I watched the debate.
I think she answered the questions much better than her opponent.
You could tell, she was nervous, kind of like she was doing a FAA oral.
Yes she is new but her morale and family values are excellent, I think she would do a fine job if something happened to McCain.
I think she would be much better leading this country than idiot Obama and his running mate.
I trust this woman, she speaks from the heart.
She speaks of hard work, family values, things that we have really lost in the USA and need to get back.
Not just free handouts like Obama and the welfare regime.
So unless something really bad happens, in 3 weeks will vote for the McCain/Palin ticket.
Lisatening to the US journos damning Palin's performance with (hardly even) faint praise convinced me that for many of us, we're so set in our political prejudices, nothing will change our opinions.
I hate to use cliches, but can't avoid it - the 'liberal' mainstream US media, with the stark exception of the Fox network, are so set on touting for an Obama victory, Palin could have delivered a Gettysburg Address Mark 2 on that stage tonight, found the cure for cancer and the commom cold and still they'd have found fault with her performance.
I saw only the second half of the debate, so I can't comment on the early part of her performance, but putting aside her suitability for high office for one moment, I'd love to have even half the debating skills she displayed on that stage. One commentator - I think it was Carl Bernstein of Watergate fame - more or less damned her for being too well prepared with her answers!!!
Whatever criticisms you may have of her, after the disastrous Katie Couric interview, which was squirmingly, agonisingly bad, you'd have to say she's a damn fast learner to have taken in so well - and, as importantly, delivered so well - the doubtless hours upon hours of pre-debate briefings she must have endured from the GOP minders.
Biden needs to be congratulated in successfully treading the very fine course of not crossing the very nebulous line where he was seen to be speaking down to the little woman.
The fact is, both of them (in the second half of the debate at least) did a damn fine job of selling themselves and their respective bosses and I think despite what the pundits are saying, Palin went some way towards resurrecting herself after her train smash Katie Couric interview - with some people. Nothing she could come up with will change the minds of committed Demorcrats and dare I call them, 'the American intelligensia'.
There's no doubt to the winner of the debate. I'm sure the liberals are scrambling to create a different outcome, but it isn't there. She rose to the occasion.
Sarah Palin is every bit the VP material the McCain says she is capable of.
The combination of McCain & Palin are much more credible than a candidate combo that posseses 143 days in a senate term and a VP that failed more than once to achieve politcal success. HELLOOOO, does anyone see the obvious??
Last edited by CityofFlight : 3rd October 2008 at 17:08.
I like Chardonnay, and occasionally I get a latte. The rest of the time it's Nescafe.
Folks see what they want to, I guess. I wasn't too impressed with Palin, though it's true she didn't drool down her front, on make any major gaffes. But I really would have liked to see her answer the question "what specifically will you do differently about xxxx or yyyy." She is, after all, running for the vice-highest-job-in-the-land. I didn't hear that from her.
Biden? -- just another glib talking politico. But we already knew that.
Interesting to note that to date, none of the post debate pundits has mentioned a subtly delivered barb that Sarah Palin slipped in almost as an aside, but aimed squarely at Michelle Obama:
Quote:
"I've always been a proud American."
Somehow, I don't think the Republican heartland will have missed that barb.
"Pride" is so unsubtle, un-nuanced, obvious even. It is the sort of emotion even the unschooled can feel. No, the sort of emotion that only the un-schooled can feel, perhaps?
I think the trendy-lefties want much more to identify with something paradoxical such being sat there in church listening to "God damn America!" or implicitly saying that at times one has found nothing to be proud of or grateful for in one's country but knowing that really, really means the opposite. You know, the way the true American patriots were out in the streets chanting, "Ho-ho, Ho Chi Minh! The NLF is going to win!", not simply signing up, for instance, to fly attack missions over North Viet Nam. (You almost need a university education to be able to think that way.)
I can see both sides in this one, when elections do tend to polarise. If you want that simple, prideful flag-waving then you can fall into line behind McCain/Palin. If you want something more subtle then you can go for Obama/Biden. A "cuppa mud down at the greasy spoon" versus a "caffe latte at Starbucks" perhaps?
Reality is more complicated, of course, but that isn't the way our elections are fought. We come up with simple messages and then try very hard to keep our candidates "on message". The voters can then validate themselves by choosing one or the other candidate pair in the same way they choose their smokes or their drinks. If you just look at the pairs as a branding exercise then I have to give the edge to McCain/Palin.
I come from a liberal background, when most of my friends were typical East Coast Democrats. We never fit comfortably because I was always trying to cut through the sophistication to get back to the basic reality of a situation. (I like to keep things simple.)
For instance, when Teddy Kennedy took his ill-fated dunking I was sat there like a chump feeling sorry for his drowned companion and finding him contemptible when everyone else had got right past that to mourn his failed Presidential ambitions since he always voted correctly. If they could swallow that whopper, a sleazy saint, with no obvious discomfort then I am sure they are well able now to overlook the obvious questions that Barack and Michelle raise with his goofy preacher and her lack of pride in America. Ignore those things and just believe in "Change", whatever you take that to mean.
I still hold to my suspicion that most of the voters will finally go for the simple solution and drop this overcomplicated schtick when it comes right down to it in the voting booth, that the Republican "brand" is the more attractive one in this contest. Hey, they sold us George W. Bush didn't they?
It won't be long now to find out if I am right in this casual opinion. At least Ms Palin did not totally plotz in her debate last night and now she must be safe back in the hands of her minders.
Yes, all that folks and businesses in the successful states must be STUPID.
Businesses aren't stupid GF. They'll go where the cheap labor is. Where the unions aren't. And when that doesn't work anymore -- just like the cotton mills in the South -- they'll move to Mexico or China or wherever the next China is.
Wal-Mart -- which can't export its jobs -- will contiinue to fight unions with every fiber of its being.
We're in a race to the bottom of the barrel. Enjoy the ride.
Don Brown
Last edited by GetTheFlick : 3rd October 2008 at 13:51.
Now ? I've been happy. As I told my controller friends at yet another retirement party, I feel like I'm the king of the world. Enough money to not worry, a government pension, good health benefits -- in short, a secure future and I know my children will have a good shot at being successful even if I'm not here to enjoy it.
Don't you wish everyone in America could say the same thing ? I do.
So how do we get there ? Tell me how you would go about moving some people out of poverty. You can spare me the lecture about the n'er-do-wells. I know they're out there. I see them and I talk to them. It is (admittedly) infuriating. Tell me how you would get some of their kids out of poverty. Or their kids.
The test of our progress is not whether we add to the abundance of those who have much. It is whether we provide enough to those who have little.
Bottom line is that Sara Palin held her own and was not destroyed by Biden, as all the mainstream media was praying for.
Of course I realize that some here (GTF?), will disagree with me.
Of course now, the mainstream media are now 'checking the facts' of the debate.
Do I count as MSM (psssst...that's "Main Street Media" to all those that don't read the Republican talking points everyday) ?
I thought she held up well -- on the surface. Which I'm sure is what matters in the election.
Personally, I loved how she quoted Reagan 3 or 4 times. I got a little whiplash when she did it and went right into I"ve been a regulator" mode but I'm sure it blew by most folks.
I thought I was being clever, calling it "Palinomics" -- but I see many, many others have been using the term for some time.
Reaganomics
1. reduce the growth of government spending,
2. reduce marginal tax rates on income from labor and capital,
3. reduce government regulation of the economy,
4. control the money supply to reduce inflation.
Palinomics: It's as simple as 1,2,4 and "I'm a regulator."
You did catch the Reagan quotes didn't you ? Including the "Shining City upon the Hill" quote ? Not to worry...I assure you the "agents of intolerance"...uh, I mean the Religious Right...uh, make that the "Social Conservatives" heard it.
But she didn't have a meltdown (so she must be qualified.)
Don, if you come to my part of Australia...you do not to spend money on beer - its my shout. I disagree with you with the bailout because the money will dissappear, its the Republican way. Remember Coolidge, "America's business is business".
A controller on a full pension who is altruistic with a touch of philanthropy and sniff of egalitarianism (Binos has all that as well but he lives 5 hours down the road and noone sees him ), you are the man Don.
City of Flight, you applied to be a controller? Why were you rejected?
"The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI) is a conservative think tank, founded in 1943."
"AEI has emerged as one of the leading architects of the second Bush administration's public policy.[2] More than twenty AEI alumni and current visiting scholars and fellows have served either in a Bush administration policy post or on one of the government's many panels and commissions.[3] Former United States Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz is a visiting scholar, and Lynne Cheney, wife of Vice President Dick Cheney and former chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities, is a senior fellow. "
"The Heritage Foundation's initial funding came from political conservative Joseph Coors, co-owner of the Coors Brewing Company.[3] Funding from Coors was later augmented by financial support from billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife. Conservative activist Paul Weyrich was its first head. Since 1977, Heritage's president has been Edwin Feulner, Jr., previously the staff director of the House Republican Study Committee and a former staff assistant to U.S. Congressman Phil Crane. "
"In the 1980s and early 1990s, the Heritage Foundation was a key architect and advocate of the "Reagan Doctrine",... "
"Similar think tanks include the American Enterprise Institute and, with the exception of certain foreign policy and social issues, the libertarian Cato Institute."
And just for our international audience...
"In 2006, the Foundation established the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom,[8] based on a grant from the Margaret Thatcher Foundation, to promote United States/United Kingdom cooperation and to advance the transatlantic alliance between the two countries. Lady Thatcher has since been named Patron of the Heritage Foundation, her only official association with any U.S.-based group.[9] "
"The exact amount of money withdrawn is still unknown, but according to The Charlotte Observer, it was large enough to attract the attention of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which regulates national banks. Federal regulators pressured Wachovia to put itself up for sale over the weekend; had Wachovia failed, it would have been a severe drain on the FDIC's insurance fund due to its size."
I know I'm just a retired guy with too much time on his hands but I don't assume too many people have time to dig into the headlines.
Palin will be advised by the whoever John McCain picks and John McCain has picked the same people that George W. Bush picked -- the same people that got us into the mess we're into today. McSame.
"Palin will be advised by the whoever John McCain picks and John McCain has picked the same people that George W. Bush picked -- the same people that got us into the mess we're into today. McSame."
A very broad brush assumption for which you have not one shred of evidence, just a nice rabble rousing bit of vitriol, given McCain's approach to the job why on earth would you assume he will take on the same set of advisor's? Maybe you haven't thought it through? Maybe you haven't been listening? Maybe you are just blinded and deafened by your own anti Republican mantra?
Ah yes, in LALA land, on the Left coast, home of Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi, Diane Feinstein, and all those compassionate "libs". People who live in glass houses...
EDIT: Ooops, my 'umble apologies, I forgot Babs Boxer...
Last edited by barit1 : 3rd October 2008 at 22:39.
Binos has all that as well but he lives 5 hours down the road
If you think you can drive from Cairns to Mackay in five hours I don't want to be in the car with you! The tiger moth, maybe?
I'll post this link lifted straight from the pages of Crikey Yes, the author is horrendously one-eyed, and none of the regular posters here need even bother reading it I suppose, but jeez he has a way with words! And the Sarah doubters will love it. I particularly like where he repeats the sentiment from an earlier post of mine. It concerns masturbation.
I never heared no talk of patient dumping in Red State Georgia, where even the Democrats are Republicans (Z. Miller and S. Nunn for example). Why's that?
Why in California where even the Republicans are Democrats?
The comments about SP's advisors should JMcC go to meet his maker prematurely led me to ponder on the way life so often imitates art. If the McCain/Palin ticket was to win in November and if JMcC did leave this mortal coil in the next foiur years, Sarah Palin would be left in the Geena Davis role from the (truly awful and thankfully axed) 'Commander in Chief'.
But I suppose the big question would be... who would get to play the Donald Sutherland role?
Linear Mode
