about and aren't just regurgitating the same stupid soundbytes I've been hearing on the national news from !@#$ers who probably can't find us on the map. Obama has ZERO experience as an Executive but you support him completely because you're a liberal apologist. Welcome to hypocrisy.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 So the Chief Executive of a state that's got huge issues to deal with wasn't wasting time following international issues and said she supported the President's decision? You think maybe she was prioritizing on what was important to her job/day-to-day life? Nah. She's just unqualified for the job but two guys who've never done ANYTHING in ANY Executive Position are gonna do just swell. You know, because they've spent time in the Beltway shaking hands and kissing babies. Talk about tired old beliefs. Fine. Like McCain said, Sarah Palin is the "most qualified person" to become President in the entire country next to John McCain. That is what he just said. And it's backed up by the fact she had better things to worry about than following international issues and blindly following President Bush.
Alaska Darin Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 Now you are denegrating OBama and Biden's experience, not much different then McCain's experience politically. Wrong. McCain has been a leader of men. I don't want anyone to misunderstand that as an endorsement because John McCain makes me ill. That being said her response was lacking because she probably was trying to be a team player, may personally disagree with some of Iraq from what I have read and was not going to say anything not according to script. Problem is it came off sounding niave. Once again, a politician unwilling to show a spine in the face of a difficult if not potentially embarrassing question. Welcome to the media age, where no one is allowed to say "I don't know."
JK2000 Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 Who exactly "clings to their Bibles"? Alaska is likely a more challenging state to run than all but a handful out there. It has all the same issues as any lower 48 state only they're spread out basically from California to New York. But you go ahead and pretend you know what the hell you're talking about and aren't just regurgitating the same stupid soundbytes I've been hearing on the national news from !@#$ers who probably can't find us on the map. Obama has ZERO experience as an Executive but you support him completely because you're a liberal apologist. Welcome to hypocrisy. Hahahahaha, so the fact that Palin has to drive a little further than most governors gives her extra "executive experience"? You know school superintendants and 7-11 owners have "executive experience" as well. I'm surprised you haven't pulled the "Palin has foreign policy expertise because her state is near Alaska" card.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 Who exactly "clings to their Bibles"? I was responding to another posters post. Pardon me if I prefer someone who has thought about what is going on in the world. Maybe it's me.
Alaska Darin Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 Talk about tired old beliefs. Fine. Like McCain said, Sarah Palin is the "most qualified person" to become President in the entire country next to John McCain. That is what he just said. And it's backed up by the fact she had better things to worry about than following international issues and blindly following President Bush. When did you start believing anything John McCain said? I'm sure Sarah Palin is devastated that she isn't the silver-tongued devil she needs to be to get your vote, as if it would be available to someone who "clings so tightly to her Bible". Riddle me this: Is there a human being on the planet that John McCain could have chosen that would've caused you to even think twice about voting for Mr. Obama? Yeah, didn't think so.
Alaska Darin Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 I was responding to another posters post. Pardon me if I prefer someone who has thought about what is going on in the world. Maybe it's me. Yeah, as if your standard is actually that lofty. Now go vote for Senator "Do Nothing"/Senator "Know Nothing". Pretend all the while that Biden didn't call John McCain his hero, didn't vote for the war, voted against the surge, and has stepped on his dick more time than John Holmes. Just remember you're getting what you deserve.
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 Wrong. McCain has been a leader of men. I don't want anyone to misunderstand that as an endorsement because John McCain makes me ill. A leader of men? When? He was a fly boy. Those guys tend to be arrogant maverick pricks. It makes them good at what they do, but not leaders. My dad was a frogman and ordinance explosive expert during the time McCain served. My Dad served his team was a leader of Men. Yes, during the time McCain was a POW, where he served his fellow prisoners admirably, but calling him a "leader of men" a opposed to Obama a community organizer in the Southside ghettos of Chicago is a stretch. "Leader of Men" What is that suppose to mean?
BuffaloBorn1960 Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 What has that got to do with political leadership. I know many executives and businessmen who couldn't/can't handle the give and take of politics. You have to have a thick skin, a quiet ego and an even temper. Something hard for anyone to be able to handle. Being a good businessman means you take the bull by the horns and go after it. In politics you have to bring everyone along with you and those that disagree with you, you make sure they stay even closer, giving all praise and credit when it was your idea in the first place. How about the same for McCain and Palin. McCain did PR work for his father-in-law and Palin was a soccer mom before getting politically involved. Not that there is anything wrong with either. All were involved in Politics early in their careers and I believe that at least is a better qualifier for President... working with people. Wow... so who is the candiate for change.??.. the one that goes along to get along.... or the one that has challenged the status qou of their party?... brilliant I'll take the POW/Soccer mom ticket over the Opportunist/Carrer polititian ticket..
justnzane Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 Why would the governor of a state spend a whole lot of time on International Policy? You up for a job on MSNBC? Ok, true a governor doesn't need to know a whole lot about International Policy. That is unless your state borders another country or two, and you are running for the second highest executive position in the country. Let's vote for a candidate that doesn't know what her job responsibilties are
Alaska Darin Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 A leader of men? When? He was a fly boy. Those guys tend to be arrogant maverick pricks. It makes them good at what they do, but not leaders. My dad was a frogman and ordinance explosive expert during the time McCain served. My Dad served his team was a leader of Men. Yes, during the time McCain was a POW, where he served his fellow prisoners admirably, but calling him a "leader of men" a opposed to Obama a community organizer in the Southside ghettos of Chicago is a stretch. ARE YOU !@#$ING KIDDING ME? A "community organizer" against an officer in the United States Navy? Jesus H. !@#$ing Christ where do you people come from? "Leader of Men" What is that suppose to mean? The fact that you have to ask says a lot.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 When did you start believing anything John McCain said? I'm sure Sarah Palin is devastated that she isn't the silver-tongued devil she needs to be to get your vote, as if it would be available to someone who "clings so tightly to her Bible". Riddle me this: Is there a human being on the planet that John McCain could have chosen that would've caused you to even think twice about voting for Mr. Obama? Yeah, didn't think so. Why should I? That's a ridiculous question. This isn't about me voting for McCain because of who he chose for VP. This is about if McCain does win, at 72 years old and a cancer victim, who is qualified to take over at a moment's notice. That, since the country began, has been the top priority for the VP. That is what McCain said himself. Virtually all candidates in history and all historians have said it. I happen to LIKE Sarah Palin a lot (outside of her social stances) which I said right off the bat. I think she has a fabulous future in the Republican party. This is also about the total bullschit that McCain says, and his judgment. I don't want my President winging it and throwing Hail Marys and taking huge political gambles on major decisions. You may, and that's your right.
BuffaloBorn1960 Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 I was responding to another posters post. Pardon me if I prefer someone who has thought about what is going on in the world. Maybe it's me. re read the post and clarify your answers if you like...
JK2000 Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 Wow... so who is the candiate for change.??.. the one that goes along to get along.... or the one that has challenged the status qou of their party?... brilliant I'll take the POW/Soccer mom ticket over the Opportonist/Carrer polititian ticket.. Wow, that's some ticket! I can't believe a McCain supporter would have difficulty with the English language!My advice- Stick to the emoticons.
Recommended Posts