The Republican Convention thread

[bobber205]

Why don't they get a job that's not minimum wage?

You do realize there doesn't exist enough jobs in the world for everyone to make above minimum wage?

[Lord Blackadder]

I agree that I don't like the negative campaigns either....but I think the Republicans have constantly discussed the leadership they posses and the Democrats lack. The Democrats have tried to put Obama's 143 days of experience on the back burner...

I don't see the experience issue as being decisive. Both the GOP and the Dems have had candidates with less experience in the past. So what? I think they are all experienced enough. I'm more worried about their platforms.

[macdaddy121]

Oh man I don't believe it. By length you actually meant time! :eek:
That's why I had the ;)... wow...

So if obama takes let's say 2 hours to explain his ideas and the republicans take days repeating theirs over and over that makes theirs better?

The RNC so far has been: POW, obama has no executive (lol) experience. (Just to note, that would mccain is equally unfit), and taxes! Scary taxes might go up. Yeah. Just for most of the people AT the RNC.

Try and understand that there is more to taxes than personal income taxes....narrow minded at it's finest.

I would impressed if Obama has spent 2 hours explaining any of his ideas....

[macdaddy121]

I don't see the experience issue as being decisive. Both the GOP and the Dems have had candidates with less experience in the past. So what? I think they are all experienced enough. I'm more worried about their platforms.

Fair enough.

[Aranince]

Yeah, I guess 10% difference in voting on issues is really a big difference in policy... :rolleyes:

Just because McCain voted for him doesn't mean hes going to follow Bush's issues. McCain sees the issues that Bush brought along, I"m sure he will do anything to change it. Like has been stated before, McCain isn't as conservative as republicans would like him. On that note, I wouldn't be surprised if McCain did some stuff that is liked by Democrats more than Republicans.

[Thomas Veil]

Sexism? I saw about ten shots of I WANT THE HOT VP buttons people were wearing.I'm gonna be making up one that says DRILL SARAH PALIN.

[macdaddy121]

You do realize there doesn't exist enough jobs in the world for everyone to make above minimum wage?

So, I guess they should be content with their minimum wage jobs and accept the hand outs that Obama promises?

[bobber205]

Try and understand that there is more to taxes than personal income taxes....narrow minded at it's finest.

I would impressed if Obama has spent 2 hours explaining any of his ideas....

There was an hour at the Saddleback Convention. Watch that twice. ;)

[obeygiant]

You do realize there doesn't exist enough jobs in the world for everyone to make above minimum wage?

Thats partly true, although anyone older than 23 can ask for a higher wage and they can get it. There is less attrition for older workers and more reliable, many times they are compensated for that.

[bobber205]

So, I guess they should be content with their minimum wage jobs and accept the hand outs that Obama promises?

Of course they should try to do better. Anyone that works 8 hour days 5 days a week should be able to live a comfortable life. Maybe not one in luxury, but still survive and not just barely get by.

Get over your high horse that people who don't make much money are lazy. Before we moved to oregon my dad made about 32,000 as a teacher, which is nothing these days and he worked his ass off every day with 2nd graders.

[atszyman]

Just because McCain voted for him doesn't mean hes going to follow Bush's issues. McCain sees the issues that Bush brought along, I"m sure he will do anything to change it. Like has been stated before, McCain isn't as conservative as republicans would like him. On that note, I wouldn't be surprised if McCain did some stuff that is liked by Democrats more than Republicans.

Only if he goes back to the 2000 McCain. Had he won the nomination then he would have beat Gore in a landslide without the FL debacle. Myself along with a lot of the "Liberals" who post here liked him in 2000. He's taken a turn to the right that we don't like and now we're trying to figure out which McCain we'll get. The one who voted with Bush 90% of the time or the one who used to stand up to Bush?

I'd be torn if I knew for certain that we'd get the 2000 McCain but given that and the Democratic platform that agrees more with what I think, I'll vote for the person I know will not follow Bush's policies, rather than the person who could end up keeping things 90% the same.

[macdaddy121]

Of course they should try to do better. Anyone that works 8 hour days 5 days a week should be able to live a comfortable life. Maybe not one in luxury, but still survive and not just barely get by.

Get over your high horse that people who don't make much money are lazy. Before we moved to oregon my dad made about 32,000 as a teacher, which is nothing these days and he worked his ass off every day with 2nd graders.

All I'm going to say is that my wife is a teacher and I'm a full time student and I work full time. We own a home and pay our bills. We have no debt other than our home loan. It can be done but individual choices are important. I have never taken a handout and I never intend to (Lord willing).

It's not easy but if the government continues to offer hand outs for the poor what motivation do they have to better themselves?

[Aranince]

Of course they should try to do better. Anyone that works 8 hour days 5 days a week should be able to live a comfortable life. Maybe not one in luxury, but still survive and not just barely get by.

Get over your high horse that people who don't make much money are lazy. Before we moved to oregon my dad made about 32,000 as a teacher, which is nothing these days and he worked his ass off every day with 2nd graders.

I wonder how many people are working minimum wage jobs/don't have jobs are doing it for lazy, and how many people are doing it because there are no higher wage jobs.

If the latter is the highest, I can accept that. I still don't think the government should give handouts to them. If anything, figure out a way to fix the economy and bring prices down. Especially on gas by drilling here.

It's not easy but if the government continues to offer hand outs for the poor what motivation do they have to better themselves?

Exactly.

[yojitani]

Thats partly true, although anyone older than 23 can ask for a higher wage and they can get it. There is less attrition for older workers and more reliable, many times they are compensated for that.

Though I don't see the local factories dishing out livable $15 ph wages to everyone over 23.

[bobber205]

All I'm going to say is that my wife is a teacher and I'm a full time student and I work full time. We own a home and pay our bills. We have no debt other than our home loan. It can be done but individual choices are important. I have never taken a handout and I never intend to (Lord willing).

It's not easy but if the government continues to offer hand outs for the poor what motivation do they have to better themselves?


Basic human pride and dignity? Of course not 100% of them have, but you have to give them the benefit of the doubt. Unless of course you don't think they have it.

[bobber205]

I wonder how many people are working minimum wage jobs/don't have jobs are doing it for lazy, and how many people are doing it because there are no higher wage jobs.

If the latter is the highest, I can accept that. I still don't think the government should give handouts to them. If anything, figure out a way to fix the economy and bring prices down. Especially on gas by drilling here.

Funniest post of the day.
You realize the consensus among experts that it would take about a decade to have any effect on world crude prices?

And that the dumb oil companies have millions of acres of land untouched? What you say to that?

[macdaddy121]

Basic human pride and dignity? Of course not 100% of them have, but you have to give them the benefit of the doubt. Unless of course you don't think they have it.

I think it is much easier to accept a hand out rather than work hard, get your education, and get a decent paying job...If that means that I think a lot of them (the one's choosing to accept the handouts and not try and better themselves) don't have human pride and dignity then so be it.

[miloblithe]

Does voting with bush 95% of the time mean anything?

And what exactly does McCain propose that is different from Bush?
Lol two people were typing the same thing as me...

No, it doesn't really mean anything.

In fact, McCain is one of the least reliable (right-wing) Republicans in congress , according to averaging ratings by conservative organizations.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Senate/con_senator_ratings-2007.html

McCain is rated at 73% by these groups, far behind the likes of Jim DeMint (97%) and Saxby Chamblis (95%). MacCain actually ranks as the 12th most left-wing Republican, by these measures, and is more left-wing than the most right-wing Democrat, Ben Nelson of Nebraska.

Obama is far from the most liberal given an 11% rating on average by conservative groups, putting him pretty much in the middle of the pack.

In terms of rankings by liberal groups:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Senate/lib_senator_ratings-2007.html

Obama is rated at 80%, or the 9th most conservative of all democrats, far behind actual left-wingers like Ben Cardin (96% and Russ Cardin (96%).

On the other hand, on the issues important to the left-wing, McCain is not your man, rated at 9%, 5th most conservative of all Republicans.

[obeygiant]

It's not easy but if the government continues to offer hand outs for the poor what motivation do they have to better themselves?

Both parties want to help the poor. But how they way to go about it is different. Small businesses create jobs, factories create jobs, innovation creates jobs. Hand outs are okay to a point, but its the metaphor: Give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and he eats forever.

[yojitani]

I wonder how many people are working minimum wage jobs/don't have jobs are doing it for lazy, and how many people are doing it because there are no higher wage jobs.

If the latter is the highest, I can accept that. I still don't think the government should give handouts to them. If anything, figure out a way to fix the economy and bring prices down. Especially on gas by drilling here.

So your answer is 'let them live in poverty until the government can fix the problem'? Drilling here isn't going to change anything, I think that has been established everywhere aside from pundit talking points.

[macdaddy121]

Funniest post of the day.
You realize the consensus among experts that it would take about a decade to have any effect on world crude prices?

And that the dumb oil companies have millions of acres of land untouched? What you say to that?

Does that mean that we shouldn't do it? It's going to be hard and it's going to take a while before we see the effects....okay well let's not do it and continue to live off of foreign oil....NO!

We need to make ever step necessary to produce our own oil and our own new forms of energy. Regardless if the overall cost goes down, at least we won't be sending 100's of billions of dollars to the Middle East every year.

[Aranince]

Funniest post of the day.
You realize the consensus among experts that it would take about a decade to have any effect on world crude prices?


Better start drilling now then.

[synth3tik]

Of course they should try to do better. Anyone that works 8 hour days 5 days a week should be able to live a comfortable life. Maybe not one in luxury, but still survive and not just barely get by.

Get over your high horse that people who don't make much money are lazy. Before we moved to oregon my dad made about 32,000 as a teacher, which is nothing these days and he worked his ass off every day with 2nd graders.

You have a good point, My mother made $50K in the 90's she quit her job to teach special ed kids and now makes about $35K. Now she did make a choice to take a job that gave he a feeling of doing something good, however teacher need to get paid more. The education system in this country has been on the decline for decades, only since "no child left with education" have we really seen the issue straight up. Like you dad my mother works her ass off. working 12-14 hour days and getting paid for 7. Pulling out of her own pocket to get school supplies.

[Aranince]

So your answer is 'let them live in poverty until the government can fix the problem'? Drilling here isn't going to change anything, I think that has been established everywhere aside from pundit talking points.

I don't think people who make minimum wage or in poverty by any means.

[macdaddy121]

Both parties want to help the poor. But how they way to go about it is different. Small businesses create jobs, factories create jobs, innovation creates jobs. Hand outs are okay to a point, but its the metaphor: Give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and he eats forever.

Wonderful quote to bring up. That's my point. Thanks.

[Aranince]

I don't think people who make minimum wage or in poverty by any means.

Another thing, Obama isn't going to help the situation out anyway. His higher taxes on businesses could make the smaller businesses fail, thus reducing jobs.

[yojitani]

I don't think people who make minimum wage or in poverty by any means.

:confused: I guess you don't live in the United States then? Here it's 7.25 per hour. Without government programs and subsidies many families would simply go under working at that rate.

[yojitani]

Another thing, Obama isn't going to help the situation out anyway. His higher taxes on businesses could make the smaller businesses fail, thus reducing jobs.

Obama is supporting small businesses (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/#small-business)

[Aranince]

:confused: I guess you don't live in the United States then? Here it's 7.25 per hour. Without government programs and subsidies many families would simply go under working at that rate.

I do live in the US, and the minimum wage here is a little above that. I don't understand the rest of your statement.


I never said hes against it. He can be for small business and raise taxes.

[yg17]

Better start drilling now then.

No. I want to be off of oil in 10 years. Drilling is putting a band-aid on a stab wound

I don't think people who make minimum wage or in poverty by any means.

Minimum wage is $6.55 x 40 hours a week = $262/week
$262/week x 4 weeks in a month = $1,048/month, before tax. I don't know what tax rates are, but you'd probably be taking in around $800 or so a month at best. Maybe a single person with no kids living in the slums can live off of that a month. That's just the basics, not even healthcare costs. And if you have a child, there is absolutely no way you could live off of that and provide a halfway decent life for them.

[miloblithe]

I don't think people who make minimum wage or in poverty by any means.

$6.55 per hour x 2080 hours per year (no vacation, no holidays, no sick time) = $13624

Official U.S. poverty line: $10,400 for 1 person, $14,000 for family of 2, $17,600 for family of 3...

That minumum wage earner better not have a family, otherwise it sounds like they are living in poverty.

[Lord Blackadder]

I don't think people who make minimum wage or in poverty by any means.

I have to disagree here as well. Have you ever tried paying rent, car insurance, health insurance, gas, food utilities etc. on a minimum wage income? It's hellish.

[miloblithe]

I do live in the US, and the minimum wage here is a little above that. I don't understand the rest of your statement.


I never said hes against it. He can be for small business and raise taxes.

U.S minimum wage is $6.55 folks.

http://www.dol.gov/dol/topic/wages/minimumwage.htm

[Aranince]

before tax[/B]. I don't know what tax rates are, but you'd probably be taking in around $800 or so a month at best. Maybe a single person with no kids living in the slums can live off of that a month. That's just the basics, not even healthcare costs. And if you have a child, there is absolutely no way you could live off of that and provide a halfway decent life for them.\

No body said anything about decent living. He said poverty. No food, no home, no nothing. If you have food and a home, you are better off than a good percentage of the world.

[Lord Blackadder]

\

No body said anything about decent living. He said poverty. No food, no home, no nothing. If you have food and a home, you are better off than a good percentage of the world.

Generally speaking, anything less than decent living IS poverty.

[yojitani]

All I'm going to say is that my wife is a teacher and I'm a full time student and I work full time. We own a home and pay our bills. We have no debt other than our home loan. It can be done but individual choices are important. I have never taken a handout and I never intend to (Lord willing).

It's not easy but if the government continues to offer hand outs for the poor what motivation do they have to better themselves?

Just out of interest, say you had a baby and the cost of childcare equaled your wife's salary thus making it a better decision for her to stay at home (or you.. either way) so you have 3 mouths to feed, medical bills to pay, etc. on one salary plus school. How would that affect your finances?

[miloblithe]

\

No body said anything about decent living. He said poverty. No food, no home, no nothing. If you have food and a home, you are better off than a good percentage of the world.

Poverty = no food + no home + no nothing?

I think you need to refine your definition of poverty.

[yg17]

\

No body said anything about decent living. He said poverty. No food, no home, no nothing. If you have food and a home, you are better off than a good percentage of the world.

What about healthcare? Clothing? Some form of transportation to or from work? Who cares if that's better than other parts of the world, those standards are not good enough for this country.

[Aranince]

Generally speaking, anything less than decent living IS poverty.

Yep. Us folk here with homes, running water, electricity, and food are sure in poverty. Just go ask the folks who barley have food every month, let alone every day.

[yojitani]

\

No body said anything about decent living. He said poverty. No food, no home, no nothing. If you have food and a home, you are better off than a good percentage of the world.

Yes, poverty:http://frwebgate6.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=503504351575+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve

it has a definition. You are describing homelessness.

Also, minimum wage differs from state to state. Be grateful you don't live in Kansas: $2.65 ph!
http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm

Also, I don't think you read the link to Obama's site. For your convenience, here's the quote I was referring you to:
* Provide Tax Relief for Small Businesses and Start Up Companies: Barack Obama will eliminate all capital gains taxes on start-up and small businesses to encourage innovation and job creation. Obama will also support small business owners by providing a $500 “Making Work Pay” tax credit to almost every worker in America. Self-employed small business owners pay both the employee and the employer side of the payroll tax, and this measure will reduce the burdens of this double taxation.
* Create a National Network of Public-Private Business Incubators: Barack Obama will support entrepreneurship and spur job growth by creating a national network of public-private business incubators. Business incubators facilitate the critical work of entrepreneurs in creating start-up companies. Obama will invest $250 million per year to increase the number and size of incubators in disadvantaged communities throughout the country.

[miloblithe]

Yep. Us folk here with homes, running water, electricity, and food are sure in poverty. Just go ask the folks who barley have food every month, let alone every day.

You're being noticeably evasive. To what extent do you disagree with the official US definition of the poverty line, and why?

[Lord Blackadder]

Yep. Us folk here with homes, running water, electricity, and food are sure in poverty. Just go ask the folks who barley have food every month, let alone every day.

You've clearly never tried to live, on your own, on minimum wage. Trying to pay for that water, electricity, and food (plus rent and fuel) eats up nearly all of your income. Almost nothing extra to save. Almost nothing extra to deal with catastrophe (broken car, health issues).

Are you saying that anyone who isn't actually sitting in the dark starving isn't in poverty?

[Aranince]

You're being noticeably evasive. To what extent do you disagree with the official US definition of the poverty line, and why?

I apologize, as I didn't know the US had an official definition for it. I was arguing for a different standard I reckon.

You've clearly never tried to live, on your own, on minimum wage. Trying to pay for that water, electricity, and food (plus rent and fuel) eats up nearly all of your income. Almost nothing extra to save. Almost nothing extra to deal with catastrophe (broken car, health issues).

Are you saying that anyone who isn't actually sitting in the dark starving isn't in poverty?

No I haven't. I do agree it would be hard to live on my own, I can't even begin to imagine what it would be like. But that's why I'm planning on going to college, getting an education so I can pay for it.

Yes, by the standards I was arguing for.

[Lord Blackadder]

I apologize, as I didn't know the US had an official definition for it. I was arguing for a different standard I reckon.

I reckon differently; see the post above.

[macdaddy121]

Just out of interest, say you had a baby and the cost of childcare equaled your wife's salary thus making it a better decision for her to stay at home (or you.. either way) so you have 3 mouths to feed, medical bills to pay, etc. on one salary plus school. How would that affect your finances?

Funny you should ask since my wife and I are trying to have a baby! :D No luck yet but we continue to work at it....:eek:

Well, my wife does want to stay at home with our newborn and I would like that for her as well. Is it possible or not, I'm not sure yet (well, it's up for debate). It is possible but we would barely scrape by. To be very honest, I am finishing school before any baby is due but I will answer your hypothetical.

Well, we have PLANNED and SAVED money so that we will be financially secure for almost any situation that arises. Obviously if there is a major issue during pregnancy we could be faced with very large medical bills (happened to a friend of ours). I have all the proper insurance and we have worked hard over the past 3 years to save as much as possible (don't buy as much Apple stuff as I would want!).

To answer your question though, there are plenty of jobs that can be performed from home or on a part time basis (babysitting, tutoring, etc) that my wife could do while I worked or vice versa. The issue comes down to work ethic. Almost anything is possible if you live with in your means, save your money when possible, and work hard! We don't have debt because we don't go out and buy stuff we can't afford. Again, planning and self discipline are key to being able to properly support yourself.

[miloblithe]

I apologize, as I didn't know the US had an official definition for it. I was arguing for a different standard I reckon.

OK. If you can admit that you don't know what you're walking about, you're on the right track.

[Aranince]

OK. If you can admit that you don't know what you're walking about, you're on the right track.

I knew what i was talking about when I compare standards to people in Africa who live in the bush. I don't know what I'm talking about when I compare to the standards of the US.

[Lord Blackadder]

No I haven't. I do agree it would be hard to live on my own, I can't even begin to imagine what it would be like. But that's why I'm planning on going to college, getting an education so I can pay for it.

Well, assuming you have middle class parents and take put big loans, you should be fine. I lived off a small stipend as a grad student (roughly equivalent to a minimum wage income) and it SUCKED. I wouldn't wish that upon my enemies. And I'll tell you something - before I had to live on so little I had a much more cavalier attitude towards poverty. But it ain't funny anymore, as far as I'm concerned.

[Diatribe]

I knew what i was talking about when I compare standards to people in Africa who live in the bush. I don't know what I'm talking about when I compare to the standards of the US.

Yeah, let's keep comparing with the worst and not the best. Always the strategy of the losers not the winners.

[Anuba]

Another thing, Obama isn't going to help the situation out anyway. His higher taxes on businesses could make the smaller businesses fail, thus reducing jobs.
While I'm no friend of taxes, I would point out that modest tax raises in a country where taxes are extremely low to begin with, will not even begin to hurt businesses. Tax money trickles back into the system in the end.

You might wanna take a look at Europe where taxes are waaaaaaaaaaaaay higher than yours, yet the European economy has fared much better than yours over the last few years, and the Euro -- which was worth less than the USD back in Bill Clinton's day -- is stronger than ever. Here in Sweden we have stuff like a 33% income tax on top of a 30% payroll tax, plus a 25% sales tax, and a whopping 70% gas tax (gas is nearly 3 times more expensive in Sweden than the US). I run a one man business and I'm paying nearly 60% tax. The tax pressure is nearly 50% of the gross national product. In the US it's 25%.

By your logic all Swedes would be jobless, starving or simply dead, all due to taxes. Yet we have lower unemployment figures than the US, our standard of living is high, everything's just spiffing. The only thing that's hurting us at the moment is the weak dollar, really.

Again, I'm no friend of taxes. I'm a liberal, which in Sweden means that I'm a right-wing, tax-lowering bastard who is frequently lumped together with other right-wingers (conservatives and libertarians). I'm just saying that if a country can keep going despite paying DOUBLE the amount of taxes that you guys do, I don't think you need to be overly concerned over Obama's tax policies. I mean, what's he gonna do? Raise the total tax load by 1%? Oooooooh. Call me back when he's talking a 100% tax raise.

[bobber205]

Yes, poverty:http://frwebgate6.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=503504351575+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve

it has a definition. You are describing homelessness.

Also, minimum wage differs from state to state. Be grateful you don't live in Kansas: $2.65 ph!
http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm

Also, I don't think you read the link to Obama's site. For your convenience, here's the quote I was referring you to:

It's 5.25 in kansas but that's not much better.

[miloblithe]

I knew what i was talking about when I compare standards to people in Africa who live in the bush. I don't know what I'm talking about when I compare to the standards of the US.

Which Africans? What country are you talking about? And what does that have to do with U.S. standards of living?

[yojitani]

It's 5.25 in kansas but that's not much better.

Is it? Not that I don't believe you or anything. I was just basing my comment on the site I linked to. According to the site, 5.25 is in Minn. .. anyway, you can't live on either figure.

[Prof.]

$7.75 in IL. $8.25 by 2010.

OMFG it says Kansas's is $2.65?

Other State Min Wage. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._state_minimum_wages#State)

[Aranince]

Which Africans? What country are you talking about? And what does that have to do with U.S. standards of living?

Sudan? It doesn't have anything to do with the US standards except that US standards are higher than nothing...which is expected.

[bobber205]

Is it? Not that I don't believe you or anything. I was just basing my comment on the site I linked to. According to the site, 5.25 is in Minn. .. anyway, you can't live on either figure.

I used to make that.... :(

[seenew]

Obama is simply repealing Bush's tax cuts, back to where they were. A government needs taxes to run, and he did a great job of bankrupting our nation with his damn cuts. We're trillions of dollars in debt and spending $10,000,000,000 a month in Iraq. Where do people think this money is going to come from?

Oh, right. China. :rolleyes:

I love the republicans. "NO TAXES! LONGER WAR! DRILL BABY DRILL! Wait, what happened to the economy?"

[bobber205]

I wish Obama would say something about not letting coffins be shown for the first time in history (I think ;) ).

IF they were, the price we all pay would be shown every night and the war would be over fast.

[Mike Teezie]

I just wish the Republicans would use their convention to talk about the future. What they would do with the next eight years, specifically.

I watched a vice presidential candidate lambast a fellow American with vapid, petty, baseless attacks that were at times downright hateful, not to mention patently false. And before you Republicans tell me Barack didn't lay out his policies, I have to say, yes, he did. He listed them out pretty overtly.

Fine, she's a VP candidate, it's her "job" to be the attack dog.

But to talk for that long and not mention the economy once? Where does she stand on the issues? ISSUES PEOPLE.

I'm of course, working myself up for nothing. I mean hey - if McCain's campaign manager himself says this election isn't about issues (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/09/mccain_manager_this_election_i.html), what's else is Palin going to yammer on about?

Sheesh. :rolleyes:

[seenew]

I just wish the Republicans would use their convention to talk about the future. What they would do with the next eight years, specifically.

I watched a vice presidential candidate lambast a fellow American with vapid, petty, baseless attacks that were at times downright hateful, not to mention patently false. And before you Republicans tell me Barack didn't lay out his policies, I have to say, yes, he did. He listed them out pretty overtly.

Fine, she's a VP candidate, it's her "job" to be the attack dog.

But to talk for that long and not mention the economy once? Where does she stand on the issues? ISSUES PEOPLE.

I'm of course, working myself up for nothing. I mean hey - if McCain's campaign manager himself says this election isn't about issues (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/09/mccain_manager_this_election_i.html), what's else is Palin going to yammer on about?

Sheesh. :rolleyes:

Yeah, exactly what I was wondering the whole time. The best part was when the whole brainwashed crowd started chanting "DRILL BABY DRILL!"

Ahahaha. It's like they think oil will never run out. If we find more, we'll just use more. And then it will run out. It WILL run out.
Loved how Palin said Obama is not interested in energy when he pretty clearly laid out his plans for investing in NEW, CLEAN, and RENEWABLE sources of energy. She's too hyped up on the big oil kool-aid they serve up in Alaska to have heard about biofuels. Sad.

All the republicans seem to do is try to scare people. "YOU ARE NOT SAFE! LOOK OUT FOR THE TERRORISTS! LOOK OUT FOR THIS CRAZY MAN WHO WANTS TO TALK THEM DOWN! THE ONLY WAY IS TO BLOW THEM UP! THEY DON'T LISTEN TO NEGOTIATIONS! How do we know? Oh. Well, we don't. We just like guns. :D "

The only good part of the night was this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wFt-BTi8jI

http://www.seenew.net/piperLick.gif

[iGary]

I went to bed thinking I made an excellent decision when I dropped out of the Republican party. It was embarrassing to watch - especially Guliani.

Last night was nothing more of the same "taxes, religion, war war war, America **** yeah" rhetoric we've been getting for the last 8 years.

"Drill baby drill?"

What a bunch of neotards.

[xlii]

"She's like a Moose going after cabbage."

The English have better headlines than we do.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4671858.ece

[Cleverboy]

Even Huckabee, by far the most entertaining, yet least offensive speaker of the night, had lies on full display. I'm wondering what numbers he was going off of?
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/09/a-mike-huckabee.html
As part of the concerted party effort to respond to questions raised about Sarah Palin's experience level, Huckabee said John McCain's running mate got more votes running for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, than Joe Biden -- the vice presidential nominee on the Democratic ticket -- could garner in his failed White House bid this year.

The crowd laughed. But the numbers don’t add up.

In 1996, when Palin was elected mayor, she won 651 votes; in 1999, she was reelected with 909 votes, according to records posted on the city's website.

Although Biden's fifth-place finish in the Iowa caucuses led to him quickly exit the presidential race, Democratic officials recorded that 2,328 Iowans showed up to back him that night.

And because Biden's name remained on the ballot in some contests, he ended up with 79,754 votes in the overall tally for the nomination race.So, Mike... that's almost 80,000 votes... and not for Mayor of Wasilla, for the office of the President of the United States. Prop-o-ganda.
Also as part of the bid to square what Palin brings to the table with Biden, a six-term senator, Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle, noted for the delegates that Alaska has the same number of electoral votes as Delaware -- three -- but was more than 200 times as large in land mass.

~ CB

[blackfox]

I wish Obama would say something about not letting coffins be shown for the first time in history (I think ;) ).

IF they were, the price we all pay would be shown every night and the war would be over fast.
That would be one of the few decisions of the current administration that I agreed with.

Why? Because it can save lives.

Although the numbers of military personnel killed in Iraq/Afghanistan have been killed as a result of a dubious initial political choice - as a matter of our success/failure in the conflicts - they have been strategically and tactically insignificant. These casualties do matter politically, however, as the accumulation of them can demoralize the public back home. So, the greater the impact of these deaths on the public and the WH, the greater the incentive for insurgents to keep killing them, and the more likely this will cause the insurgents numbers to grow. The less attention to that the public, and the President, displays over military casualties - the better for those still out there - and for the potential success of the conflict.

[BoyBach]

Well I guess I'm just taken aback by the overt role that religion is allowed to play in this context... I think that if any political party here in the secular parts of Europe would bring an actual bishop on stage and ask the crowd to join him in prayer, I think the sheer impact of all the dropped jaws would cause the floor to crack. Then there would be public lynching for breaking the unspoken rule of never dragging religion into politics. All this stuff about "family values", uh... over here we have no idea about the families of politicians, and we don't care. They can be straight, single, married, gay, divorced, bigamists... Once someone is elected prime minister we may get a glimpse of his wife at some official event or whatever, but that's about it.

All these men in cowboy hats and hideous women in pant suits and 4 cans of hairspray... I guess this is the closest I'll ever get to contact with aliens! :eek:


After watching some of the coverage on the news last night I was left with the impression that, despite the cosmetic façade, that USA is a very, very foreign country.

And what about the disease that Obama allegedly contracted when he was in Europe? Sorry, I can't remember who said it, I believe it was made in one of the mediocre speeches if that helps narrow the field!? :rolleyes:

[Cleverboy]

And what about the disease that Obama allegedly contracted when he was in Europe? Sorry, I can't remember who said it, I believe it was made in one of the mediocre speeches if that helps narrow the field!? :rolleyes: Yeah... I was very embarassed as an American, to hear an American politician imply that Obama "contracted a disease" by going abroad, meeting people, and speaking. You know what... I remember being insulted, but I can't find mention in any of the transcripts to ANYTHING other than Huckabee commenting on bringing back ideas. --I'm thinking it was Gulliani, and apparently BOTH Palin and Gulliani had the teleprompter stall on them, and they had to go from memory. None of his transcripts are apparently from the ACTUAL speech. Someone needs to hunt that down.

~ CB

[Pittsax]

I didn't read through the 9 new pages of this thread, so I apologize if I repeat anything.

Wow...they talk about Steve Jobs' "Reality Distortion Field" but this is ridiculous! Ladies and gentlemen, I give you:

The Republican Reality Delusion Field

First off, you have Mitt Romney (I couldn't bring myself to watch more than two+ hours of coverage). Apparently, everything going wrong in the US is the result of 21 months of having a Democratic Party-controlled Congress. The mortgage crisis? Economic downturn? Massive debt? High oil prices? Yup, all Pelosi and the Democrats' fault. And the solution? More deregulation and more tax cuts. This is like saying the way to fix a broken arm is to cut it off! The mortgage industry has already been massively de-regulated, and thanks to allowing speculation in oil, prices are sky high. But you wouldn't know that by listening to Willard there. No...somehow the reduced government oversight has caused what little is left to cause the problem. And it's got to be the slight Democratic majority (which isn't enough to actually do anything in the Senate) and not the 6 years of rubberstamping by the Republicans.

Then you have Huckabee, who actually gave a decent speech. I liked his story about how not all Republicans are born with a silver spoon in their mouth (he certainly wasn't). Of course, once you step outside the RRDF™ you remember that John McCain IS one of those silver spoon Republicans. Thanks for reminding us Mike.

And Giuliani. I was actually surprised he made it through 75%+ of his speech without mentioning 9/11 once. That's not to say I liked it, but I was surprised. And to say that lobbyists are afraid of McCain, when they're practially running his campaign, is farcical.

Finally, we have Sarah Palin, who I must admit didn't seem too intimidated out there. She actually gave a decent speech, which is to say she did a good job of reading what was written for her. I loved how she was willing to use her kids to get ahead, even an infant with Down's syndrome. It almost seemed to me like she wanted to bring up Bristol's pregnancy, but then thought better of it, but she has a son going to Iraq, so that must make her qualified for the job. And I like how she said, "being mayor is a lot like being a community organizer, except with real responsibilities" but then never actually saying what those responsibilities were. And obviously she didn't look at her record uncovered by the (sexist and liberal) media, because she used the same lines about the "Bridge to Nowhere" and being anti earmark from her unveiling speech. In fact, the speech sounded a lot like someone took her speech from last week and grafted it onto a generic "Obama sucks" speech.

And lastly a word about the media. It's not sexist or liberal to point out that facts are diametrically opposed to what a candidate is saying about themselves. The only sexist comment I can think of is the one made about how she's not spending enough time at home with the kids. That I can agree on. But to use sexism as a crutch when the media points out all the earmarks she got for Wassilia over the years, or how she was in favor of the Bridge to Nowhere, or how her husband was a member of the AIP? And you KNOW that if the tables were reversed the Republicans would be all over Obama/Biden/Whomever. In fact, when Obama started running, they jumped on every little detail because he was "still an unknown" which is a fair criticism, even if some of their attacks weren't. But now that the shoe is on the other foot, they've become a bunch of whiners (cue Phil Gramm). Fact is, Republicans, YOU opened the door for the "new person" attacks. Sarah Palin opened the door for scrutiny of her kids by parading them around as a political tool. And you all in general have opened the door for attacks about what you'll actually DO as president, because in two days of coverage I've heard nothing about your actual plans for the future. Just bitching about the media, the same old anti-Obama rhetoric, and the tired "Vote Republican or Your Kids Will Die" crap that hasn't worked in 4 years.

[Anuba]

After watching some of the coverage on the news last night I was left with the impression that despite the cosmetic façade, that USA is a very, very foreign country.

And what about the disease that Obama allegedly contracted when he was in Europe? Sorry, I can't remember who said it, I believe it was made in one of the mediocre speeches if that helps narrow the field!? :rolleyes:
The most striking thing is how little they think of the people and their intelligence. Sure, European politicians stretch the truth too, but they don't talk down to people in baby language and they certainly wouldn't dare try to get away with such blatant lies. I felt like I was watching some kind of Baghdad Bob contest...

[Cleverboy]

Wow...they talk about Steve Jobs' "Reality Distortion Field" but this is ridiculous! Ladies and gentlemen, I give you:
The Republican Reality Delusion Field

I like this article:

When A Party Plays Make-believe
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/04/politics/animal/main4414377.shtml
Welcome to The Ironic Convention, 2008.

At one point last night, Romney argued, "We need change all right -- change from a liberal Washington to a conservative Washington!" It was a fairly common sentiment. I have this nagging urge to put a post-it note on the convention podium that reads, "Psst, Republicans, you've controlled the White House for eight years, and Congress for six of the last eight years. You've humiliated yourselves and discredited the conservative governing philosophy forever. Love, Steve."

Seriously, what's the message of the week in St. Paul? That Republican governing works? No. That Republicans have a legitimate policy agenda? No. That the next four years should be different from the last eight? No. It's simple: "Your house may be on fire, but don't trust that man standing outside with a hose, because he doesn't share your values."

In this sense, this convention is just like the one from 1992, with Republicans pretending that they haven't been in charge, and blaming Democrats for the Republican failures in the most divisive, pathological way possible.

Who's buying this nonsense?Indeed. Six of the last 8 years had Republicans controlling congress, and Republicans controlling the White House. --And... wow, now they don't even want the President to talk too much, and keep calling him "history" and pointing to "the future". Ug. Like... gag me with a spoon. Fer sure.

~ CB

[BoyBach]

Has Steve Bell, the Guardian's cartoonist, uncovered an unintended gaffe?

Conveniently for every cartoonist in the country, she compares herself to an attack dog (“What’s the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? Lipstick.”).

;)

[rdowns]

Sex of the last 8 years had Republicans controlling congress

Kinky. :D

[BoyBach]

This just in from the Associated Press - an interesting fact check on Sarah Palin's presentation to the convention last night.

ST. PAUL, Minn. — Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and her Republican supporters held back little Wednesday as they issued dismissive attacks on Barack Obama and flattering praise on her credentials to be vice president. In some cases, the reproach and the praise stretched the truth.

Some examples:

PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere."

THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."

PALIN: "There is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform _ not even in the state senate."

THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation.

PALIN: "The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."

THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama's plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain's plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.

Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families.

He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes above $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.

MCCAIN: "She's been governor of our largest state, in charge of 20 percent of America's energy supply ... She's responsible for 20 percent of the nation's energy supply. I'm entertained by the comparison and I hope we can keep making that comparison that running a political campaign is somehow comparable to being the executive of the largest state in America," he said in an interview with ABC News' Charles Gibson.

THE FACTS: McCain's phrasing exaggerates both claims. Palin is governor of a state that ranks second nationally in crude oil production, but she's no more "responsible" for that resource than President Bush was when he was governor of Texas, another oil-producing state. In fact, her primary power is the ability to tax oil, which she did in concert with the Alaska Legislature. And where Alaska is the largest state in America, McCain could as easily have called it the 47th largest state _ by population.

MCCAIN: "She's the commander of the Alaska National Guard. ... She has been in charge, and she has had national security as one of her primary responsibilities," he said on ABC.

THE FACTS: While governors are in charge of their state guard units, that authority ends whenever those units are called to actual military service. When guard units are deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, for example, they assume those duties under "federal status," which means they report to the Defense Department, not their governors. Alaska's national guard units have a total of about 4,200 personnel, among the smallest of state guard organizations.

FORMER ARKANSAS GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE: Palin "got more votes running for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska than Joe Biden got running for president of the United States."

THE FACTS: A whopper. Palin got 616 votes in the 1996 mayor's election, and got 909 in her 1999 re-election race, for a total of 1,525. Biden dropped out of the race after the Iowa caucuses, but he still got 76,165 votes in 23 states and the District of Columbia where he was on the ballot during the 2008 presidential primaries.

FORMER MASSACHUSETTS GOV. MITT ROMNEY: "We need change, all right _ change from a liberal Washington to a conservative Washington! We have a prescription for every American who wants change in Washington _ throw out the big-government liberals, and elect John McCain and Sarah Palin."

THE FACTS: A Back-to-the-Future moment. George W. Bush, a conservative Republican, has been president for nearly eight years. And until last year, Republicans controlled Congress. Only since January 2007 have Democrats have been in charge of the House and Senate.

http://timesonline.typepad.com/uselections/2008/09/palin-and-suppo.html

[leekohler]

Why is anyone even bothering with this convention? It should be obvious from the last 8 years that the Republicans can't win without lying. Why is anyone even listening to this pack of fools?

[iShater]

Because it about country first, about diversity .. err ... maybe not. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26539124/)

[Pittsax]

This just in from the Associated Press - an interesting fact check on Sarah Palin's presentation to the convention last night.

<SNIP>

Damn...the AP is just made up of a bunch of sexist lefties....

[Thomas Veil]

http://timesonline.typepad.com/uselections/2008/09/palin-and-suppo.htmlExcellent!

I knew a lot of that listening to her last night, either in part, completely or intuitively. That article really fills out all the details, and makes her look like the liar she is.

Thanks for posting. :)

I think you're gonna hear Obama, Biden and others quoting a lot of these whoppers in the coming weeks.

[sushi]

Interesting to see so many angry Democrats on the Republican Convention thread. If it makes you so angry, why read the thread?

Guess I must be missing something.

[Pittsax]

Interesting to see so many angry Democrats on the Republican Convention thread. If it makes you so angry, why read the thread?

Guess I must be missing something.
I can't speak for everyone else, but I'm just trying to cut through the BS. I expect policy differences from Republicans (otherwise, they'd be Democrats), but it's the out-and-out lying and distortion I can't stand.

And the best way to combat lies and distortion is to point it out.

[iShater]

Interesting to see so many angry Democrats on the Republican Convention thread. If it makes you so angry, why read the thread?

Guess I must be missing something.

Please, do no forget the Independents! :eek:

The thread is about the topic, and everybody is interested in the topic. :)

[leekohler]

Interesting to see so many angry Democrats on the Republican Convention thread. If it makes you so angry, why read the thread?

Guess I must be missing something.

Because it's sad to see this kind of garbage dumped on America. This is what passes for political discourse? This is what we want? Really?

[Aranince]

With all these claims of lies...I've yet to see it pop up on any major news network(Fox, CNN, etc.).

[Mike Teezie]

With all these claims of lies...I've yet to see it pop up on any major news network(Fox, CNN, etc.).

They've been posted in this very thread, but here you go:

Here's a great article from Associated Press:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080904/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_fact_check

[Aranince]

Veto Lie is false: http://www.adn.com/legislature/story/415749.html

Obama has not authered a law:
From the AP article you posted:
"But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation."

No major law or reform here.

[sushi]

Here's a great article from Associated Press:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080904/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_fact_check
This is what you call a good article? Pretty weak if you ask me.

I do find it interesting to see some folks becoming angry and upset about the Republicans choice for VP. Why does it matter if Obama is going to win? ;)

[obeygiant]

Interesting to see so many angry Democrats on the Republican Convention thread. If it makes you so angry, why read the thread?

Guess I must be missing something.

Actually this is the only credible thread to sling mud in. The other two thread's about republicans are too obviously hateful. :) Carry on!

[Mike Teezie]

Veto Lie Wrong: http://www.adn.com/legislature/story/415749.html

Obama has not authered a law:
From the AP article you posted:
"But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation."

No major law or reform here.

From the article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080904/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_fact_check):

PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere."

THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."

Is this what you are talking about? If so, the article just points out that she lied about end the "abuses of earmark spending by Congress." Also, that she rejected the Bridge to Nowhere. I don't see anything about a veto in there.

Maybe I'm missing what you are referring to.

This is what you call a good article? Pretty weak if you ask me.

I do find it interesting to see some folks becoming angry and upset about the Republicans choice for VP. Why does it matter if Obama is going to win? ;)

I don't see what's weak about it. It's just a list of lies she told, what more does in need?

[leekohler]

This is what you call a good article? Pretty weak if you ask me.

I do find it interesting to see some folks becoming angry and upset about the Republicans choice for VP. Why does it matter if Obama is going to win? ;)

Please refer to Boybach's post #322 on the previous page for more fact checking.

What matters is that this is what a major political party in the US thinks is just fine and dandy. Palin is an insult to all Americans. If you're a Republican, you should be seriously angry. But hey- you want her, have her.

[Aranince]

Is this what you are talking about? If so, the article just points out that she lied about end the "abuses of earmark spending by Congress." Also, that she rejected the Bridge to Nowhere. I don't see anything about a veto in there.

Maybe I'm missing what you are referring to.


People are saying she lied about vetoing.

[hogfaninga]

Please refer to Boybach's post #322 on the previous page for more fact checking.

What matters is that this is what a major political party in the US thinks is just fine and dandy. Palin is an insult to all Americans. If you're a Republican, you should be seriously angry. But hey- you want her, have her.

WOW.

You got a lot of hate in your heart. I pity you.

[gauchogolfer]

WOW.

You got a lot of hate in your heart. I pity you.

Are you seriously saying that leekhohler posted something hateful? Your bar must be set pretty low. How would you respond to post #322?

[iShater]

Are you seriously saying that leekhohler posted something hateful? Your bar must be set pretty low. How would you respond to post #322?

You had to make me scroll and then have to go back to another page. Link for the love of God!!! :D :p

[Don't panic]

People are saying she lied about vetoing.

no, the lie was about refusing earmaks, which she actively sought, and about opposing the infamous bridge, which she also supported, until it became clear that it was going to be undefunded anyway and used the money for other scopes.

[hogfaninga]

Are you seriously saying that leekhohler posted something hateful? Your bar must be set pretty low. How would you respond to post #322?

I just find it rather funny how the liberals are filled with so much hate. I have never seen so much hate coming from any other group.

Example: From your avatar I know you support a Communist. That being said I have a low opinion of you(not like you care nor do I care what you think of me). I think liberals are trash. See it goes both ways.

[leekohler]

WOW.

You got a lot of hate in your heart. I pity you.

Nope- not hate, sadness. Sadness that this kind of discourse has become acceptable in this country. Sadness that no matter how hypocritical, that there are still people who buy into the current GOP's rhetoric.

I just find it rather funny how the liberals are filled with so much hate. I have never seen so much hate coming from any other group.

Example: From your avatar I know you support a Communist. That being said I have a low opinion of you(not like you care nor do I care what you think of me). I think liberals are trash. See it goes both ways.

Keep it up with the name-calling and you're headed for a nice time-out. Oh by the way, look in the mirror if you need to see who's being hateful.

[Thomas Veil]

WOW.

You got a lot of hate in your heart. I pity you.Sorry, the truth is not hateful.

As far as liberals getting on Palin's case...I have a feeling you ain't seen nothin' yet.

She's going to have an unintended consequence for McCain. You can't come out slinging that poo and expect to not get a reaction.

She's energizing the liberal base. The wilder her rhetoric gets, the more energized our side will become.

BTW, you might want to avert your eyes from my avatar.

[mactastic]

I think liberals are trash.
Gee, you seem to have a lot of hate in your heart. I pity you.

[hogfaninga]

Nope- not hate, sadness. Sadness that this kind of discourse has become acceptable in this country. Sadness that no matter how hypocritical, that there are still people who buy into the current GOP's rhetoric.



Keep it up with the name-calling and you're headed for a nice time-out. Oh by the way, look in the mirror if you need to see who's being hateful.

Time out? OK oh great one. I'm fearful of that. Liberals love censorship. It is alright for them to throw out their propaganda and lies, but not the other side. I guess it doesn't take too much strain on the brain to be a liberal. Most of the rhetoric here is the talking points put out each day by the Obama campaign.

[mactastic]

Time out? OK oh great one. I'm fearful of that. Liberals love censorship. It is alright for them to throw out their propaganda and lies, but not the other side. I guess it doesn't take too much strain on the brain to be a liberal. Most of the rhetoric here is the talking points put out each day by the Obama campaign.
You have a lot of hate in your heart. I pity you.

[GorillaPaws]

Time out? OK oh great one. I'm fearful of that. Liberals love censorship. It is alright for them to throw out their propaganda and lies, but not the other side. I guess it doesn't take too much strain on the brain to be a liberal. Most of the rhetoric here is the talking points put out each day by the Obama campaign.

It's not censorship to expect people to debate civilly without having to resort to name calling. Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean you have to do so disagreeably. How about ratcheting up the maturity level a notch and discussing issues of substance?

[leekohler]

Time out? OK oh great one. I'm fearful of that. Liberals love censorship. It is alright for them to throw out their propaganda and lies, but not the other side. I guess it doesn't take too much strain on the brain to be a liberal. Most of the rhetoric here is the talking points put out each day by the Obama campaign.

Really? I could have mistaken you for Rush Limbaugh just now. ;)

You want to come in here and talk issues, do it. But Do NOT come in here just to talk trash and name-call. This isn't the EIB Network or Air America. Read the rules of this forum or risk a time out- it's up to you.

You'll find all kinds of people in here, all with many differing viewpoints. But you can't label everyone in these forums with your "liberal" brush and get away with it. Most of us have too many different views on different issues for you to make that claim.

[iShater]

Time out? OK oh great one. I'm fearful of that. Liberals love censorship. It is alright for them to throw out their propaganda and lies, but not the other side. I guess it doesn't take too much strain on the brain to be a liberal. Most of the rhetoric here is the talking points put out each day by the Obama campaign.

Please, lets not get started about what Republicans have done to our civil liberties. I think this thread is being recorded. :rolleyes:

[BoyBach]

I just find it rather funny how the liberals are filled with so much hate. I have never seen so much hate coming from any other group.

Example: From your avatar I know you support a Communist. That being said I have a low opinion of you(not like you care nor do I care what you think of me). I think liberals are trash. See it goes both ways.


I wonder what you'll make of me?

I'm a European (don't forget to have your inoculation, we're contagioues :eek: ), socialist (I want to steal and spend all of your money :eek: ) liberal (I'm a terr'rist supporter :eek: ).

:rolleyes:

[obeygiant]

I'm a European

I'm always curious why Europeans and Aussies have such a strange affinity for American Politics.

[iShater]

I'm always curious why Europeans and Aussies have such a strange affinity for American Politics.

I think we don't realize how things that happen in the US impact the rest of the world. They do.

[obeygiant]

Please, lets not get started about what Republicans have done to our civil liberties. I think this thread is being recorded. :rolleyes:

The fact that the FBI isn't at your door is enough to say that nothing really has changed with our civil liberties.

[Diatribe]

The fact that the FBI isn't at your door is enough to say that nothing really has changed with our civil liberties.

Tell that to the people at Guantanamo Bay.

[Pittsax]

The fact that the FBI isn't at your door is enough to say that nothing really has changed with our civil liberties.
...or it's just because I haven't called my Uncle Ahmed in Pakistan lately

[Pittsax]

I
Example: From your avatar I know you support a Communist.
No offense, but most of you on the Right really need to re-examine the definition of Communist/socialist

[obeygiant]

Tell that to the people at Guantanamo Bay.

Oh yeah, those chaps at gitmo. Don't worry when Obama is Prez he'll let them out.

There are now about 490 prisoners at Gitmo, and "55 percent of the detainees are not determined to have committed any hostile acts against the United States or coalition allies.

"Only 8 percent of the detainees were characterized as Al Qaeda fighters.

Of the remaining detainees, 40 percent have no definitive connection with Al Qaeda at all and 18 percent have no definitive affiliation with either Al Qaeda or the Taliban.
"Only 5 percent of the detainees were captured by United States forces. [A total of] 86 percent of the detainees were arrested by either Pakistan or the Northern Alliance and turned over to United States custody. This 86 percent of the detainees captured by Pakistan or the Northern Alliance were turned over to the United States at a time at which the United States offered large bounties for capture of suspected enemies."

The Northern Alliance included Afghan warlords—not noted, to say the least, for their concern for any due process in rounding up "suspects" or the quality of the "evidence," if any, connecting their captives with terrorism. But these warlords were attracted by the generous sums the U.S. gave them for these suspects—many of whom were then warehoused at Gitmo.Report from 2006 (http://www.villagevoice.com/2006-02-28/news/gitmo-the-worst-of-the-worst/)

[iShater]

The fact that the FBI isn't at your door is enough to say that nothing really has changed with our civil liberties.

The FBI already abused the warrant-less taps, how long before they start doing that sort of things to people they suspect of things?

PS: And wouldn't it be too late when something like that happens? :confused:

[BoyBach]

I'm always curious why Europeans and Aussies have such a strange affinity for American Politics.


There's nothing "strange" about taking an interest in international events and politics.

[Diatribe]

There's nothing "strange" about taking an interest in international events and politics.

If you're looking at the American majority it is. :D :p

[Thomas Veil]

Time out? OK oh great one. I'm fearful of that. Liberals love censorship. It is alright for them to throw out their propaganda and lies, but not the other side. I guess it doesn't take too much strain on the brain to be a liberal. Most of the rhetoric here is the talking points put out each day by the Obama campaign.I work for a public access facility, a place founded on the liberal principle of freedom of expression (even though, ironically, it's used by, among others, closed-minded religious bigots to spread their venom). You can say anything you want on our channel, and we cherish that freedom. I do admit, however, that we are very much the proverbial soapbox on the corner.

Contrast that with Rush Limbaugh, who has three hours of national time daily to express his distorted, warped views of what liberalism is, and is vehemently against the Equal Time provision because, God forbid!, it might force him to share some of his precious hate radio time with someone who thinks differently (no pun intended).

The liberals I've seen here tend to hold conservatives accountable, and they use facts and reality to do that, and reality, as conservatives have found to their chagrin, has a liberal bias. I'm sympathetic that the real world does not work the way conservatives would like it to, but they're the ones who need to make the adjustment.

[seenew]

Oh yeah, those chaps at gitmo. Don't worry when Obama is Prez he'll let them out.

Report from 2006 (http://www.villagevoice.com/2006-02-28/news/gitmo-the-worst-of-the-worst/)

Good! Did you even READ what you quoted? The majority of them SHOULD be let out, or at the very least be given trial!

I love it when the Right says they don't deserve trial. Of course they do, they are human just like anyone else in this country (except they are being held here against their will), and our law states that everyone is equal and deserves equal treatment. So we should give them a fair trial. Should we stoop to be that low as to ignore our own principles? No, we should be above that, take the high road and set an example. After all, if they are truly guilty of the crimes we say they are, then it should be no trouble to put up a case against them.

This is just a whole new era of McCarthyism. Fortunately some people see it as such and maybe we can stop before it gets that far.

[obeygiant]

McCain gave a very rousing speech. He never mentioned "experience" but he did say he had scars. I know the majority here hate hearing about the fact that he was a POW, but that fact is central to his character. In a way its fascinating listening to the ordeal he went thru, those things actually happened to him.

The RNC went well, as least as well as the DNC went. The whole Hurricane Gustav situation was handled very smoothly and it gave the RNC a chance to really start.

The next two months are going to be a riot.

[Cleverboy]

McCain gave a very rousing speech. He never mentioned "experience" but he did say he had scars. I know the majority here hate hearing about the fact that he was a POW, but that fact is central to his character. In a way its fascinating listening to the ordeal he went thru, those things actually happened to him.I don't think anyone on these forums "hate hearing about" the fact that he was a POW. Those who have problems with it, have problems with the amount of times they've been forced to hear it. It's been documented in the news that the fact is endanger of being belittled, because it is used to divert attention when the campaign has been pressed with difficult or unflattering questions. I think that's a fair enough reason to feel bothered. It has nothing to do with the merit of the sacrifice or its importance to his character. Last I heard, even fellow POW's have begun to be offended by its overuse.

~ CB

[seenew]

I think the second half of his speech was surprisingly well spoken. I don't buy it at all, of course, but since I went in with such low expectations, I was shocked. However, he still remained vague (IMO) in some of his positions, and seemed to contradict himself and his party's themes so far. Change? I thought they told us change was bad? Now they're for it? And what about those job handouts he talked about? I thought they were against 'handouts'.

I will give him some props for admitting his party had screwed up the country. Although it doesn't seem like he plans on doing much about it.

I want the debates!

[bobber205]

I would just like to say that during Kerry's campaign, I never thought having a purple heart gave him any more credibility and I got sick of hearing about it too.

[atszyman]

Change? I thought they told us change was bad? Now they're for it? And what about those job handouts he talked about? I thought they were against 'handouts'.

I also caught a portion at the gym (I'm currently watching the TiVo'd version) but I did hear him mention that Obama voted for a corporate wellfare bill. I thought those didn't exist either?

I also heard him talk about Obama's plan making the government paid for healthcare available for those who can't afford it, and how it will put a bureaucrat in the way of their healthcare.

Isn't this the same healthcare plan that we provide for Congress and other government employees?

Edit:
Finally finished the speech, sounds more like the McCain of 2000, avoided Bush at every corner and I can see it appealing to many.

I did like how in the comments immediately after the speech Chris Matthews talked of having to divorce himself form the current GOP and managed to cram the word "divorce" into the statement about a dozen times, a little subliminal message perhaps?

[bobber205]

I also caught a portion at the gym (I'm currently watching the TiVo'd version) but I did hear him mention that Obama voted for a corporate wellfare bill. I thought those didn't exist either?

I also heard him talk about Obama's plan making the government paid for healthcare available for those who can't afford it, and how it will put a bureaucrat in the way of their healthcare.

Isn't this the same healthcare plan that we provide for Congress and other government employees?

that is nearly quoting what obama has always said. :D

[atszyman]

My biggest question of the night is now, "If all we need to do to start drilling is elect McCain, why hasn't Bush already started it?" Every time they talk about it they make it sound like we can start on January 21, 2009 right after his oath of office, so why aren't we doing it now? Why doesn't Bush start the ball early? Why delay it any longer if it's going to be such a big help?

McCain can talk all he wants about drilling but odds are that he'll be facing a more dominant Democratic majority in Congress so if he's going to need their say to do it, it may very well not amount to anything.

[BoyBach]

I noticed that the speakers leading up to McCain continued with the lies about Palin and with the historical revisionism. :rolleyes:

I thought that McCain's speech was a bit rubbish - he managed to contradict himself continually - with the exception of his POW story.

Two highlights:


That is how you play the POW card. It's something that shaped his character and not a way to excuse his gaffes.
When he praised Barack Obama and completely confused the crowd who instinctively started to boo before they realised they were meant applause. Priceless.


The message of his speech appeared to be "Fight! Fight! Fight!" whilst the audience waved signs emblazoned with "Peace" - Orwell would be proud.

[Pittsax]

After having a night to digest McCain's speech, I think (and I'm trying to be as objective as I can here), that there's no way (legitimately) he can win the election.

McCain clearly puts off a lot of his base. There were lines in his speech where you could almost hear the crickets chirping -- bits about how if a Democrat had a good idea, he would accept it. This has always been his problem in the eyes of most mainstream Republicans. Sure, he can fire them up now, but just about any base gets fired up after a convention.

On the flip-side, you have Sarah Palin. She definitely can fire up the base (listen to her speech, and notice that dropping her name got McCain the loudest cheers of the night), but she has the potential to REALLY put off the swing voters. Put it together, and you have a pretty bad combination. Few swing voters are brought in by VP choices, but they can be repelled by them. And most base voters care more about who is #1 than #2. Sure, they might support Sarah Palin, but how much do they want John "Some Democrat Ideas are Good" McCain in the White House?

[Pittsax]

That is how you play the POW card. It's something that shaped his character and not a way to excuse his gaffes.

I totally agree. But it's a Boy Who Cried Wolf problem. By the time McCain got around to it, we had heard the POW story so...many...times...already. How much more of an impact would it have had if it hadn't been the predominant theme of the convention?

[atszyman]

So any predictions on a post convention bump?

If there is one at all I predict it will be small. I think Palin's speech was the biggest draw, and there was very little in that speech to convert moderates or independents. McCain's speech would have done a better job but I don't think the ratings will have held from Palin's speech and it will have mostly been preaching to the choir.

They managed to introduce Palin and bring those already supporting McCain on board and support her, but I just don't see the draw for those who were on the fence.

Polls should be interesting next week.

[BoyBach]

So any predictions on a post convention bump?

If there is one at all I predict it will be small. I think Palin's speech was the biggest draw, and there was very little in that speech to convert moderates or independents.


I agree. Whilst Palin will have invigorated the 'conservative base', I'd hazard a guess that the gun-toting, bible-bashing, book-banning, science-rejecting, ant-abortion, climate change-denying whackjob will have invigorated the 'liberal base' also (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/04/obama-raises-8-million-af_n_124023.html).

[quagmire]

Ummm..... wow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw1vEzqld0I

Even though they say it is a tribute video, it didn't sound much like what a tribute normally sounds like.........

[atszyman]

Ummm..... wow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw1vEzqld0I

Even though they say it is a tribute video, it didn't sound much like what a tribute normally sounds like.........

That's fear-mongering propaganda, that was not a tribute.

[beatzfreak]

That's fear-mongering propaganda, that was not a tribute.

Yep, as a New Yorker who lost friends on 9/11, I find it extremely offensive to their memory.

I wonder if they intentionally showed this at the same time many NY/NJer's where watching our NY Giants seasonal opener so we wouldn't see it.

[mactastic]

Did you know McCain was a POW? And that Palin works with her nose? Seriously, what the hell was that about?

If there's one thing I learned watching the convention, it's that Sarah Palin should be at the top of the ticket, McCain should be the VP nominee. No one throws the red moose-meat around like she does.

Of course, while she sure can give a great speech, other than that, she's an empty suit with no major accomplishments to her name. She's just a rock-star type celebrity that attracts crowds like a conservative Brittney Spears or Paris Hilton. She's presented herself as a messainic figure to the GOP, their savior who is being crucified by theliberalmedia in front of their eyes.

But other than that, what has she done? Very, very little.

So any predictions on a post convention bump?

If there is one at all I predict it will be small. I think Palin's speech was the biggest draw, and there was very little in that speech to convert moderates or independents. McCain's speech would have done a better job but I don't think the ratings will have held from Palin's speech and it will have mostly been preaching to the choir.

They managed to introduce Palin and bring those already supporting McCain on board and support her, but I just don't see the draw for those who were on the fence.

Polls should be interesting next week.
I think there will be a significant bounce for McCain. In fact, I would expect that he will take the lead in national polls. The choice of Palin has finally solidified McCain's GOP base. The enthusiasm gap should be gone now as the extreme-right finally gets on board the crooked-talk express. This election is now McCain's to lose unless Obama gets his **** together in a hurry.

[atszyman]

So any predictions on a post convention bump?

If there is one at all I predict it will be small. I think Palin's speech was the biggest draw, and there was very little in that speech to convert moderates or independents. McCain's speech would have done a better job but I don't think the ratings will have held from Palin's speech and it will have mostly been preaching to the choir.

They managed to introduce Palin and bring those already supporting McCain on board and support her, but I just don't see the draw for those who were on the fence.

Polls should be interesting next week.

I stand corrected (http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN0439266820080905).

A record 38.9 million U.S. TV viewers watched John McCain accept the Republican nomination for president on Thursday, slightly more than the 38.3 million people who tuned in for Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's speech, Nielsen Media Research reported.

Next week's polls should be interesting.

I think there will be a significant bounce for McCain. In fact, I would expect that he will take the lead in national polls. The choice of Palin has finally solidified McCain's GOP base. The enthusiasm gap should be gone now as the extreme-right finally gets on board the crooked-talk express. This election is now McCain's to lose unless Obama gets his **** together in a hurry.

It's possible but I just don't see it. I think she's very polarizing and doing just as good of a job uniting the Dems as she is pulling the GOP base. Of course the viewership of McCain's speech last night will probably help since he sounded more like the McCain a lot of us liked in 2000.

[mactastic]

Maybe I missed it, but I didn't hear McCain utter the name "Bush" even once during his acceptance speech?

[atszyman]

Maybe I missed it, but I didn't hear McCain utter the name "Bush" even once during his acceptance speech?

Nope never by name, he did mention Laura, and made references to "the President" but never used Bush unless he used it as Laura's last name.

[obeygiant]

Maybe I missed it, but I didn't hear McCain utter the name "Bush" even once during his acceptance speech?

Hell no. I wouldn't either. :)

[NT1440]

Maybe I missed it, but I didn't hear McCain utter the name "Bush" even once during his acceptance speech?

im not sure what speech it was, but it was recent, and i swear to god i heard him "thanking bush for leading us through these tough times". The only reason i remember this is because i spit out some milk and was choking on coco puffs because of it.

does anyone else remember that little tidbit? Maybe it wasn't Mccain tho, i really cant remember who said it.

[szark]

Maybe I missed it, but I didn't hear McCain utter the name "Bush" even once during his acceptance speech?

I didn't watch the speech, but he apparently said the name once according to the NY Times: Words They Used (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/09/04/us/politics/20080905_WORDS_GRAPHIC.html)

[solvs]

Attacks, praise stretch truth at GOP convention (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080904/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_fact_check)

That about sums it up. What a disappointment. While the Dems finally got into some specifics, praising McCain even while saying they disagreed with him, and while talk of bipartisanship and bringing others to the table was cheered at the DNC, the RNC seemed to just be speaking to their base. Using the same old talking points, as the article points out sometimes not even factually, criticizing Obama for things that don't seem to be issue based, and lots of talk about "liberals" (especially Bush, actually using the term "angry liberals"). I didn't hear any policy, new or old, and the rhetoric wasn't even that exciting. No wonder McCain (almost wrote Bush, Freudian slip much... didn't exactly dispel that myth no matter how hard they tried) barely got a bump in the polls. Palin did ok, better than most of the rest I suppose, but we still don't know much about her. As I posted in another thread, 60% of those polled were unsure of her before, and after, 60% were unsure. If that doesn't tell them something, I don't know what will.

Lieberman is going to be hurt by this more than anyone:

Jewish Dem Breaks Silence, Rips Lieberman: 'Not His Finest Hour' (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/03/jewish-dem-breaks-silence_n_123529.html)
Reid not happy with Lieberman’s speech (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/03/reid-not-happy-with-lieberman%E2%80%99s-speech/)
Democrats May Have Had It With Lieberman (http://www.courant.com/news/custom/topnews/hc-joereax0904.artsep04,0,7002280.story)
Lieberman leaves Democrats livid (http://www.kansascity.com/news/columnists/steve_kraske/story/785550.html)

I would just like to say that during Kerry's campaign, I never thought having a purple heart gave him any more credibility and I got sick of hearing about it too.
At least no one is actually making fun of McCain's POW status the way the GOP did at their convention in '04 with their purple heart bandaids.

That's fear-mongering propaganda, that was not a tribute.
I agree, a line was crossed (http://www.jedreport.com/2008/09/did-they-just-cross-the-line-o.html). That was horrible. I missed it the first time I'd heard about it, figured it was typical neocon fearmongering. But after I saw it, it was just as bad as I'd heard. Worse actually. I hope there's a backlash against it. There should be.

They also used fake troops for another video (http://www.vetvoice.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1843).

like a conservative Brittney Spears or Paris Hilton.
Both of them are conservatives, as are their families. ;)

I think there will be a significant bounce for McCain.
I hope you were being sarcastic, because there wasn't.

Maybe I missed it, but I didn't hear McCain utter the name "Bush" even once during his acceptance speech?
No one said his name. Even he barely talked about himself when he spoke. Via satellite. His Wife kinda did, but not really either. The Daily Show did a whole bit about him being practically absent, despite those like Reagan being mentioned constantly. Can you blame them?

Meanwhile:

Democrats post big gains in voter registration (http://www.nola.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/politics-17/1220752751321310.xml&storylist=politics)