Jump to content

Election Year!!!

Basil II

By Basil II,
in Tongue-Tied Lightning

 Share Followers 1

Recommended Posts

John Smith

John Smith

Posted
Posted
:yawn Old news.......if that's what you call it. Let's face it, if she'd had an abortion the argument would be, "It's her choice, damn it." But now she HAD the baby and it's "Can we trust her decision making skills?" Come on, really? I do not want to argue or debate abortion. It really is a womans body but this decision argument is "wack".

 

It's new to me. I only point it out to show how a real mother a real voter thinks. My wife was intrigued by her but lost total respoect when she heard this. I am sure she is nto the only one.

 

john s, you've had a lot to offer in these threads and i appreciate them, but the above rumor (or fact, whichever it is) was discussed at length in the last thread, and i hope no one minds if i quote my own post from that thread which was put up just before the thread was shut down:

 

i believe this:

 

"the media and others focusing on palin's private family life will hand the election to mccain on a silver platter. this will be a picnic for him if people keep the ticket on the defensive for irrelevant reasons. leave her private life alone, and all the wrong reasons for her being chosen by mccain will float up to the surface on their own."

 

 

p.s. today: actually, they seem to be racing, not floating, to the surface.

 

In the previous thread I pointed out that what she wants the democrats to not discuss she totes out on stage and wants praise for...she had the down syndrome baby even when she knew ahead of time and could have aborted. Bravo for her, now she wants her privacy as she totes her down syndrome child on stage at appearance after appearance, well she's makign it an issue open for discussion, but only wants one side able to discuss? Ditto with her daughter. Your statement from the last thread basically say's if the democrats act like rovian republicans in regards to her family it will cost them the election. Has that sort of behavior cost republicans elections? Afterall they are the masters at that sort of campaigning.

 

My point overall is that regardless of what bubbles to the surface they can't sit and hope something bubbles up, they have to go after issues whhere the republicans actiosn don't mirror their phillosophies, and they can't yet again allow the republicans to dictate the terms of the debate/election. Because everyone here knows damned well that if Obama had a 17 year old pregnant daughter it would be amajor topic of discussion by the right and an incessant one. Heck I read an article today where they still are trying to tie Edwards to Obama and the inference being one democrat and another are indistiguishable thus the sins of Edwards are the sins of Obama.

 

Just about anyone who pays attention knows that the Obama will kill McCain on the issues. McCain just does nto have facts or reality to back his positions. But there is no contest on election strategy if the democrats allow the republicans to dictate the terms of the election, which is what they are doing right now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

quarter23cd

quarter23cd

Posted
Posted

I don't understand how Palin can claim to be both anti-abortion/sex-education and also be pro-gun, since enacting tougher gun laws clearly would have the added benefit of cutting down on the number of hunters wounding or killing the magical storks who carry those cute little babies down from heaven. And isn't that what its really all about?

Link to post
Share on other sites
JUDE

JUDE

Posted
Posted
My Dad has an "Obama for President" sign in his front yard.

 

Yeah, I'm still not convinced the DFL is the answer, you'll have to try harder. Thanks.
Link to post
Share on other sites
embiggen

embiggen

Posted
Posted
Dammit - I'm on a connection that blocks Youtube - and most streaming media.

 

Fucking prison......

 

 

I hear ya!

 

My Dad has an "Obama for President" sign in his front yard.

 

 

your dad rocks!

Link to post
Share on other sites
fatheadfred

fatheadfred

Posted
Posted
before mccain chose palin, he and obama were virtually neck and neck in the polls. he wasn't in a desperate situation, so why would he make a do-or-die v.p. choice? i don't really buy the maverick thing, with something this crucial and fundamental. he is starting to remind me a little of ross perot.

 

The crispies forced it upon him in a super secret motel meeting. Dobson's pick. To maintain the fundamental base for the long term. This is one theory. Still chewing on that one, however it seems somewhat logical save for the fact what good does it do if they do not win by polarizing the undecided and independent voters?

Link to post
Share on other sites
sweetheart-mine

sweetheart-mine

Posted
Posted
In the previous thread I pointed out that what she wants the democrats to not discuss she totes out on stage and wants praise for...she had the down syndrome baby even when she knew ahead of time and could have aborted. Bravo for her, now she wants her privacy as she totes her down syndrome child on stage at appearance after appearance, well she's makign it an issue open for discussion, but only wants one side able to discuss? Ditto with her daughter. Your statement from the last thread basically say's if the democrats act like rovian republicans in regards to her family it will cost them the election. Has that sort of behavior cost republicans elections? Afterall they are the masters at that sort of campaigning.

 

My point overall is that regardless of what bubbles to the surface they can't sit and hope something bubbles up, they have to go after issues whhere the republicans actiosn don't mirror their phillosophies, and they can't yet again allow the republicans to dictate the terms of the debate/election. Because everyone here knows damned well that if Obama had a 17 year old pregnant daughter it would be amajor topic of discussion by the right and an incessant one. Heck I read an article today where they still are trying to tie Edwards to Obama and the inference being one democrat and another are indistiguishable thus the sins of Edwards are the sins of Obama.

 

Just about anyone who pays attention knows that the Obama will kill McCain on the issues. McCain just does nto have facts or reality to back his positions. But there is no contest on election strategy if the democrats allow the republicans to dictate the terms of the election, which is what they are doing right now.

you make a lot of good points. i still think that stooping to rovian tactics is like becoming a monster to attack a monster, and would certainly hurt obama's campaign. there are many ways to keep republicans from dictating the terms of the election -- many issues to highlight & become more strident about, and hypocrisies to reveal -- without going after the quality of palin's motherhood. that one would backfire and i think it would be a big mistake. obama does not need mothers nationwide who feel attacked and disappointed hillary supporters who feel crazy out there defending palin, whether or not palin talks about her mothering herself.

Link to post
Share on other sites
fatheadfred

fatheadfred

Posted
Posted
I don't understand how Palin can claim to be both anti-abortion/sex-education and also be pro-gun, since enacting tougher gun laws clearly would have the added benefit of cutting down on the number of hunters wounding or killing the magical storks who carry those cute little babies down from heaven. And isn't that what its really all about?

 

Assembly of God.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mrs. Peel

Mrs. Peel

Posted
Posted
I don't understand how Palin can claim to be both anti-abortion/sex-education and also be pro-gun, since enacting tougher gun laws clearly would have the added benefit of cutting down on the number of hunters wounding or killing the magical storks who carry those cute little babies down from heaven. And isn't that what its really all about?

 

:rotfl

Link to post
Share on other sites
John Smith

John Smith

Posted
Posted
you make a lot of good points. i still think that stooping to rovian tactics is like becoming a monster to attack a monster, and would certainly hurt obama's campaign. there are many ways to keep republicans from dictating the terms of the election -- many issues to highlight & become more strident about, and hypocrisies to reveal -- without going after the quality of palin's motherhood. that one would backfire and i think it would be a big mistake. obama does not need mothers nationwide who feel attacked and disappointed hillary supporters who feel crazy out there defending palin, whether or not palin talks about her mothering herself.

 

 

I

Link to post
Share on other sites
quarter23cd

quarter23cd

Posted
Posted

I'm curious to find out out how Palin is coming across now, after a few days to digest. (I suppose we'll know more after her convention speech)

 

The morning after the announcement, I was watching the news with my sister-in-law, who isn't overly political or at least not tied to any party, and she was in a full swoon over Palin. I asked why and her response was that "She's a woman, and a mother". For that, she can relate to her. "But what else do you know about her?" I asked. And she replied, "Nothing, but the TV people describe her as a 'maverick', and I like that."

 

First of all, the word 'maverick' needs to be stricken from the political lexicon, particularly because it isn't usually applied very well. Secondly, her "I identify with her because she's a mother" honestly carries about as much weight as "George Bush seems like the kind of guy I'd like to have a beer with." Its shallow reasoning--it doesn't really tell you anything about the person's professional qualifications--but those first impressions are important, especially since the thing about running a complete unknown is that you can project upon her whatever qualities you want to see. (to be fair, the same could be said about Obama's campaign and I think he is just now reaching the point where most people are getting to "know" him--which, I suppose, means that we probably won't really "know" Palin until sometime after the election, conveniently enough) Anyway, I'll be curious to talk with my sis-in-law again soon to see how/if her opinion has changed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Good Old Neon

Good Old Neon

Posted
Posted
I don't understand how Palin can claim to be both anti-abortion/sex-education and also be pro-gun, since enacting tougher gun laws clearly would have the added benefit of cutting down on the number of hunters wounding or killing the magical storks who carry those cute little babies down from heaven. And isn't that what its really all about?

 

What I really don

Link to post
Share on other sites
bobbob1313

bobbob1313

Posted
Posted

Morality isn't a straight line drawn across every issue.

 

How can you be anti-war and then support the murder of innocent babies? The argument works both ways, and you undercut your own argument that way.

 

Plus, didn't you already do the "plate of embryos vs. a human" thing and get ridiculed for it because it's a ridiculous argument?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Central Scrutinizer

Central Scrutinizer

Posted
Posted

I think there's a leap in logic in here somewhere ...

 

In a Reuters story, "Obama told CNN on Monday that Palin's level of experience as a former mayor of tiny Wasilla, Alaska, did not match his own, citing the size of his campaign.

 

" "My understanding is that Gov. Palin's town, Wasilla, has I think 50 employees. We've got 2,500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million dollars a year -- we have a budget of about three times that just for the month," Obama had said.

 

"McCain adviser Carly Fiorina said she was appalled and accused him of sexism."

 

Where did pointing out lack of qualifications, or questioning experience, make it sexist?!?!

Link to post
Share on other sites
sweetheart-mine

sweetheart-mine

Posted
Posted
I don't understand how Palin can claim to be both anti-abortion/sex-education and also be pro-gun, since enacting tougher gun laws clearly would have the added benefit of cutting down on the number of hunters wounding or killing the magical storks who carry those cute little babies down from heaven. And isn't that what its really all about?

:lol :lol :lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Followers 1
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...