PDA

View Full Version : Surprise! Palin is VP pick for McCain


Gesualdo
08-29-2008, 03:21 PM
So did he pick Sarah Palin as his running mate because she's a woman and he's trying to compete with the Democratic ticket's history-making bid? Or is she actually a smart choice because of her NRA membership and her anti-abortion views, among other things?

McCain Taps Alaska Governor Palin as Vice Presidential Running Mate (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=5684098&page=1)

Ned
08-29-2008, 04:30 PM
I'm going to have to learn about her more, but the thing that stands out to me more than anything else is her lack of experience. If something would happen to McCain, if elected, she would be the President, and her experience in endeavors that would help her lead the country are virtually nil.

At first blush she seems like a "big-time" super lightweight, only chosen to counter Obama's minority status by her gender.

Leslie Sanchez says she's, "A strong if unexpected choice. She shares the values of the GOP base while helping McCain anchor down moderate-to-liberal Republican women who might otherwise have flirted with Obama." Having read her statement, I can only ask Sanchez, what have you been smoking?

Pallin's a card carrying lifetime NRA member, an emphatic "Pro Lifer," supports the teaching of creationism in schools, and opposes same-sex marriage. That clearly says she's a right sided religious conservative, and it means she's in there to solidify McCain with the conservative right, period.

Does Sanchez think that moderate-to-liberal Republican women are going to vote for McCain merely because he has a woman on the ticket, despite the fact her philosophy of life and her politics aren't even close to their own? I don't think so. I think, just like the more conservative Democrats are thinking of voting McCain, the more liberal and moderate Republicans, men and women, are thinking Obama. I think both these groups will vote their conscience and vote in their best interest, regardless of what their party affiliation reads, once they're in the polling booth on election day.

I think that if McCain had really been looking to attract moderate-to-liberal Republican men and women to vote for him, through his pick for Veep, he would have chosen Tom Ridge, someone who is generally conservative, but who's far more moderate than McCain. After all, Pallin is far more conservative than McCain, and at this point in time, that's not easy to pull off.

Gesualdo
08-29-2008, 04:40 PM
She herself in an interview with the media, upon being asked about her opinion about being considered for the VP slot, blew it off. She didn't think she could possibly be in the running for VP "this time around." Hmmm...

Loonbeam
08-29-2008, 05:05 PM
As I have said on other venues, there may be depths here we haven't seen yet. She will draw some identity voters, those with no hard party affiliations but who vote on the basis of gender (and I know at least one of those who freely admits she doesn't give a carp about Republican or Democrat, she just wants women in high office. I may not agree with her but that is her right).

She's definitely a big hit among what are defined as Republican Conservatives nowadays (as opposed to just Conservatives, which are a different breed). Anti-abortion, pro-gun, anti-gay marriage and civil unions).

I think the experience card will be more of a liability for the Democrats (although not as much as it was), because they can still say there is only a chance she will become president, with Obama, he's first in line.

Ned
08-29-2008, 05:37 PM
Here's an interesting quote from Paul Begala, a former counselor to Bill Clinton when he was in the White House, which rings true for me at this point.

For months, the McCainiacs have said they will run on his judgment and experience. In his first presidential decision, John McCain has shown that he is willing to endanger his country, potentially leaving it in the hands of someone who simply has no business being a heartbeat away from the most powerful, complicated, difficult job in human history.I'm starting to think that McCain might have pushed me over the edge to vote for Obama, who I really don't like, with his choice for Veep.

jfrenaye
08-29-2008, 06:12 PM
I am not so sure Ned. I too need to learn some more about her, but the dems also have the inexperience going for them but as the elected president.

They seem equally politically qualified (Obama and Palin)

As to Belaga comment, honestly the turnover of a president is not so much a single person but a team. If McCain decides to form his cabinet now (say offeing state to Lieberman, Defenser to Ridge, etc) the voters will be much more confident in the VP selection. The odds of McCain having to "pass the torch" are consideraby less than Obama I believe. And while Biden has a lot of experience, I am not so sure he is qualified for President either--grantred more qualified than Palin

Ned
08-29-2008, 07:41 PM
I'm with you on the team concept, to a point, but the one thing I don't understand about your statement is, "The odds of McCain having to "pass the torch" are consideraby less than Obama I believe."

Are you expecting an assassination attempt on Obama if elected. McCain is not a young man, and has already had numerous medical problems. My thinking is the other way around. Would you elucidate us.

I will tell you the thing I keep getting back to in deciding for whom to vote is the Supreme Court. I'm petrified, at this point, over who McCain would appoint, considering he has said he'd keep up the current move to the conservative side that Bush has started. I think the Bush (both of them) appointees have been a disaster for the country.

I am not so sure Ned. I too need to learn some more about her, but the dems also have the inexperience going for them but as the elected president.

They seem equally politically qualified (Obama and Palin)

As to Belaga comment, honestly the turnover of a president is not so much a single person but a team. If McCain decides to form his cabinet now (say offeing state to Lieberman, Defenser to Ridge, etc) the voters will be much more confident in the VP selection. The odds of McCain having to "pass the torch" are consideraby less than Obama I believe. And while Biden has a lot of experience, I am not so sure he is qualified for President either--grantred more qualified than Palin

jfrenaye
08-29-2008, 07:49 PM
As wrong as it is, I truly do not believe that the US is ready for a black president and there likely will be an assasination attempt or success at some point.

I know it has been a few years, but back in 1988 1989 1990 (ish), Colin and Alma Powell had Thanksgiving with my family up at my uncle's place in PA and the discussion of him possibly running for president one day came up and Alma said he would do it as a single man because she refused to go down in history known as the widow of the first black president. That was powerful back then

But I can tell you that in my little burb down there there is an active chapter of the KKK. It is disgraceful but I truly believe that there are enough people out there that are so racist that there will be some person to make an attempt.

Ned
08-29-2008, 08:40 PM
I don't know that there will be an assassination attempt if Obama is President, however, here in PA, like in your home state of MD, the KKK has been growing in recent years. According to the news media, the KKK has been growing faster in MD, PA, and NY than any other states in the country, while continuing to be centered in the South. Since 2000, the KKK has gain strength in Iowa and Nebraska, though generally in the Plains they have been weak, according to the ADL.

I've been giving the question of whether or not the country is ready for an African American President for some time. I'm sure of this, it's much more ready for that, than a Jewish President, much more ready.

While I think there are wide swaths of the country absolutely not ready to vote for an African American for President, I think they are mostly in the "Red" states. I think that there are battleground states which have been blue states, or flip-flop states, however, were bigotry will be more of a problem for Obama than the issues. I see these states as Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West VA, Missouri, Arkansas and Nevada.

That being said, I've been doing some reading about Pallin this evening, both on Elephant and Donkey sites on the Internet, and am quickly coming to the conclusion that I'm going to follow Hillary Clinton's advice given in Denver.

I'm definitely not for Obama. There's very little to like about him for me, and I don't think he will give any support to Israel, an important issue for me, unless forced to by Congress or circumstance, yet I'm definitely not for a Presidential candidate who's not pro-choice, not pro civil rights for all Americans, not for restoring the checks and balances of the federal government, not for ending all the unnecessary secrecy, not willing to admit where the real problems of world terrorism are located, not willing to look at the economic reality of the country, who thinks more oil drilling is the long term answer to our energy/environment problems, who thinks bio-fuels are a substantial part of the answer and not solar, geothermal, wind and nuclear, who thinks that using the military isn't the choice of last resort, etc., etc., etc., and that's McCain in my book.

Hillary suggested "No way McCain." I'm quickly coming to that conclusion myself.

As wrong as it is, I truly do not believe that the US is ready for a black president and there likely will be an assasination attempt or success at some point.

I know it has been a few years, but back in 1988 1989 1990 (ish), Colin and Alma Powell had Thanksgiving with my family up at my uncle's place in PA and the discussion of him possibly running for president one day came up and Alma said he would do it as a single man because she refused to go down in history known as the widow of the first black president. That was powerful back then

But I can tell you that in my little burb down there there is an active chapter of the KKK. It is disgraceful but I truly believe that there are enough people out there that are so racist that there will be some person to make an attempt.

CruiseExpert
08-29-2008, 08:45 PM
It will be interesting to see how the votes go.

deangreenhoe
08-29-2008, 09:22 PM
Here's an interesting quote from Paul Begala, a former counselor to Bill Clinton when he was in the White House, which rings true for me at this point.

I'm starting to think that McCain might have pushed me over the edge to vote for Obama, who I really don't like, with his choice for Veep.

I don't even have to think twice about this one. Anyone who bases their core beliefs on exclusion as opposed to inclusion and is more about limiting freedoms of choice (you get my drift) based on their own personal beliefs while discounting others? Pfft. In my opinion she's Charlton Heston in drag.

Ned
08-29-2008, 09:34 PM
I'm officially in on the Obama bandwagon after the choice of Palin.

That being said, Deeno, your line "She's Charlton Heston in drag" is the best line I've read this year.

(Have some rep for that one.)


I don't even have to think twice about this one. Anyone who bases their core beliefs on exclusion as opposed to inclusion and is more about limiting freedoms of choice (you get my drift) based on their own personal beliefs while discounting others? Pfft. In my opinion she's Charlton Heston in drag.

Ships 'N' Trips Travel
08-29-2008, 11:10 PM
In my opinion she's Charlton Heston in drag.
That's a good one. ;)

So, I got my degree in political science ... every four years I'm in heaven. :D I watch both conventions and all the debates (sick puppy huh?) and I eat it up.

I think McCain was shrewd in picking Palin. He's walking all over Obama's convention bump. Not one word this morning about Obama's exceptance speech last night ... it was wall-to-wall coverage about Palin (and about how the pundits got caught with their pants down....no one expected it to be her). McCain did what Obama didn't do ... he picked a woman as his running mate. He also picked a VP that the party conservatives can be satisfied with (not sure I'd say "happy" but they'll be happier about her than McCain). One of the party fears was that the conservatives would stay home Nov 4th (no fear they'd vote Obama, but not voting at all would hurt too). This may bring them to the polls to vote for McCain (holding their noses as they do it). McCain did somewhat shoot down his argument about Obama being inexperienced (Palin is just as inexperienced), yet he now has a "Washington outsider" on his ticket while Obama picked a 30 year senate veteran in Biden. Also if McCain were to die in office before his first term is up, the Republicans will have produced the first woman president in Palin denying Hilary Clinton the chance to try for that first in 2012.

However, I don't think McCain will win over disgruntled Hilary supporters. As she asked at the conventiion, were they campaigning because of her or because they believed in the issues? If it's the issues she said they need to support Obama now. if they were simply campaigning to get a woman in office, issues be damned, those folks may now vote for McCain.

AaronK
08-30-2008, 06:24 AM
Unfortunately our presidential election is again a choice of "the lesser of two evils", not getting a candidate that we would actually be excited about to vote for president....

Kairho
08-30-2008, 07:18 AM
"President Palin"

Think about it.....

mtp51
08-30-2008, 07:55 AM
"President Palin"

Think about it.....

It would be in name only, wouldn't it? Her homies would be running the country.

deangreenhoe
08-30-2008, 08:47 AM
I usually try to stay way on the fringes of political discussions, usually just sit back rather quietly, observe and absorb, but...

...when Palin was announced, something just didn't sit right with me. I knew I should be congratulatory that a woman finally made it onto the ticket in that capacity, in fact would be under normal circumstances. It's something that's long overdue in this country.

I finally figured out what was making me uneasy last night, while listening in on a conversation between some family members who are ultra-conservatives and admittedly what one would term, "fundies."

They were all thrilled about the choice for all the wrong reasons, at least in my mind. First and foremost, they "got" that the pick was designed to appeal to swing voters who would now vote the Republican ticket simply based on the gender of the VP. It was the strategy that was impressing them (and yeah, there was a lot of gloating going on), and nobody seemed to care a lick about Palin's qualifications, other than...

...and here where it gets complicated in my mind. The details about Palin that most excited them were the fact that she was a life-long, gun toting member of the NRA, was an avid hunter (kills and eats Mr. Moose and Mr. Bear), fought to preserve bounty hunting of wolves in Alaska (shot from planes, no less), "births up a whole lot of babies," (a direct quote, please don't blame me for the content), is a staunch opponent of a woman's right to choose, has solidly voted against recognition of same sex couple rights and is hell-bent on opening up ANWR for drilling.

She's an ultra-conservative Bubba's wet dream. Annie Oakley for VP! For those who spit out the words "liberal" and "democrat" as if they were curse words, she's perfect.

But nary a comment or observation about her qualifications for the job, or her position on critical domestic social issues for the betterment of the greater population, other than everyone hopes she'll kick some whimpy, whining liberal ass. :cool:

Granted, this is just one element of the GOP that I'm observing, but I'm not comfortable with their reasons for being thrilled with the choice. I'm not sure if this is the best way to break the "glass ceiling" either. I guess my problem is that I tend to examine motive too much - maybe I over think things a bit.

On the positive side - she's probably less likely to accidentally shoot a fellow hunter in the face with bird shot then the last VP. Bwahahaha.

(Sorry, couldn't resist that last parting shot. ;-)

Kairho
08-30-2008, 09:09 AM
Dean, you've put your finger on it. As I see the overall issue, there are (or should be) two considerations behind the nomination of anyone for either of the two top positions. These are (1) the ability to perform the job (governance), and, (2) the ability to get votes (politics). These can be looked at as a continuum, analogous to the continuum from conservative to moderate to liberal. Things such as gender, ideology, experience, and others traits are incorporated into the continuum.

In a perfect world there would be balance (Peter will be able to bring in the animal lover vote and knows everything about national security and economics).

Unfortunately, just as some voters all but completely ignore one or the other (I like Sam because he is an expert on constitutional law or I like Sam because he is a border collie), candidates are often selected for their location on the continuum.

By observation, the healthiest and sanest place to be is near the middle -- a healthy combination of being able to earn votes and the ability to govern once elected. Too far to one end of the other results in consternation, emasculation, and ridicule. Think about where George Bush and Bill Clinton sit on the continuum; think about the current crop of four.

McCain's error was he went way overboard to the political end of the continuum to the exclusion of governance considerations. That, way more than gender and ideology, is where I see the GOP having trouble this year.

jfrenaye
08-30-2008, 09:32 AM
Should the VP be an elected/nominated position?

Ned
08-30-2008, 09:39 AM
...when Palin was announced, something just didn't sit right with me. I knew I should be congratulatory that a woman finally made it onto the ticket in that capacity, in fact would be under normal circumstances. It's something that's long overdue in this country.

Excuse me Dean, but in 1984, 24 years ago, Walter Mondale chose as his running mate a truly qualified and remarkable woman to be his Vice Presidential running mate, Representative Geraldine Ferraro of New York.

Of Palin's nomination Ms., Ferraro, now principal in the government relations practice of the Blank Rome law firm, perhaps America's most prestigious law firm doing work in the area of government relations, said, "There are a lot of women who are disaffected by how Hillary [Rodham Clinton] was treated during her run in the Democratic primaries. And either way the choice is historic. I've spent a lot of time over the last 24 years saying, 'Gosh, I wish I weren't the only one,'"

I thought one of the comments on the Internet about Palin's nomination, and Ferraro's comment was very close to being perfectly said.

This election is not about McCain or Obama. It is about the American people and what is good for the majority, not the privileged few.

The Democrats nominated Geraldine Ferraro to the ticket 24 years ago and it has taken that long for the Republicans to follow suit. This party is always behind the heartbeat of the majority of Americans. The only change that we can expect from McCain-Palin is a change to the Republican party, which I applaud John McCain for doing. Unfortunately it is too little too late and for the wrong reasons.

Sara Palin is a very pretty woman, she looks great standing next to him and projects a persuasive image, but all that glitters is not gold. Just because you add a woman to the ticket does not mean you should get the female votes. You have to have the person with the qualifications and experience and that was Hillary Clinton.

My vote is with the Obama-Biden ticket because it represents qualifications and experience as well as change for the greater good. Congratulations to John McCain for changing the politics of his party by elevating the status of women and adding Sara Palin to the ticket.

Jehaine
08-30-2008, 10:33 AM
I think I am just going to watch things develop. It is still too early for me to choose anyone.

Sure, Ms Palin might believe those things now, but if she is any sort of politician, she would clarify (temper?) some of her more ultra-conservative views to lure voters.

However, I'm doubtful if she can perform at the national level as a political leader. Initially, I was surprised. Then, when I read about her lack of foreign experience and diplomacy, I think as a VP choice it's terrible. The Vice president Job is not the time to get on-the-job training about foreign affairs. But maybe she has visited other countries as ambassador or diplomat? Will have to do more Googling. :)

Still now that all the candidates are chosen, I hope they all speak a bit more. Both Obama and Biden; and McCain and Palin. Maybe they'll have some plans in mind for how to direct us in the next 4 years.

jfrenaye
08-30-2008, 10:35 AM
I think I am just going to watch things develop. It is still too early for me to choose anyone.

Sure, Ms Palin might believe those things now, but if she is any sort of politician, she would clarify (temper?) some of her more ultra-conservative views to lure voters.

However, I'm doubtful if she can perform at the national level as a political leader. Initially, I was surprised. Then, when I read about her lack of foreign experience and diplomacy, I think as a VP choice it's terrible. The Vice president Job is not the time to get on-the-job training about foreign affairs. But maybe she has visited other countries as ambassador or diplomat? Will have to do more Googling. :)

Still now that all the candidates are chosen, I hope they all speak a bit more. Both Obama and Biden; and McCain and Palin. Maybe they'll have some plans in mind for how to direct us in the next 4 years.
But the Presidency is OK for on the job training? ASk Joe Biden.

Jehaine
08-30-2008, 10:41 AM
No, the Presidency isn't either.


P.S. If anyone has Joe Biden on speed-dial, sure, I'll ask him. ;)

Loonbeam
08-30-2008, 11:18 AM
Obviously, this is being discussed in a number of venues. Especially how this was a strategy to get the Hillary voters. In my opinion, that is not quite right..

Dean (I think) already pointed out this was designed to motivate the base and make sure they come up, a number much bigger than potentially gained from Hillary's camp. On that basis alone, it makes sense.

The fact that she is a woman is designed to target those voters (mostly female) who do not have a party affiliation and who voted for Hillary not as a Democrat but as a female (I know at least one of these). These voters will vote for a female to move to high office because they figure they will be better off with one there than with a man, no matter what. Sadly, most of these voters are ignorant (often by choice) of the actual candidates position. (Case in point, the example mentioned above could not tell me Hillary's positions on energy, the environment, immigration.. more sadly, she didn't want to know).

I'm still debating internally however whether this is any better than voting blindly on party loyalty.

bodega
08-30-2008, 12:12 PM
The fact that she is a woman is designed to target those voters (mostly female) who do not have a party affiliation and who voted for Hillary not as a Democrat but as a female (I know at least one of these). These voters will vote for a female to move to high office because they figure they will be better off with one there than with a man, no matter what. Sadly, most of these voters are ignorant (often by choice) of the actual candidates position. (Case in point, the example mentioned above could not tell me Hillary's positions on energy, the environment, immigration.. more sadly, she didn't want to know).
*****************************************
Well hot damn, those barefooted, prego's who drive the morning carpool only know about birth'n and nothing else attitude is still alive in the 21st century:mad:

I do believe in a woman's intuition and if the woman in your life belived in Hillary, she has her girldar set higher than you could understand:p

Obama's choice of Biden and McCain's choice of Ms. P reaffirms my plan to get to the county office this week to reregister as an undeclared.

deangreenhoe
08-30-2008, 01:54 PM
Excuse me Dean, but in 1984, 24 years ago, Walter Mondale chose as his running mate a truly qualified and remarkable woman to be his Vice Presidential running mate, Representative Geraldine Ferraro of New York.



Yes, I'm aware of that. I was somewhat heavily involved in the Democratic Party at the time, albeit in the Hart camp. I guess I should have been less metaphorical (taking cues from the media hype) and pointed out it's the first woman put into that position in contemporary times, or since Ferraro. I should have said, "I knew I should be congratulatory that a woman made it onto that ticket again in that capacity." It's been a long time in the general scheme of things.

Which is another reason I usually don't discuss politics. Someone is bound to play fact checker on you and post a correction or clarification of nuance in colorful, bold fonts. ;-)

Loonbeam
08-30-2008, 01:57 PM
Ned,

Curious as to your thoughts on this article: http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/08/30/with_biden_and_palin_veeps_gop/

His contention is that Biden (who arguably will be driving a light of foreign policy) is a significant asset on the Jewish vote side of the equation.

Ned
08-30-2008, 03:43 PM
I'm happy to comment.

First, despite many who disagree, the Jewish vote is far from monolithic. We have three major groups inside of Judaism; Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform, and a lessor group in numbers, the Reconstructionists. The differences in points of view between these groups are enormous, about all kinds of social issues.

On the other hand, I think we can safely say, as the article implies, Jews are strongly for the separation of church and state in the US. We believe without it, the minority religions in the country will be seriously damaged. At this point, most Jews are upset with the Bush administration for badly weakening this separation, and believe he has damaged minority religions in the country significantly. There is a great fear of the religious right by Jews, who believe these zealots wish to turn this country from its historic underpinnings of a nation of laws which tolerates and encourages all religions and all forms of worship or non-worship, to a Christian country, and what that would mean for us, which it has never been, despite the utterances of their leadership.

In the article Rosenberg stated that only a minority of Jewish voters base their vote on Israel. Up until a decade ago, I would have agreed with Rosenberg, but I think he hasn't kept up with the times. The State of Israel has become increasingly important in the politics of American Jews, and while for a majority of Jews, it is not a deal breaker, it has substantially risen in importance for Jews, primarily because of a shift in teaching in the Reform, and to a lessor degree the Conservative movements in which it was more important than in the Reform movement in the past. As Israel has become more of a whipping boy in Europe and the 3rd world contingent of nations, American Jewry's awareness of our unique importance to the well being of Israel, in the areas of finance, trade, security and long term survival has skyrocketed.

Today, while the lack of a strong commitment to Israel by a presidential candidate is not a deal breaker to get one's vote, it is a deal breaker to get one's donation, and believe me, the Dems and Obama want Jewish money, which in the past has been close to automatic, and Reps would love to start racking those bucks in and away from the Dems if they can.

With Obama, the door to the vault was barely ajar. His closest advisors have not been seen by the Jewish community at large (there are some exceptions) as pro Israel, and in fact, many are seen as anti-Israel. Obama has a very short, and not a very strong record, concerning Israel, and his willingness to talk directly to Hamas, and other groups Jews consider terrorist organizations is an anathema to most Jews.

With Biden, a long time strong supporter of Israel, and the separation of church and state, Jews see a long time powerful friend. With Biden the door has been opened, however, I believe that while most Jews will eventually decide to vote for Obama-Biden, there is a wait and see attitude concerning money. Jews want to know that Obama is listening to Biden about Israel. At this point we can't be sure he is. If that point comes, Jewish donations to the Obama campaign could easily surpass the record amounts Kerry pulled in 4 years ago, and those are monster dollars.

In addition to a strong unanimity concerning the separation of church and state, Jews are pro-choice with very few exceptions, though to outsiders, many Jews seem to be at least sympathetic to pro-life due to the teaching of Halacha, Jewish law. Halacha is clear. It says that an abortion is only permitted in the case where the mother's life is in danger. What most outsiders don't seem to understand is that the importance of the separation of church and state is just as important, so Jews generally believe Halacha or any religions law, should not be the basis for civil law, and that each person should have the right to choose based on their beliefs and their religious teaching. Jews believe we, the Jewish people, should be following Halacha as we interpret it, but that no one else should be forced to follow our law.

McCain has in the past supported the Discovery Institute, which is trying to supplant the teaching of evolution in the schools with the creationism. Jews believe that G-d created the universe, heaven and earth, yet except in very few quarters Jews also believe that there is no conflict with the teachings of Torah (first five books in the Bible (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy)) and the teaching of evolution. In fact, I would describe it this way; G-d used evolution to create the earth, humans, and everything upon the earth. G-d did it, and G-d's method was not a wave of a hand, but evolution.

One thing that we Jews have come to understand about the Torah is that we don't necessarily fully understand it. For one thing, we have come to reunderstand it over and over again with each rereading after increasing our knowledge of the actual words of the text, and each retranslation. In Judaism the study of Torah is above all else. We believe we learn it throughout our life and really never master it all.

The Dead Sea Scrolls have been instrumental in our better understanding of the ancient text in the 20th and this century, and through its use we have begun to understand more and more Torah. Unfortunately, we can't say the same for many groups of non-Jews who have not moved on with the new knowledge, and are using poorly accomplished translations of translations made centuries ago under rigid political doctrine constraints. We believe that these groups are seriously misunderstanding the text and are therefore are taking inappropriate and harmful actions due to that misunderstanding. We also believe that they have a right to their understanding of the text, but not if they use it to harm others or take away their right to their beliefs.

Where I believe Rosenberg has it right, is his comments about McCain and Palin. Palin has been a strong Pat Buchanan supporter. Jews consider Buchanan an anti-Semite. (I know I do, along with all of my friends, even my Christian friends.) Palin is anti-choice, a creationist and from what I know, and which Rosenberg agrees, has no regard for separation of church and state. She is more conservative than McCain, and far right of him as well, socially, politically, and religiously. That will play well to the religious right, and many in the Republican base, but it has pretty well shut the door on Jewish support and Jewish votes for them.

Based on the choice of Palin, I think in the long run, Obama will garner a larger percentage of the Jewish vote than Kerry got. I think Obama could get as much as 95% of the Jewish vote. If we would vote that way, it would appear that we're monolitic, however, it would be because McCain-Palin stand on the opposite side of the most important issues to Jews, other than Israel.

Ned,

Curious as to your thoughts on this article: http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/08/30/with_biden_and_palin_veeps_gop/

His contention is that Biden (who arguably will be driving a light of foreign policy) is a significant asset on the Jewish vote side of the equation.

Ships 'N' Trips Travel
08-30-2008, 05:29 PM
But the Presidency is OK for on the job training? ASk Joe Biden.

So how much foreign policy experience did these ex-presidents have before entering office? Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and George W Bush?

Ships 'N' Trips Travel
08-30-2008, 05:30 PM
Should the VP be an elected/nominated position?

In the "old days" the VP was the presidential candidate that got the second highest number of votes in the Electoral College....maybe we should go back to that? Although I can't imagine Obama or McCain being too thrilled about being VP to the other. ;)

pezmanffx
08-31-2008, 07:59 AM
Pfft. In my opinion she's Charlton Heston in drag.

That soo made my crappy week better.

Ned
08-31-2008, 08:38 AM
Actually, as governors of states that had a population over 670,000 (2006)
Georgia (9M+), California (36M+), Arkansas (2M+) and Texas (23M+) these states have and had significant individual trade missions and went abroad and interacted with many foreign dignitaries and delegations. It wasn't at the same level, but it sure was a whole lot more than Palin has ever done.

Hell, the Mayor of the City of Philadelphia has more trade experience, and more experience with foreign dignitaries and foreign delegations than Palin.

So how much foreign policy experience did these ex-presidents have before entering office? Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and George W Bush?

Ned
08-31-2008, 08:54 AM
We'd probably go back to the problem we had in the election of 1800. Each of the parties had a secondary candidate who they intended to elect as VP. Under the system in place at the time (Article Two, Section 1, Clause 3), the electors could not differentiate between their two candidates, so the plan had been for one elector to vote for Thomas Jefferson but not for Aaron Burr, thus putting Burr in second place. It didn't work out that way and eventually there was a tie despite the plan. The vote went to the U.S. House of Representatives. After 35 deadlocked ballots, Jefferson finally won on the 36th ballot and Burr became vice president. Burr wasn't exactly a gem as Veep.

In the "old days" the VP was the presidential candidate that got the second highest number of votes in the Electoral College....maybe we should go back to that? Although I can't imagine Obama or McCain being too thrilled about being VP to the other. ;)

greenearth
09-01-2008, 06:22 AM
I'm going to have to learn about her more, but the thing that stands out to me more than anything else is her lack of experience. If something would happen to McCain, if elected, she would be the President, and her experience in endeavors that would help her lead the country are virtually nil.
.
Ahh Ned you have to be careful on what you say about experience. We the dems have been critized for that since Obama has been nominated. And for the dems to start up with that is wrong. It was our chance to say "look you yelled at us for lack of experience and now look at what you have done". But we blew it by saying the same thing in the media.

jfrenaye
09-01-2008, 06:48 AM
I heard a cute saying Alaska: The Nation's Coldest State and the Hottest Governor

Ned
09-01-2008, 09:41 AM
In doing more research on Palin, who makes George W. Bush look like a flaming liberal, I have found even more troubling information.

She has no problem with eliminating the separation of Church and State, and in fact signed a proclamation which declared a week in October 2007 as "Christian Heritage Week" in Alaska. If she also declared a week in November as "Jewish Heritage Week," I'd be four square against that too, not that she's about to do that.

In a gubernatorial debate in 2006 (http://community.adn.com/adn/node/102978), Palin stated that she supports clergy endorsing candidates for office from the pulpit, despite IRS tax-exemption regulations that prohibit all 501(c)(3) organizations from political campaigning.

According to the The Anchorage Daily News (http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/2006/governor/story/8379502p-8274738c.html) she opposes all stem cell research.

According to The Roundtable for Religion and Social Welfare Policy (http://www.religionandsocialpolicy.org/news/article_print.cfm?id=6660) Palin supports Alaska’s Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives (OFBCI) set up by her predecessor in office, and in fact as governor has proposed $1.5 million for State of Alaska "Faith Based Grants."

Clearly, she believes in imposing her religious point of view on others via the government.

Ned
09-01-2008, 09:56 AM
GE, I'm not sure I understand what you mean, but regardless, Obama's experience in matters of foreign policy and politics far exceeds Palin's, but of course, that's easy since she has none. I have more experience with foreign nationals, governments, and have seen more of people of other countries in their native land than Palin.

She didn't even have a passport until last year. She's listed as her foreign travel, Kuwait, Germany and Ireland. She's been out of the US exactly once. She visited US troops who are members of the Alaskan National Guard in Kuwait and Germany, and stopped at Shannon Airport on the way home to shop. That's the total of her foreign travel experience. She's never even gone on a trade mission from her state.

Many will say there is a big difference in the need for foreign policy experience between a person running for president and a person running for vice president. I disagree. As they say, the VP is a heart beat away from being president, and considering the age of McCain, coupled with his health history, that heart beat is not necessarily very far away.

I really don't care if Reps say Obama has no foreign policy experience or not, for me to criticize Palin's lack of the same. Compared to Palin, one can easily say Obama has as much foreign policy experience as Henry Kissinger.

Ahh Ned you have to be careful on what you say about experience. We the dems have been critized for that since Obama has been nominated. And for the dems to start up with that is wrong. It was our chance to say "look you yelled at us for lack of experience and now look at what you have done". But we blew it by saying the same thing in the media.

Loonbeam
09-01-2008, 10:30 AM
The more I find out about her, the more she scares the bejabbers out of me...

I've already gone from voting for Obama, to donating to Obama, to very possibly going and volunteering for Obama just based on her. I don't want her anywhere NEAR the White House!

jfrenaye
09-01-2008, 10:54 AM
Is it fair to be comparing her to Obama? SHe is running for VP he is running for Pres.

Just like the DNC Convention if you noticed it appeared W was running again---McCain-Bush was all you heard.

Faith based grants...I am not sure that is pushing her religious views on anyone, but allowing religious groups the opportunity to apply for and receive state money is appropriate based on the program they are doing. If the Islamic Church of Allah decided to apply for a grant ro help feed the homeless in whatever city, that woudl be a faith based grant. Should they be disqualified merely because they are afilliated with a church?

Loonbeam
09-01-2008, 12:25 PM
Short answer, yes if..

The difference between a faith based grant and a regular is that, in general, it doesn't preclude religious activity as part of the service. To use your example,a s part of that grant the organization in question can require a prayer to Allah prior to getting your food. With the standard govt. food service program, that is not permitted (you can request it, but not make it mandatory).

I'm over-simplifying, but it is an issue of the govt appearing to endorse a specific religion.

Now, I fully agree that there is a difference between running for Pres versus VP (although given McCain's age and health issues not as much as in the past). And Obama's lack of experience (relatively speaking) is a concern to me, honestly moreso than her lack of experience. But during the democratic campaign, he did a lot to show me that he has the necessary skills to lead, the most important of which is know your weaknesses! Recognizing that foreign policy experience is not his strongest suit, he recruited a #2 who is arguably the senate's expert on Foreign Relations and considered one of the top overall in the country on that area.

Leaders are defined by the people they surround themselves with. This is why a good hunk of the bush presidency has been a mess. (Rumsfeld, Brown, Gonzalez, Miers, etc...)

This is where the Bush-McCain comparison comes in. Not only has McCain espoused many of the less successful poilicies of the Bush admin, he is following the same approach, picking his inner circle based on ideological and personal loyalty, as opposed to the right person for the job. There is not one person who I have found who has been able to state the case that Palin was the best choice. She was picked because she was female, and more, because of her hardcore conservative credentials. She does not address any of McCain's weak spots (the economy, most notably).

I am concerned about her getting to the White House. Not because of a lack of experience, but because her apparent views of the direction of the country (more guns, more involvement of religion, more drilling, anti-choice) are 180 degrees opposite than mine, and there is a better than usual chance she will be in a position to impose them.

If you happen to agree with her positions, not only do I urge you to vote for her, I insist on it. That's how the system is supposed to work.

Ned
09-01-2008, 12:58 PM
First, I'd like to say that L's answer is excellent. I just wanted to add a few things.

Is it fair to be comparing her to Obama? SHe is running for VP he is running for Pres.

Absolutely fair, as while she is running for VP, all it would take for her to become president would be a heart attack by John McCain, not unknown for a 72 year old, or a recurrence of his cancer or prostrate problems, or other problems which have been termed "routine interactions" by his doctors, as not being unusual for a man of his age. His age has brought her total lack of credible experience to center stage.

Each person of each pair of people running for President/Vice President need to be capable of being president and running the federal government, because they could be president. US history is full of Vice Presidents becoming President due to assassination, death or resignation of the president.

Let's see:


John Tyler for William Henry Harrison in 1841
Millard Fillmore for Zachary Taylor in 1850
Andrew Johnson for Abraham Lincoln in 1865
Chester Arthur for James Garfield in 1881
Theodore Roosevelt for William McKinley in 1901
Calvin Coolidge for Warren Harding in 1923
Harry Truman for Franklin Roosevelt in 1945
Lyndon Johnson for John Kennedy in 1963
Gerald Ford for Richard Nixon in 1974

Unfortunately look at the quality of some of them because they were running merely to enhance the chances of the ticket, without concern for the quality of the VP candidate. The country can't afford to do that any more.

Just like the DNC Convention if you noticed it appeared W was running again---McCain-Bush was all you heard.

Considering the various positions of McCain, and his voting record, it seems to me that the characterization of McCain as another Bush is not unfair. Hey, listen to the characterizations of Obama. Both sides are free with the rhetoric.

Faith based grants...I am not sure that is pushing her religious views on anyone, but allowing religious groups the opportunity to apply for and receive state money is appropriate based on the program they are doing. If the Islamic Church of Allah decided to apply for a grant ro help feed the homeless in whatever city, that woudl be a faith based grant. Should they be disqualified merely because they are afilliated with a church?

The problem with faith based grants is that the people of faith promote their faith while doing good with the grants, and therefore tax dollars are promoting specific faiths. The recipients of most of these grants are disingenuous about that, saying proselytizing and promotion of faith are not part of their charitable operations which involve government grants, however, I have personally seen that's not so in various Philadelphia religious communities. I would add that my hat's off to the Salvation Army, who is at least honest about it. They make no bones about the fact that "Christianity" is part of everything they do. No one's tax dollars should be a part of that.

Eileen Sellers
09-02-2008, 07:55 AM
Each person of each pair of people running for President/Vice President need to be capable of being president and running the federal government...


I quite agree. So what happens if Biden dies.
Then all we have is a professional campaigner in office.

Kairho
09-02-2008, 08:05 AM
I quite agree. So what happens if Biden dies.
Then all we have is a professional campaigner in office.
...who then gets to nominate a new vice president, subject to confirmation by Congress. Check out your 25th Amendment..

Eileen Sellers
09-02-2008, 05:18 PM
Yes, of course. I understand the legal succession. I was commenting from the point of view of electing a president based on his choice of vice president.

Ned
09-02-2008, 05:30 PM
So Eileen, if I may ask, based on your prior post, you prefer the Veep candidate who makes the mean Moose Stew?

Yes, of course. I understand the legal succession. I was commenting from the point of view of electing a president based on his choice of vice president.

Eileen Sellers
09-02-2008, 07:31 PM
A year or so ago on this board I said that my best hope for the election would be Biden vs. McCain. Of course, that was based on both running for President. In this election there were three people uniquely qualified to become President, they were Hillary Clinton, Joseph Biden, and John McCain. Only John McCain is still running for President.

So on election day each and every American has to choose who is the best candidate to be President. Who can stand alone if all else fails and lead America. Who can stand on their own and do the job. That is the person who should become President.

mtp51
09-02-2008, 07:56 PM
I do not believe that John McCain is capable of "standing on his own" in context to the Presidency. But then many have not been capable. Certainly, W has proven that.

Loonbeam
09-02-2008, 07:59 PM
Now see, regardless of whether I agree with you or not, at least you have conviction and thought behind your choice....

A year or so ago on this board I said that my best hope for the election would be Biden vs. McCain. Of course, that was based on both running for President. In this election there were three people uniquely qualified to become President, they were Hillary Clinton, Joseph Biden, and John McCain. Only John McCain is still running for President.

So on election day each and every American has to choose who is the best candidate to be President. Who can stand alone if all else fails and lead America. Who can stand on their own and do the job. That is the person who should become President.

Ned
09-02-2008, 08:23 PM
I do not believe that John McCain is capable of "standing on his own" in context to the Presidency. But then many have not been capable. Certainly, W has proven that.

You can say that again!

Ships 'N' Trips Travel
09-02-2008, 09:25 PM
I don't think any president should stand alone ... he/she should however be able to surrond him(her)self with a solid group of advisors who have demonstrated strength in their respective arenas (economics, foreign policy, defense, etc.).

Loonbeam
09-02-2008, 10:08 PM
Exactly my point, and this is where McCain (and ok, to a lesser extent Obama in some cases) has really disappointed.

...

Okay, there was a pause in my typing here. I was flipping around AM and picked up a conservative talk radio show. I didn't catch the host, but I suspect it's national. The following is an actual quote of a caller...

"Well of course I will vote for McCain. That way when the old guy dies we'll have someone who believes in the only real god in charge of this country..."

I don't have words.



I don't think any president should stand alone ... he/she should however be able to surrond him(her)self with a solid group of advisors who have demonstrated strength in their respective arenas (economics, foreign policy, defense, etc.).

Kairho
09-03-2008, 07:45 PM
Surprising report from CNN:

Hot mic catches GOP strategists trashing Palin pick (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/03/hot-mic-catches-gop-strategists-trashing-palin-pick/)

September 3, 2008
Posted: 08:15 PM ET

From CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney

(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. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrG8w4bb3kg)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."

Ned
09-03-2008, 09:06 PM
Ah the stupidity of those who always assume. :p

Thanks for the report K., I missed it.

Ned
09-04-2008, 10:45 AM
A picture is truly worth a thousand words. Of course, I'll be she shoots straighter than Cheney.

Gesualdo
09-04-2008, 10:53 AM
A picture is truly worth a thousand words. Of course, I'll be she shoots straighter than Cheney.



Funny! That's a fake photo, BTW.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/palin.asp

Ned
09-04-2008, 10:55 AM
Funny! That's a fake photo, BTW.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/palin.asp

Yep, that's right, but it is funny and I thought we hit the point in this thread where levity was more important than the facts.

Gesualdo
09-04-2008, 10:59 AM
Yep, that's right, but it is funny and I thought we hit the point in this thread where levity was more important than the facts.

I figured you knew. Wanted to make sure no one else thought it was real.

Eileen Sellers
09-04-2008, 08:38 PM
... thought we hit the point in this thread where levity was more important than the facts.


That's the foundation of all religions.

Ned
09-04-2008, 11:08 PM
Eileen, sometimes your non-sequiturs are positively mystifying, and this is one of those times.

That's the foundation of all religions.

Eileen Sellers
09-05-2008, 07:20 AM
I know...a bit of thread fatigue set in. I got thinking about magicians illusion of levity.."false levity"..seeing is beliving and all that..anyway just a bit of failed humor. If we are very, very lucky in life, something we believe will actually be true. Catch you on another topic.

Ned
09-05-2008, 07:34 AM
I know the feeling, plus, for me, I'm normally not good at humor, making that is. Have a great weekend.

I know...a bit of thread fatigue set in. I got thinking about magicians illusion of levity.."false levity"..seeing is beliving and all that..anyway just a bit of failed humor. If we are very, very lucky in life, something we believe will actually be true. Catch you on another topic.

vacationagent
09-11-2008, 11:49 AM
I'm happy to comment.

First, despite many who disagree, the Jewish vote is far from monolithic. We have three major groups inside of Judaism; Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform, and a lessor group in numbers, the Reconstructionists. The differences in points of view between these groups are enormous, about all kinds of social issues...




I realize I am way behind here as I am just reading this thread today but I want to thank you for such an interesting post and for sharing your insight with us. (For the sake of brevity I have deleted most of the quote but I am referring to the entire post.)

Ned
09-11-2008, 05:18 PM
It was my pleasure.

I realize I am way behind here as I am just reading this thread today but I want to thank you for such an interesting post and for sharing your insight with us. (For the sake of brevity I have deleted most of the quote but I am referring to the entire post.)

Loonbeam
09-13-2008, 11:16 PM
I'm trying very hard not to post every article I see out there, but this one came from the NY Times, which is generally pretty good at vetting their sources.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?hp=&adxnnl=1&pagewanted=all&adxnnlx=1221365543-/8jGBc63nO87jfNVNdfXUA

I read this, and all I could think of was how much she sounded like the current White House occupant and his henchman combined...

jfrenaye
09-14-2008, 08:32 AM
OMG was Tina Fey spot on last night on SNL or what?

mtp51
09-14-2008, 08:38 AM
OMG was Tina Fey spot on last night on SNL or what?

Yes - she was just perfect!! That was the only skit worth watching. The rest of the show sucked. Michael Phelps was anything but funny. Not that he has to be funny......

jfrenaye
09-14-2008, 09:00 AM
OK the mom thing was funny as was this being his 9th biggest thrill, but beyond that...you are right.

The new guy seems funny in a Belushi-esque way. The skit with the ugly kids--he had some GREAT lines, responses and looks.

But I hope Fey comes back for the next 7 weeks. I had heard that Barack was to do a cameo walk on and canceled at the last minute and it was supposed to be Fey as Palin and Pohler as Cindy McCain against Barack---now THAT would have been great!

Ships 'N' Trips Travel
09-14-2008, 09:11 AM
Just saw the opening of SNL, don't normally watch it but got it on the DVR for my daughter (MP fan that she is). Loved the bit with William Shatner too....didn't watch after that though.

deangreenhoe
09-14-2008, 09:35 AM
Yes - she was just perfect!!

"I can see Russia from my house."

http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h310/deangreenhoe/SmileyHystericalLaughing.gif

jfrenaye
09-14-2008, 10:25 AM
I forgot about Shatner--yes he was good as well. Priceline!

bodega
09-14-2008, 12:33 PM
After shoveling truck loads of shale yesterday I couldn't stay awake to watch SNL. I saw the bit on one of the news shows this morning. Too darn funny!!!

icymrot
09-15-2008, 10:09 AM
I had heard that Barack was to do a cameo walk on and canceled at the last minute and it was supposed to be Fey as Palin and Pohler as Cindy McCain against Barack---now THAT would have been great!

Obama cancelled due to Hurricane Ike, the campaign felt it would not be appropriate based on what was going on in Texas. I have not seen anything that funny from SNL in years! There were so many classic one liners - "I can see Russia from my house", "[The Bush Doctrine] I don't know what that is". Tina Fey had the accent and look down perfectly.

I'm surprised the McCain campaign hasn't come out slamming SNL and NBC for the skit....

Kairho
09-15-2008, 10:15 AM
I'm surprised the McCain campaign hasn't come out slamming SNL and NBC for the skit....
He can't and not look super hypocritical as he as appeared numerous times on the show. And also on other comedy and late night shows. He knows he as to take as well as he can give. If he starts complaining I can just imagine how the comedians will ramp up even more. He cannot win if he complains.

Plus SNL was pretty even handed in this skit, skewering both women somewhat equally (although some writers have said Clinton got it more).

greenearth
09-15-2008, 10:16 AM
I'm surprised the McCain campaign hasn't come out slamming SNL and NBC for the skit....
For starters political humor has been around for ages. And if they can't take a joke well....
Second they made fun of Hillary as well.

Luanne
09-15-2008, 10:19 AM
I agree that Tina Fey was fabulous.........I was looking forward to Barack being on, however I suspect he declined at the last minute due to Ike and he would have been nailed to the wall for being "funny" during such a tragic time. *eye roll* but I understand and he did the right thing. I suspect he'll be on and I agree that Fey needs to come back for the next 7 weeks cuz there is so much juicy stuff which she can do. The make up artists did a fabulous job. Great sketch

p.s. - I DO NOT like the new way I have to post. The quick reply automatically kicks you into "quoting" someone......Of course, I removed who I wasn't trying to quote........what a pain.

Ned
09-15-2008, 10:27 AM
For starters political humor has been around for ages. And if they can't take a joke well....
Second they made fun of Hillary as well.

Yes, yes, and yes. Well said.

(I've sent you some rep for a statement well said.)

icymrot
09-15-2008, 11:06 AM
For starters political humor has been around for ages. And if they can't take a joke well....
Second they made fun of Hillary as well.

Oh I know, but both parties have been jumping all over every little thing said and taking quotes and situations out of context, this is just one more opportunity to continue the trend thats all.....

Ships 'N' Trips Travel
09-15-2008, 03:21 PM
"The Bush Doctrine] I don't know what that is".
I might let Palin slide on this one ... Bush has only had something like 7 doctrines in the last 8 years. I think when Charlie Gibson first asked her the question, it wasn't really clear WHICH doctrine he was referring to. ;)

Ships 'N' Trips Travel
09-16-2008, 06:58 PM
He can't and not look super hypocritical as he as appeared numerous times on the show. And also on other comedy and late night shows. He knows he as to take as well as he can give. If he starts complaining I can just imagine how the comedians will ramp up even more. He cannot win if he complains.

Plus SNL was pretty even handed in this skit, skewering both women somewhat equally (although some writers have said Clinton got it more).
You spoke too soon. McCain camp calls Fey schtick "sexist."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26743182/

Kairho
09-16-2008, 07:19 PM
You spoke too soon. McCain camp calls Fey schtick "sexist."
But if I recall, it was Carly Fiorina calling Fey and Pohler sexist. Can that be done? A woman calling another woman's comments about a third woman sexist?

That's twice Fiorina stepped in it today ... expect to see her in the locker room for a while.

Linder
09-16-2008, 08:04 PM
This is pretty funny:

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/83e3b0b258

Ships 'N' Trips Travel
09-16-2008, 08:20 PM
Linda,

Thanks for the laugh.

Ned
09-16-2008, 09:22 PM
That was fun. Thanks for the link.