Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Bailout Alternative???

Status
Not open for further replies.
number6 said:
And the son of a Tennessee Democrat hacked her email, but you weren't too keen to mention that, were you... or that the Fla. Democrat who won the disgraced Rep. Mark Foley's seat and promised to bring "ethics back into politics, starting with the family!" who has been found to be having multiple affairs and who the Democratic House leadership have been covering up for in order to hold on to his House seat (sound familiar?).

Joel, when you only make partisan posts, how can you expect anyone to take what you say as anything less than flubber?
Click to expand...

Palin misused her power in a way which can only be described as immature.
I won`t call her stupid, since there are lots of people who think they did everything right but in reality it was not the case. But I`m especially careful with such people because they`ve lost their contact with reality. I mean, how can anyone promote abstinence before marriage etc. but miserably fail with her own daughter and still keep a straight face? And a politician who abuses his position to clean up familiy business can only be described as dangerous. This doesn`t exclusively apply to reps but to anyone.
 
I like the *presidential* kind republic that the US have, meaning that the president is a real executive power which has enough independence from the legislative bodies [congress, senate].

This is closer to the ideal of dividing the three powers: legislative, judiciary and executive.

In Europe, most of the countries could be described as *parliamentary* republics, meaning that the governments are formed out of a parliamentary majority and are strongly dependent on the parliamentary configurations.

This isn't true division of power, cause the legislative and executive powers are strongly interconnected.

It creates a fundamental instability of the European systems, cause governments are often instable and fall victims of parliamentary plots and re-configurations. For example in Italy, in 60 years there have been more than 80+ governments and that cannot be good for a government.

*

On the other hand, I'm surprised that the US system is actually a two-party system. We used to have this for 10+ years after the "fall" of communism. It was more or less - a teatro, but nevertheless, it proved to not be a very good configuration. Now it's more colorful here, which is good: more segments of the society are represented by different parties, not just two, and it's starting to look like a democratic process.

Two-party system can't be good.

The ideal [in which I believe] would be: strong but independent legislative and executive powers, meaning a presidential republic and a national assembly based on many parties with strong pluralism...

And if the president is that bad, the parliament could always impeach him, but that should be an extraordinary occasion, not a frequent event.

In that way, we would have more stability for the executive power.
 
kalone said:
I mean, how can anyone promote abstinence before marriage etc. but miserably fail with her own daughter and still keep a straight face?
Click to expand...

It was not Palin but her daughter who made the mistake here.

Yes, it was certainly a mistake; we all make them.

Not all of us make the same mistakes...

What do you expect Palin to do, disown her daughter?

She's her DAUGHTER!


Get real, dude!
 
fde101 said:
It was not Palin but her daughter who made the mistake here.

Yes, it was certainly a mistake; we all make them.

Not all of us make the same mistakes...

What do you expect Palin to do, disown her daughter?

She's her DAUGHTER!


Get real, dude!
Click to expand...

She`s noncredible. That`s all I`m saying. I don`t give dogshit what she or anybody else does with their children. She shouldn`t have applied nor accepted for her position because right now she`s a threat to society if she can`t distinguish between private and work affairs. And once again, this applies to any politician from any party anywhere on the whole f...king world.
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
I was keeping my post as impartial as I could.... I pride myself on not affiliating with either party, I vote across party lines at every election. And I can pick on candidates from either side.... Whether it's Obama's "small town white folk" or "guns and religion" comments or McCain waffling on his support leading up to the Bush vs. Kerry election, or Biden's increasingly arrogant demeanor when discussing topics he is not well educated with or his own obvious distrust for Obama early after his selection as running mate. Where does it end? ...It doesn't.
Click to expand...

Let's look more closely at this "non-partisan" analysis. Obama hates ordinary people. Biden's an arrogant blow-hard and liar. And McCain? Well, McCain waffled in his support of Bush in 2004. And that's the worst you can come up with for John.

Sorry, but some people might be a little more disturbed by McCain's warmongering and self-admitted ignorance on economics, and the lobbyists and extremists running his campaign.

Frankly, you don't sound like a non-partisan person at all. That's true of all of us here, but really now, just look at that choice of examples.... Do they suggest an impartial assessment of the candidates? Or impartial analysis of the issues?


Jeff Kilgroe said:
I have to admit that I like her as a candidate -- she more accurately represents mainstream america far better than any of the other candidates involved on either side of the fence.
Click to expand...

This has got to be the most frightening comment yet. Didn't we already get quite enough of the "folksy" president, over the past 8 years? Unlike the patrician George W. Bush, with his phony accent and brush-clearing photo ops, Palin's roots may be authentic. But that's even more terrifying. H.L. Mencken noted 70+ years ago that sooner or later the American public would fulfill its deepest desire and elect one of its own, an imbecile, president. That fantasy having already come true once, do we really need another go at it?
 
jpp said:
That fantasy having already come true once, do we really need another go at it?
Click to expand...

I'm not voting for that. I'll support any Republican that comes along that I think is intelligent, well informed, well spoken and a good leader and has policy views I support. There have been in the past, there will be in the future. I will oppose corruption.

To me a partisan is someone who looks for an excuse to vilify anyone in one party but does not hold an equal standard for the other party.

I don't do that. I have supported and criticized people in every party. McCain was my guy in 1999. He's done a 180 flip flop on almost every issue since then and now I no longer support him.

Do I have a bias? Yes. Everyone has a bias. I enjoyed William F. Buckley because he was a bright guy. That's my bias, well spoken, thoughtful people.

Palin has clearly shown herself in her own words to not be in the same league as the other 3 candidates in any category other than beauty. Which may be why her favorables among women are much lower than men.

If you're a guy listen to Palin with audio only.
No really, click and close your eyes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nokTjEdaUGg

If you simply listen to her words even in the last debate (where she was at her best so far) she sounds... well, less than mediocre. I seriously believe anyone in this thread could have given a better interview with Couric - and the idea the Palin needed time to cram for an interview that asked about what she read, what court decisions she was aware of, what the Bush doctrine is etc. is really working hard to find a way to let her off the hook. McCain chose her to be a heartbeat from the Presidency?

So when a bunch of Republicans in Alaska call for an investigation of Palin, and that investigation concludes that she violated ethics laws by using her office to persecute a State employee how can anyone call that partisan?
 
jpp said:
Let's look more closely at this "non-partisan" analysis. Obama hates ordinary people. Biden's an arrogant blow-hard and liar. And McCain? Well, McCain waffled in his support of Bush in 2004. And that's the worst you can come up with for John.
Click to expand...

Matter of perspective, I guess... Many still consider McCain a real piece of turd for his actions in '04. It's a matter of principles, to some (including myself) it's worse than Bidan being an "arrogant blow-hard", I never said he was a liar, you just did that on your own, please don't imply that I made it out that way. And no, I wasn't trying to come up with the worst examples for any of them, I've barely scratched the surface. Like I said, I would just piss people off. Apparently I've already pinched one of your nerves.

McCain's warmongering and self-admitted ignorance on economics, and the lobbyists and extremists running his campaign.
Click to expand...

You don't want to open that can of worms. Take another look at Obama's campaign and the sources of his funding as well as all his "I just don't know", "we'll have to prioritize" and "I can learn" comments. I won't say more than that.

Frankly, you don't sound like a non-partisan person at all. That's true of all of us here, but really now, just look at that choice of examples.... Do they suggest an impartial assessment of the candidates? Or impartial analysis of the issues?
Click to expand...

If I told you where I stand on various issues, it might surprise you, but I won't do it here. Not really good for public knowledge. Then again, the few things I have been vocal about will often make me look like a right-wing wacko. Maybe I just like stirring the pot and getting people riled up... OK, I do.

I'll make you a deal. You bash Obama and Biden for a bit and I'll rip on McCain and Palin.

This has got to be the most frightening comment yet. Didn't we already get quite enough of the "folksy" president, over the past 8 years?
Click to expand...

Bush isn't very "folksy", IMO. He's totally out of touch with middle america.

Palin is in some ways too, but I still say that she better represents the american people than any candidate we have seen in a long time. No, this does not qualify her for the job. But it's interesting to see someone who is in a VP consideration slot, who has a household income of less than $175K per year, who lives in a down to earth home worth less than half a million bucks, blah, blah, blah...

Mencken had his head in the sand... If he really paid attention, he would've realized that as of 50 years ago, the american public had already elected one of its own imbiciles on many occasions. Sometimes for the better, sometimes for worse. We will have good presidents, we will have bad presidents. And all of them are just one person who can not act alone, blame or praise must be placed squarely where it belongs -- on the entire elected government. Last time I checked, as of a few weeks ago, Congress had a lower approval rating than Bush, less than 9%.
 
joelnet said:
I'm not voting for that. I'll support any Republican that comes along tha I think they is intelligent, well informed, well spoken and a good leader and has policy views I support. ?
Click to expand...

FWIW, I think you misunderstood me. I was taking exception to Jeff's notion that Sarah is attractive to him because she most closely represents Middle-America. GWB was the candidate all the pundits wanted to have a beer with, and he sounded just like folks, and I think we saw the result of that.... It's her policies, her lack of knowledge and her brazen lying which render Sarah Palin an unacceptable candidate, not her Middle-American roots.

As for an "intelligent, well-informed" Republican, one who doesn't think humans and dinosaurs saw the first light of day 6000 years ago in the Garden of Eden or that the imaginary free market will solve all our problems -- when was the last time one of them ran for president, or had any chance of getting the nomination?

The current state of the Republican party puts it at war with American traditions -- the real ones, those of the founding fathers like Jefferson. Until that changes, I can't see why anyone would want to empower the base, even if a decent local Republican candidate comes along. In the end, you're voting for the party, and its platform.
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
Matter of perspective, I guess... .
Click to expand...

Exactly, and our perspectives are completely different, because neither of us is non-partisan. The rest of your post bears this claim all out. It's anything but impartial analysis.

As for H.L. Mencken, it was 70 years ago, not 50 (I wasn't thinking). Certainly we've had some very bad presidents, and Mencken had Hoover to refer to, but GWB is. I'd argue, something of a classic, and a fulfillment of Mencken's prophecy in a way that Nixon, Carter, Clinton or even Reagan wasn't.

I'd be happy to bash Obama and Biden as center-right candidates who won't do a thing to upset the status quo, but in the current reduser climate, I'd only be giving comfort to the enemy. Not that it matters, since nothing said here is likely to determine the election result...
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
Last time I checked, as of a few weeks ago, Congress had a lower approval rating than Bush, less than 9%.
Click to expand...

There are 700ish people in Congress you can get mad at so it's difficult to discern the cause of a number like that. The only decent way to compare is to compare individual Congress person ratings vs. the President.

Clearly Obama and McCain have much higher favorability ratings than Congress, yet they are in Congress.
 
kalone said:
Palin misused her power in a way which can only be described as immature.
I won`t call her stupid, since there are lots of people who think they did everything right but in reality it was not the case. But I`m especially careful with such people because they`ve lost their contact with reality. I mean, how can anyone promote abstinence before marriage etc. but miserably fail with her own daughter and still keep a straight face? And a politician who abuses his position to clean up familiy business can only be described as dangerous. This doesn`t exclusively apply to reps but to anyone.
Click to expand...

Kalone, I have a different perspective (surprize! surprize!:tongue: ).

Did she misuse her pouer? No laws were broken and there were no charges brought. And in the OPINION of the (possibly politically motivated) investigative body, she should have kept her husband from interfering (I heard she tried, but husbands are often protective of their spouses). It seems the husband was worried about the former brother-in-law, a man who had THREATENED VIOLENCE toward his wife's family. Shame on him for trying to stop something terrible happening. He should have waited until someone was perhaps killed and then called 911.

I doubt seriously the people of Alaska would have chosen her as their leader if they didn't have confidence in her intelligence. The whole state can't be stupid. But she didn't pass the pop quizzes sprung on her by the ABC news anchor and then the CBS one. Good thing she isn't running for teacher or Supreme Court Justice. Besides, She had been in Alaska only a short time before and had been studying Alaska priorities instead of World Politics. Doesn't mean she can't handle world politics with time to prepare.

Everyone seems to think she failed with her daughter. Why? Is having a child a failure? To me it means she hasn't hovered over her children and has instead given them the chance to find there oun way. She probably still favors abstinence.

And the boy who is the baby's father? He said in his one interview with the Associated Press that he and Bristol had been sweethearts since they were freshmen in high school and had always intended to marry. He was looking forward to being a father and taking his son (an apparent hint to the baby's sex) hunting and fishing. He is up on the North Slope right now working as an electrician's apprentice. Not likely to be a Harvard man, but a Man, nonetheless.

I'm o.k. though if you do not have confidence in her as a number 2. But at least that ticket has the experience in the number one position, unlike the other ticket that has the novice in the number one position.

Sorry to have to defend someone so often, but it seems the individual in question is getting an unfair scrutiny. But in the interest of full disclosure, if something unfair is said about Obama I'll not likely defend him here. I've made it no secret that I support McCain/Palin, so I will leave that defense of misinformation to those who support Obama/... and what's-his-name....Oh, yeah, Biden.
 
jpp said:
FWIW, I think you misunderstood me. I was taking exception to Jeff's notion that Sarah is attractive to him because she most closely represents Middle-America.
Click to expand...

I'm agreeing with you. I like that Palin is of an average income level. But it ends there.

Her views and ability to communicate are very simplistic and that's not what I personally want from a President. Given McCain's age and health his choice of Palin is alarming to me. Imagine if she were President. She'd be a complete puppet of the Rove wing of the party - because she's closest to their ideology.
 
number6 said:
I doubt seriously the people of Alaska would have chosen her as their leader if they didn't have confidence in her intelligence. The whole state can't be stupid.
Click to expand...

Getting votes and being intelligent are two different things.

The whole State is smaller than Omaha Nebraska and she has not been re-elected. Her abuse of power results have just come out. Her approval rating in Alaska has been in a free fall.

To use the people of Alaska as evidence of anything at this point is premature.
 
joelnet said:
Getting votes and being intelligent are two different things.

The whole State is smaller than Omaha Nebraska and she has not been re-elected. Her abuse of power results have just come out. Her approval rating in Alaska has been in a free fall.

To use the people of Alaska as evidence of anything at this point is premature.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I wasn't aware that Alaskans were idiots. My bad
 
And then there's this scary stuff:
129_1224009628.jpg

129_1224009663.jpg

129_1224009697.jpg

Not only intimidation, but violating these people's free speech rights.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top