Oh wait a second, do you mean when she was mayor podunk alaska, the town with 14 people and one drunk russian?
Oh yea, I forgot that.
Yea, she can definitely run shit. If there’s a quarrel with some eskimos, or someone falls under the ice, than she will be kickass.
Or apparently, if a moose needs killing.
Here, amigos, this is where Sarah Palin “ran shit” from.
You can also buy cigarettes and a paper there.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
There’s a word for women in NJ who hunt moose. Normally they play softball and are firefighters too. We call them, “bull dykes.” No thanks.
[/quote]
You must be from North Jersey. Down in South Jersey where you can still hunt, fish, and farm, women hunting is quite common== and far from bull dykes. I grew up there. My wife grew up in the marshes. She hunted and rode motorcycles and is far from a Lesbo (on a side note, that works against me sometimes, dammit, that 3-some ain’t gonna happen…)
In Maine, some of the smartest, self-sufficient, down to earth, and competent women hunt and fish. Camo teddies are commonplace…
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
It should surprise no one that I like Nancy Pelosi, so I wouldn’t really mind said scenario. Not that she’s that she’s good looking, or not a dyke, but at least she’s a Democratic woman, and not Hillary Clinton.
[/quote]
What you’re really saying here is that you’d rather have a Nanny with no respect for the Constitution and your Liberty versus a woman who has a track record of actually working to help people by freeing them from the Government and actually understands and respects the Constitution.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
rainjack wrote:
You compare Palin to a stewardess, but she has 2 years more experience actually running shit than your top guy has.
Running Alaska. All 600,000 of them, and that counts polar bears and yetties.
And she’s been governor for 2 fuckin years.
Obama’s been in the senate since 2004. That’s four years.
Aren’t you an accountant amigo?[/quote]
He served all of 150 days before hitting the campaign trail. Being that I do count beans, I can tell you that Opie has missed 3.5 years of his term, of which there are still 2 years left.
I guess you are right. I did misspeak. Palin has 1.5 years more experience actually running shit. Barry is far more experienced in campaigning.
I don’t want a president whose extent of experience consists of voting “present” when he actually decides to show up.
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
There’s a word for women in NJ who hunt moose. Normally they play softball and are firefighters too. We call them, “bull dykes.” No thanks.
You must be from North Jersey. Down in South Jersey where you can still hunt, fish, and farm, women hunting is quite common== and far from bull dykes. I grew up there. My wife grew up in the marshes. She hunted and rode motorcycles and is far from a Lesbo (on a side note, that works against me sometimes, dammit, that 3-some ain’t gonna happen…)
In Maine, some of the smartest, self-sufficient, down to earth, and competent women hunt and fish. Camo teddies are commonplace…
[/quote]
Well, I’m not going to make fun of your wife. But everyone knows you 609 motherfuckers are a little bit off.
Hahah. Sure buddy. That’s what you want to call it, you go right ahead.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
There’s a word for women in NJ who hunt moose. Normally they play softball and are firefighters too. We call them, “bull dykes.” No thanks.
It should surprise no one that I like Nancy Pelosi, so I wouldn’t really mind said scenario. Not that she’s that she’s good looking, or not a dyke, but at least she’s a Democratic woman, and not Hillary Clinton.
And besides, having our manly man President who builds fences and weightlifts has put us in quite a quandry in the world. If that’s what we get for having a President who puts off the image of “manliness” (even though he never did a day of hard labor in his life), then you fellas can have that too.
I ain’t voting for who I want to get drunk with, I’m voting for President. And I’ll take an educated Obama who watches The View over anyone out there right now.[/quote]
You’re making no sense - you are attacking a female candidate on the basis her femininity automatically disqualifies her from leadership (only good as a “stewardess”, apparently), and then whining that “masculine qualities” got us in trouble, so we need some “femininity” to correct the machismo.
Let’s see - “femininity” bad, except when “femininity” good.
I suppose coherence is too much to ask.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Oh wait a second, do you mean when she was mayor podunk alaska, the town with 14 people and one drunk russian?
Oh yea, I forgot that.
Yea, she can definitely run shit. If there’s a quarrel with some eskimos, or someone falls under the ice, than she will be kickass.
Or apparently, if a moose needs killing.
[/quote]
Nope. Talking only about her term as Governor. But if it makes you feel less scared to call her a bull dyke mayor of 14 drunks, go ahead. in about 4 months, you will be calling her the Vice President.
Four years after that? Madam President.
Another four years later? Madam President.
She will be either #1, or #2 longer than your gal pal Eli will be QBing for the NYG’s.
It’s going to suck to be you.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Running Alaska. All 600,000 of them, and that counts polar bears and yetties.
And she’s been governor for 2 fuckin years.
Obama’s been in the senate since 2004. That’s four years.
Aren’t you an accountant amigo?[/quote]
Obama was in the Senate for 150 days before he began running for President full-time.
Palin has been governor nearly three times that number.
And, just to pile on - Palin negotiated a pipeline project (the largest construction project in North America) with Canada, and Obama has called exactly zero meetings as Chairman of the Subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
stories are breaking left, right, and center that she is not as clean as McCain believe she was.
She is NOT a reformer, is NOT against pork barrel spending, has NO foreign policy experience (seriously, commanding the Alaskan National Guard does not count).
And lastly it is rumored that she heavily abused her authority as governor in a manner which could see her end up in jail, but we’d have to wait for some more info on that before we can go into great detail.
Has a candidate ever dropped their VP nominee before an election? Cos it just might happen with this one…
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
There’s a word for women in NJ who hunt moose. Normally they play softball and are firefighters too. We call them, “bull dykes.” No thanks.
It should surprise no one that I like Nancy Pelosi, so I wouldn’t really mind said scenario. Not that she’s that she’s good looking, or not a dyke, but at least she’s a Democratic woman, and not Hillary Clinton.
And besides, having our manly man President who builds fences and weightlifts has put us in quite a quandry in the world. If that’s what we get for having a President who puts off the image of “manliness” (even though he never did a day of hard labor in his life), then you fellas can have that too.
I ain’t voting for who I want to get drunk with, I’m voting for President. And I’ll take an educated Obama who watches The View over anyone out there right now.
You’re making no sense - you are attacking a female candidate on the basis her femininity automatically disqualifies her from leadership (only good as a “stewardess”, apparently), and then whining that “masculine qualities” got us in trouble, so we need some “femininity” to correct the machismo.
Let’s see - “femininity” bad, except when “femininity” good.
I suppose coherence is too much to ask.[/quote]
I’m tired. It was a holiday weekend.
Honestly, I don’t like Palin because I think you don’t go from managing a town of 5,000 to being VP in two years.
I don’t care at all about her personal issues, who her daughter is fucking, or whatever. What I care about is that she is a very conservative person. She’s pro-life and anti gay marriage (as I recollect). That’s going to drive away whatever women they thought they were going to get on the sex basis, so I think it’s a stupid choice on McCain’s part. If I was him I’d have taken Romney and tried to steal Mass from us… but if that’s where he wants to go, so be it.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Oh wait a second, do you mean when she was mayor podunk alaska, the town with 14 people and one drunk russian?
Oh yea, I forgot that.
Yea, she can definitely run shit. If there’s a quarrel with some eskimos, or someone falls under the ice, than she will be kickass.
Or apparently, if a moose needs killing.
Nope. Talking only about her term as Governor. But if it makes you feel less scared to call her a bull dyke mayor of 14 drunks, go ahead. in about 4 months, you will be calling her the Vice President.
Four years after that? Madam President.
Another four years later? Madam President.
She will be either #1, or #2 longer than your gal pal Eli will be QBing for the NYG’s.
It’s going to suck to be you.
[/quote]
HAHAHAHAHHA.
You’re delusional now. She will never be president. She’s so damn scandalous that McCain is going to have to drop her before she can become Herr president, or whatever you want to call her.
[quote]Ren wrote:
stories are breaking left, right, and center that she is not as clean as McCain believe she was.
She is NOT a reformer, is NOT against pork barrel spending, has NO foreign policy experience (seriously, commanding the Alaskan National Guard does not count).
And lastly it is rumored that she heavily abused her authority as governor in a manner which could see her end up in jail, but we’d have to wait for some more info on that before we can go into great detail.
Has a candidate ever dropped their VP nominee before an election? Cos it just might happen with this one…[/quote]
The DailyKos is no place to get information. But nice try.
Unless you have real sources to link us to. You wouldn’t happen to have any of those, would you? Didn’t think so.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
HAHAHAHAHHA.
You’re delusional now. She will never be president. She’s so damn scandalous that McCain is going to have to drop her before she can become Herr president, or whatever you want to call her.
[/quote]
Oh, so she was a stupid bull-dyke mayor of 14 drunks just a few minutes ago. Now she is so riddled with scandal that McCain is going to drop her.
Tell me there, Einstein - how much fucking scandal can be created with 14 drunks?
Did you have to read ren’s post before you came up with the scandal thing?
Pick a reason she is no good, and stick with it. Waffling over why she sucks smacks of fear.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
HAHAHAHAHHA.
You’re delusional now. She will never be president. She’s so damn scandalous that McCain is going to have to drop her before she can become Herr president, or whatever you want to call her.
Oh, so she was a stupid bull-dyke mayor of 14 drunks just a few minutes ago. Now she is so riddled with scandal that McCain is going to drop her.
Tell me there, Einstein - how much fucking scandal can be created with 14 drunks?
Did you have to read ren’s post before you came up with the scandal thing?
Pick a reason she is no good, and stick with it. Waffling over why she sucks smacks of fear.
[/quote]
You’re confusing “waffling” with “there’s too much to list”.
Here is a wonderful gem from the “Lincolnesque!” Obama trying to defend his “experience”:
[i] Anderson Cooper asked Barack Obama last night to answer the claim that Sarah Palin has more applicable experience than he does. In response, he completely ignores Palin’s status as governor, and then makes the claim that a campaign counts as executive experience:
AC: Some Republican critics say, you don't have the experience to handle a situation like this [Hurricane Gustav]. They've in fact said that Governor Palin has more executive experience as mayor of a small town and as governor of a big state like Alaska. What's your response?
BO: Well, you know, my understanding is that, uh, Governor Palin's town of Wasilly [sic] has, uh, 50 employees, uh, uh, we've got 2500, uh, in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year. Uh, uh, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month. Uh, so I think that, uh, our ability to manage large systems, uh, and to, uh, execute, uh, I think has been made clear over the last couple of years. Uh, and certainly, in terms of, uh, the legislation that I've passed just dealing with this issue post-Katrina, uh, of how we handle emergency management. The fact that, uh, many of my recommendations were adopted and are being put in place, uh, as we speak indicates to extent to which we can provide the kinds of support and good service that the American people expect.
Let’s take the last point first. Did Barack Obama pass legislation bearing his recommendations for emergency management? A list of ‘actions’ taken by Obama in the wake of Katrina compiled by a supporter doesn’t exactly lend itself to that conclusion. Once one strips out all of the speeches, the actual legislative actions appear to mostly consist of adding his name as co-sponsor to the bills of others, and it’s unclear whether any of the bills Obama did introduce ever passed.
Even if they did, it gives him no experience at managing disasters. Governors and mayors have to manage disasters, and when they succeed, they save lives. When they fail, as we saw in Katrina, it costs lives. Legislators have no role in disaster management itself, although honestly, disaster management isn’t usually a resumé point when voting for mayor, governor, or President. Whatever impulse exists now to make it one stems from the irrational blame heaped on George Bush for the failures of Ray Nagin and Kathleen Blanco in Katrina, although FEMA certainly had its failures as well.
But the main point here is that Obama didn’t really answer the question, and he set up a straw man argument in response to Cooper. Governor Palin is, well, governor, and not currently the mayor of Wasila. As Governor, Palin operates a $9 billion budget, and manages $13 billion in revenue. Furthermore, she runs a government that employs 25,000 people.
Obama blithely pretends that she’s still the mayor of ‘Wasilly’ in order to boost himself. However, running for office isn’t executive experience, for one good reason: Obama isn’t the campaign manager. He has a CEO actually running the campaign, handling the budget, and managing the people while Obama makes the speeches.
If this is Obama’s best response on the experience question, the attacks on Palin’s experience will have to stop, unless the campaign wants Obama to keep embarrassing himself while making it.
Update: The McCain campaign has responded to Mark Halperin at Time:
"For Barack Obama to argue that he's experienced enough to be president because he's running for president is desperate circular logic and it's laughable. It is a testament to Barack Obama's inexperience and failing qualifications that he would stoop to passing off his candidacy as comparable to Governor Sarah Palin's executive experience managing a budget of over 10 billion dollar dollars, and more than 24,000 employees." -Tucker Bounds, spokesman John McCain 2008
By that standard, anyone who ever ran for any public office has executive experience - and that also kills their own experience argument against Palin anyway.[/i]
To review: running for the Presidency qualifies you for the Presidency. As such, so long as Palin campaigns on the ticket, she is qualified for the ticket.
Remember - Obama is the smart one.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Ren wrote:
stories are breaking left, right, and center that she is not as clean as McCain believe she was.
She is NOT a reformer, is NOT against pork barrel spending, has NO foreign policy experience (seriously, commanding the Alaskan National Guard does not count).
And lastly it is rumored that she heavily abused her authority as governor in a manner which could see her end up in jail, but we’d have to wait for some more info on that before we can go into great detail.
Has a candidate ever dropped their VP nominee before an election? Cos it just might happen with this one…
The DailyKos is no place to get information. But nice try.
Unless you have real sources to link us to. You wouldn’t happen to have any of those, would you? Didn’t think so.
[/quote]
Pork Barrel Spending:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080902/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_palin_earmarks
Foreign Policy:
What the hell do you want from me on this? She has none, do you really want me to cite links?
and then the National Guard scandal thing:
http://www.newsminer.com/news/2008/jul/28/lawmakers-formally-call-investigation-palins-publi/
http://www.adn.com/news/politics/story/510080.html
pretty much waiting on more info on that last one to come out, but the report from the newsminer is from back in July. Rumor has it that McCain’s camp is trying to block and delay anything to do with it, so we’ll just have to wait and see
That was cute, especially how your boy threw in every, “Uh, uh” that Obama said. Because, you know, that ensures objective journalism.
I’m figuring most guys who teach Constitutional law for a decade aren’t the dimmest guys, especially those who end up becoming senators.
But I can’t prove to you that he’s smart or not. I can’t prove that she is or isn’t. The simple fact is that her policies are super-conservative, and while that may appeal to angry alienated right wingnuts, it’s not going to do shit for his overall campaign.
Overall, I’m happy with the pick, because I think it’s going to shoot him in the foot.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
That was cute, especially how your boy threw in every, “Uh, uh” that Obama said. Because, you know, that ensures objective journalism.[/quote]
That’s called cold transcripting, which also picks up really partisan things like “crosstalk” and “unintelligible”.
Shouldn’t the “Lincolnesque!!” candidate sound a little better off the teleprompter?
And shouldn’t the “educated” Obama make a better defense of his “executive experience” than that trainwreck above?
Teaching con law is great - winning a Senate campaign basically unchallenged with the Daley machine fueling the effort isn’t evidence of much at all.
But that is a demographic McCain needs to solidify, so that isn’t necessarily a bad thing - and Palin has cross-appeal due to her reformist approach (taking on her own party on ethics issues).
It might very well, and the Democrat may well win - but in a year that should be a walk for Democrats, the Left nominated the weakest and most inept candidate in a generation, and that is some feat, considering Kerry.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
That was cute, especially how your boy threw in every, “Uh, uh” that Obama said. Because, you know, that ensures objective journalism.
That’s called cold transcripting, which also picks up really partisan things like “crosstalk” and “unintelligible”.
Shouldn’t the “Lincolnesque!!” candidate sound a little better off the teleprompter?
And shouldn’t the “educated” Obama make a better defense of his “executive experience” than that trainwreck above?
[/quote]
What do you want? He said that he’s dealt with far more employees and a budget that’s a million times bigger than Palin’s.
You Republicans are all about business- what’s more important than overhead and budgeting? Nothing. Then he went on to talk about emergency management and the passing of bills that have his name on it.
Not only that, but your boy didn’t even go through the trouble of finding out whether or not the bills passed. He used the phrase, “appear to mostly consist of adding his name as co-sponsor to the bills of others.”
“Appears to mostly consist”? Want to get a little more vague than that? C’mon dude. This shit ain’t reputable. He doesn’t find out if the recommendations that Obama says he made passed, or even what they are- he just says what they “mostly appear to be” to him, who is quite obviously a biased observer.
Then, on top of that, he goes on to pull a swift little indirect comparison, because even though he never says the word “Senator”, he throws in how important mayors and governors are in that situation, which Palin has been both. Of course, she’s never seen a disaster or led during one, but THAT’s not the point, right?
This has holes in it everywhere
And if we did a cold transcript of our glorious leader, your brain would melt from trying to find the semblances of a sentence from the fragmented brain of Bush. So if you want to play that game, shit happens.
EDIT: As shit happens with every politician, from top to bottom. When I try to get direct quotes from politicians from CD’s, they all sound like stuttering morons. Every last one of them. You don’t realize this because unless it’s a prepared statement, journalists have to make what they say legible.
Well, if you’re trying to make him out to be a stuttering moron by posting your cold transcripts, then you have to take the impressive along with it. The man is obviously very fuckin educated, even if you think he got elected because of a political machine.
It’s a big damn gamble. If he wants to take it then he’s got brass balls, because I wouldn’t. Very conservative republicans are not going to vote the other way to spite him, and I don’t know if they make up a big enough voting block for him to realllyy miss them… I don’t know. I don’t know if the Republicans can win this by not losing…
[quote]
Overall, I’m happy with the pick, because I think it’s going to shoot him in the foot.
It might very well, and the Democrat may well win - but in a year that should be a walk for Democrats, the Left nominated the weakest and most inept candidate in a generation, and that is some feat, considering Kerry.[/quote]
That’s a matter of opinion. He is a stronger candidate than Clinton, and what you look at as inexperience, many people look at as not-corrupted-yet (there’s a word I’m thinking of but it fails me).
The Democrats will win, and we will see where we head from there.
[quote]Ren wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Ren wrote:
stories are breaking left, right, and center that she is not as clean as McCain believe she was.
She is NOT a reformer, is NOT against pork barrel spending, has NO foreign policy experience (seriously, commanding the Alaskan National Guard does not count).
And lastly it is rumored that she heavily abused her authority as governor in a manner which could see her end up in jail, but we’d have to wait for some more info on that before we can go into great detail.
Has a candidate ever dropped their VP nominee before an election? Cos it just might happen with this one…
The DailyKos is no place to get information. But nice try.
Unless you have real sources to link us to. You wouldn’t happen to have any of those, would you? Didn’t think so.
Pork Barrel Spending:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080902/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_palin_earmarks
Foreign Policy:
What the hell do you want from me on this? She has none, do you really want me to cite links?
and then the National Guard scandal thing:
http://www.newsminer.com/news/2008/jul/28/lawmakers-formally-call-investigation-palins-publi/
http://www.adn.com/news/politics/story/510080.html
pretty much waiting on more info on that last one to come out, but the report from the newsminer is from back in July. Rumor has it that McCain’s camp is trying to block and delay anything to do with it, so we’ll just have to wait and see
[/quote]
You missed where the blogger on the Kos also questions her membership in the AIP.
The pork barrel spending stuff is not really news. I found that on a simple google search the day she was announced as McCain’s running mate.
I don’t like it, but it is hardly enough to drop her from the ticket.
The “trooper-gate” is a non sequitur. Governors fire people they don’t like. Ask former state employees in Arkansas about Gov. Clinton.
If this is the best the left can dig up on her, after 5-6 days of trying, they have nothing. I mean they got some dirt, but it’s no Ayers’.
Do you seriously think McCain will drop her for this piddlly shit? Biden breaks more promises and rules before breakfast than this.
Seriously, since coming out with the accusation that Sarah’s Down Syndrome baby was really her daughters’ - the Kos has been pretty much lost any credibility it ever thought it had. It’s worse than wiki. You might want to find a different place to get your talking points.