Last night, the stakes were high in the vice presidential debate. Governor Sarah Palin has been taking a pounding in the press for her disappointing performance in some recent interviews. So, it is not a stretch to say that the fate of the Republican ticket rested in her hands last night. Palin faced incredible pressure as she prepared to debate 36-year Senate incumbent Joe Biden.
How did she fare in such a high stakes format? Well, it was a home run for Palin. She addressed the voters of America very directly, looking right at the camera. She was poised and confident and was not shaken at any point during the debate. She was friendly and smiled quite often during the 90 minute exchange. Her goal was to appear folksy and approachable for voters across America trying to decide who to vote for on November 4.
In contrast, Joe Biden, while filled with facts and figures, lacked Palin's warmth and pleasing personality. He may have won the debate on the substance of his arguments, but she clearly won on stylistic points.
Biden directed most of his fire toward John McCain, while Palin attacked Barack Obama, especially his policy toward the war in Iraq, which she called "the white flag of surrender."
In light of the falling poll numbers for the GOP, this debate may be instrumental in changing the dynamics of the race. Now, Republicans have something to cheer about. It is reminiscent of the period right after the Republican convention when the party activists were celebrating Palin's selection. Now for the second time, Palin has given a boost to the Republican ticket.
It is now time for John McCain to step up and take off the gloves. His obsession with running an "honorable" campaign means that he is not being aggressive enough with his opponent. In contrast, Barack Obama has a history in the bare knuckles atmosphere of Chicago politics. He has no hesitation in slugging it out with McCain, so it is past time for the Arizona Senator to return fire.
Although the advantage is still with the Democrats, the campaign is not over. McCain-Palin can win this race, but it will be up to John McCain to achieve victory. This is one thing that Sarah cannot do for the ticket, but at least she has given new life to a campaign in trouble.
Jeff Crouere is the Host of “Ringside Politics,” which airs at 7:30 p.m. Fri. and 10:00 p.m. Sun. on WLAE-TV 32, a PBS station, and 7 till 11 a.m. weekdays on WGSO 990 AM in New Orleans and the Northshore. He is the Political Analyst for WGNO-TV ABC26 and the Political Editor for NewOrleans.com. For more information, visit his web site at RingsidePolitics.com. E-mail him at jeff@ringsidepolitics.com
Yeah, Palin hit a home run alright just as Grammatica hit four for four field goals for the Saints last Monday night. Too bad McCain can't put her on injured reserve for hoof and mouth disease. Written by Gotitright
on 10/10/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
That was a good one..... If I am mistaken about the 1% or so recollection and a source, forgive me, I have a lot of things stored in my head and total recall isn't what it used to be... But anyways, the point I am compounding on is the compounding of problems that were instituted as solutions..... It is the additional Administrative, and logistical support implementations that drive the simple subject of USDA food vouchers, or assisted housing concepts above and beyond economically sound or sensible programs to pursue under current practice and theologies...... Yes, when McCain said there will be cuts, He spoke the truth, and anyone that thinks things can continue on, let alone progress to a higher level and still be sustainable is out of their Mother F_ _ _ _ G Mind... Plain and simple.... I am begging America to not make life harder than it already is.... Obama's position is untenable.... It will not work, and we are going to be screwed.... We need sound, efficient, effective, prudent planners out their that can cut through the Bull Sh!t and get the facts out their in a sensible fashion that will benefit rather than be a detriment to the whole....... Written by
on 10/8/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
You are mistaken in attributing the "social welfare is only around 1% of our gumments costs" quote to me (I do remember that thread though). Thass okay. On another note... How do you tell your bud Prince Valient you're about to breath your last? You say "ME - DIE - VAL." Medieval, get it? Written by kpf
on 10/8/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
The level of the lack of understanding by so many people across the board on a vast spectrum of accounts is truly appalling……… 200 years ago if a person lived to be 45 that person was considered ‘old’… To dig a big ditch or canal took hundreds of people, today one man in an excavator and one man driving a dump truck can complete the task 10 times faster… The most common cause of death in the civil war wasn’t from bullets, or bayonets, or exploding shell fire, it was from poor medical practices and infection……. People started living longer some 3,000 years ago when the rudimentary basics of soap were stumbled upon…. Did you know that in Mideviel Europe it was grounds for divorce if it was uncovered that a woman took a bath in order to entice a man into marriage? Funny but true….. So what he have here is fewer people required to complete backbreaking tasks, people living to be 78, 85, even 100 years +……… We have more people outstripping natural and cultivated resources….. I believe it is possible for people to be able to retire at the age of 48……………. What we have here, in the United States, is a failure to realize our capacity to evolve…….. We have a number of archaic bureaucracies in effect, and a fearful population that constitute a plutocracy that is attempting to fool the masses….. And their only answer is socialism……….. They require a politibuearu to keep them in comfort…….. They are in effect the bourgeoisies that fear open markets and personal freedom…. And they have to have their special set aside masses to perpetuate this hoax…. KPF onetime said something along the lines that the social/welfare – wutever costs are only around 1% or so….. Not dogging you there KPF, merely making a comparative analysis….. Well the facts are that may be some kind of a diluted monetary dispensation… The reality of it is this: That for every 3.5 to 5 people on some form of a social program, there are 1 to 2 on a payroll that supports the administrative effects necessary for these programs operations…….. Whole books can be written on this, and guess what, there are only arguments that will ensue…. No action, just talk and squawk…. It is time for bold Americans, with bold solutions to be identified, recognized, and advocated…. How do you eat an elephant (or chew the ass of a Jackass ‘which is slang for a mule’)? One bite at a time my friends, one bite at a time……………………………….. When things are going wrong, and you want to figure out why, consider who it is that will smile biggest at your demise…. Common sense, common sense………… Now keep your powder dry boys, it is almost time to get out of the trenches and make an advance…….. Written by
on 10/8/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
The implied promise of a taxpayer bailout by Democrats who supported these "affordable housing" loans allowed the greedy capitalist to make loans knowing that if the shite hit the fan the taxpayer would be there to bail them out. Although some regulation is helpful all that is truly needed to stop lenders from making bad loans is the knowledge that NO ONE will be there to bail them out if the loans are defaulted. This "rescue package" is going to THE VERY SAME PEOPLE that the "Campaign Finance Reform law" (McCain-Feingold) was supposed to protect us against. The fact that the "supposed" party of the poor and working class supports this bailout along with the Republican Party illustrates the futility in anyone's belief that either of these parties are anything other than puppets for the uber-wealthy Wall Street robber barons. Written by kpf
on 10/8/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
More truth. http://www.newsweek.com/id/162789 Written by Moderate Independent Voice
on 10/7/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Words matter. "Allowed" or "encouraged" is not the same as "forced." The Community Reinvestment Act (meant to *encourage* lending, although not compel bankers to abdicate their own responsibilities to their shareholders, to under-served elements of the community but honestly to believe that armies of poor people are out there flipping condos by the dozen is something of a stretch) may be the right wing's favorite bogeyman to trot out these days but it's been around for decades when this problem has cropped only after several other events. The truth is that banks and bankers were making tons of money and that they wanted lightened regulation in order to make more money and they brought this mess unto themselves a lot more voluntarily than involuntarily. http://online.barrons.com/article/SB122246742997580395.html See the 2004 SEC leverage rules change in particular along with the Financial Services Modernization Act all of which the bankers heavily lobbied for. To be fair, yes, many different parties are complicit in their guilt on this but the bankers wanted government off their backs so that regulation would not be an obstacle to their being able to make more money and that's what they got. No doubt, regardless of who wins in November, the era of unfettered laissez-faire capitalism in the financial services industry is probably coming to an end.
Written by Moderate Independent Voice
on 10/7/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Oh darn, so much for optimism...... It is spreading like a cancer, Tokyo, Beijing, I suppose Credit Suisse is to be watched carefully tomorrow…… 3 a.m. e.s.t. Written by
on 10/6/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Your description of Libertarians effect on me is like water off a duck's back... but don't go talking about "excessively greedy" taxpayers who do not want their taxes increased!!! That WILL get me incensed! Written by kpf
on 10/6/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Well, now that Walmar......er, uhhh,,,, WallStreet has succesfully been bailed out, you can all sleep tight for a few weeks.... Merry Xmas................ Written by
on 10/6/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Dear Moderate Independent Force, Here it is . . . by Stanley kurtz.
"Stanley Kurtz takes a look at how the Community Reinvestment Act was used by groups like (former Obama employer) ACORN to force banks into giving loans on marginal properties to people with questionable credit backgrounds.
CRA was meant to encourage banks to make loans to high-risk borrowers, often minorities living in unstable neighborhoods. That has provided an opening to radical groups like ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) to abuse the law by forcing banks to make hundreds of millions of dollars in "subprime" loans to often uncreditworthy poor and minority customers.
Any bank that wants to expand or merge with another has to show it has complied with CRA - and approval can be held up by complaints filed by groups like ACORN.
In fact, intimidation tactics, public charges of racism and threats to use CRA to block business expansion have enabled ACORN to extract hundreds of millions of dollars in loans and contributions from America's financial institutions.
Banks already overexposed by these shaky loans were pushed still further in the wrong direction when government-sponsored Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac began buying up their bad loans and offering them for sale on world markets.
Fannie and Freddie acted in response to Clinton administration pressure to boost homeownership rates among minorities and the poor. However compassionate the motive, the result of this systematic disregard for normal credit standards has been financial disaster.
If you take government and politics out of this equation America wouldn’t be in a financial crisis right now. Which is exactly why the solution to this problem isn’t more government, and a big fat bailout, but rather a return to a strictly free private sector market."
Written by Walker0416
on 10/6/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Kerry, I include that in every description of libertarians primarily just to rib you! And I know you don't like the hookers. TW Written by Tee Dub
on 10/6/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
The link to the Community Reinvestment Act is below. Lending institutions were "allowed"/"forced" (take your pick) to lend to poorer minority borrowers so they could buy their own homes. Not a bad idea IF it is not taken too far. What's "too far'... uh... the current financial mess qualifies for that. Yes, corporate greed componded this matter, however it will be neither the rich nor the poor who pays to fix it, rather the middle class will pay as usual. Tee Dub, don't be so arrogant about Libertarians (“arrogant” as in “your superiority to”), they stand for so much more than your simplistic definition asserts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act Written by kpf
on 10/6/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
During the Clinton administration penalties were enacted to "force" Fannie & Freddie lenders into lending to the mandated focus group even though they were not good credit risks. No right wing voodoo, it's a fact. But get a grip, dems and repubs are both guilty in this fiasco. Written by NJS
on 10/6/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Please provide documentation that the government actually forced lenders to make loans that they knew that the borrowers could not pay back. A link would do. Or else shut your trap with that nonsense. Pure far right wing fantasy. The truth: the banks wanted "government off their backs" exactly and that's what they got back in the 1990's, courtesy of McCain and Phil Gramm, although, to be fair, many Democrats were far from innocent, and that's what has led us to this point. Poor business practices on the bankers' (not exactly a left wing group) part. Bottom line: no one was forced to do anything. Written by Moderate Independent Voice
on 10/5/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
A home run? which debate were you watching, Jeff? Palin had a choice on Thursday: fumble through questions she didn't know the answer to, or repeat unrelated talking points. So she chose the latter. Maybe in the short term it was wise, but in the long term it will not have a positive impact for McShuffleboard. The most recent electoral count is 330-175 in favor of Obama. The sooner the Republicans acknowledge the anchor, the sooner they can cut it loose. It may not be too late. I'm sure Fox would allow Huckabee a brief sabbatical.... Written by Dave
on 10/5/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Personally, in these times, I feel that a conservative is someone who wants more individual freedom to succeed, someone who wants government off their backs. A liberal, I feel, is someone who thinks that government is the answer to all our problems. For instance: Liberal - thinks that less fortunate people should be able to own their own home and they institute government policies to force lenders into accepting poor credit choices, take into account welfare payments as part of the salary formula, etc. Conservatives - work hard, save your money and buy a house. The sad fact is that the national democratic party has been taken over by a very liberal faction within the party. Blue Dog (conservative) democrats in Congress are few and far between. Republicans are walking around in circles trying to find a leader to tell them what they really are in a polkitically correct manner. Alot of gun toting religious loving folks around the south are lifetime democrats. So I agree that your party affiliation doesn't necessarily make you a liberal or a conservative. But on the national scene: Obama = Liberal, McCain = kinda conservative, Written by Nut Job Sid
on 10/5/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Conservative or liberal are terms which do NOT describe the people around here. First, there are FDR/LBJ style liberals of which are not really represented around here. Classical liberals are also not really represented in that libertarians are closest to the classical liberal vein and libertarians are not really represented around here. Bona fide conservatives are imho those who value notions such as prudence, caution and dignity (I am defining "liberal" as being in favor of change and especially change in the direction of greater personal freedoms for more people and "conservative" basically as being against change or at least against drastic or immediate change and "reactionary" as being not just against change but for essentially turning the clock back and undoing change previously enacted). Was Gerald Ford (a good conservative but not a reactionary) the last of those on the national scene? I characterize "Reagan Revolution-ites" and the like as angry reactionaries, i.e. the far right, and those are most certainly well represented around here. In our current time the contest is between them and moderates, essentially, and not so much between conservatives and liberals, although I suspect that the far right philosophy is somewhat more dominant in the region than across the nation as a whole. How many people, then, who are non-white really and truly believe in the doctrine of the far right? Written by Moderate Independent Voice
on 10/5/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
When one calls Obama, or anybody else, a "baby-killer," I picture a flaming nut-job. Written by KjunL:ady
on 10/5/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Hmmmm, CIA and confederate flag. I think you might be surprised to find out what my skin color is and that color does not necessarily make you a conservative or a liberal. Written by Sid
on 10/5/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Oh yeah, Tee Dub, I see multiple unsolved murders every week in Jasper, TX and Denham Springs. Every time a tourist wanders too far from the Bass Pro Shop, they turn up dead, right?? At least the murder you love to recall in Jasper was an isolated incident attributed to true textbook racists. In the Ninth Ward, they are too savage to even have a philosophy to base their murders on. It's just the lust for blood and the animal insticts for dominance over there. And as far as your antiwar sentiments, what are you planning to do once President Obama emboldens Iran, and Israel unleashes the nukes on them and anyone else who follows up with a threat to their existence? That war won't drag out or cost as many dollars, but the consequences will make your Bush tirades looks awfully silly. I guess you'll blame that one on Republicans, too, for not abandoning Israel to the muslim extremists before they had the capability to start World War III.
Written by show your faith
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Dear "CIA Sid".. Have some decaf.....good times are a comin'... Before long, you can stand outside, unfold your Confederate flag, and blame President Obama for all your problems... (maybe you and "Written By" will be running your own website by then)..............Listen, as much as you "Conservatives" don't like it... It's time the pendulum swung the other way... It will be back again.. probably another 8 to 12 yrs.... who knows? Written by KjunLady
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
When McCain has the guts to tell the right-wing base to "sit down and shut up...I'll do what's best for the country whether it's what you happen to want or not..." which I have yet to see, then I can start to buy into his standing to sell himself as some kind of maverick or earnest reformer -- and that goes double for Palin. Until then he's just another politician himself (he has been in the Senate for more than 25 years) and Palin is, too (she deserves no free pass just because she is younger or just because she's a woman or just because she's a governor rather than a senator). It's in the substance of what he and she propose, especially in specifics, and can deliver that will define whether he's or she's a true reformer. Written by Moderate Independent Voice
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Dear "show your faith" - do you think there are any white neighborhoods/areas where black people who enter are in danger? Maybe like, say, Jasper, or Paris, TX? When I was a teenager, I knew black teens who were afraid to go into Denham Springs. TW Written by Tee Dub
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Well, what exactly do McCain and Palin stand for and propose? They seem to have left a lot fairly undefined, except for a few things like health care (their plan is essentially to turn to reliance on the market more, i.e. for people to try to get health insurance coverage as individuals and not through their employers which is going to end up being very costly to most people if indeed they can get coverage at all) and more tax cuts for the very well-off. In other words, the same-old same-old. How does anything of they've proposed, in specifics, sound like they're going to "shake things up" at all? Written by Moderate Independent Voice
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Tee Dub, Why don't you take a midnight bike ride through the Ninth Ward. I'm sure you'll get no trouble from those crazy libertarians down there. Written by Show your faith
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
There we go again, running against George Bush. Let' not talk specifics but only speak in generalities, that way no one will know what we really stand for or where we came from. George Bush has been President for 2 terms. His economic record is not very good. But the real problem is Congress. Partisan politics and finger pointing have gotten us no where. Miss Pelosi will go down in history as the worst speaker of the house ever. Congress has gotten us into the Fannie Mae Freddie Mac fiasco and now we're having to foot the bill for individuals greed and congressional political correctness. Say what you will about Biden and Palin, the problem lies in the fact that we the people keep putting professional politicians back in office so that they can rape and pillage and retire as millionaires. Written by Sid
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
How much wherewithal do McCain/Palin have to be able to talk up some kind of maverick or outsider status? They both represent the party who's been in power in the White House for the past 8 years. They also both represent the party who's been in power in Congress for the large majority of the time since 1994 (remember the Contract with America?). They have yet to name one major issue where they would differ from the Bush administration policies. They have said nothing definite about disentangling this country from Iraq or about how they would do anything differently with regard to national security and foreign policy than what Bush has done. They would certainly continue most if not all of Bush's domestic agenda. What are the issues on which McCain has differed with Bush in the past? Campaign finance reform? Opposition to Bush's tax cuts? Anything else? One certainly has not heard much from him lately about any of the stands on which his position at one time or another differed from either Bush's or that of the right wing base? He would make Bush's tax cuts permanent, wouldn't he? He surely hasn't said much about his stands on immigration or campaign finance reform lately. McCain and Palin both, I suppose, can have something to say about not caving in to pressure from the Lou Dobbs crowd to oppose any and all congressional action on the credit market crisis and so maybe McCain's stand there could indeed count as the kind of "maverick who reaches across the aisle" thing to do that would fit with how he wants to brand himself -- but then again they stood arm in arm with their president on yet another major issue. But will that hurt them with the right wing base? We will see. Would McCain rather be right and do what he thinks is best for the country than win the election or would he rather win the election above all else? The majority of his actions would seem very much to indicate the latter. I suspect that he miscalculated when he "suspended" his campaign and tried to look to be getting involved in the effort to get a bill passed to deal with the credit markets crisis, thinking that the voters would be impressed with his "bold action" and not seeing how the right wing base would be so strongly opposed to congressional action. Bush won in the past (we will leave discussion about vote count controversies for another time) by playing to the right wing base and getting the moderates and independents to feel turned off by and to not want to vote for his Democratic Party opposition. McCain and Palin are doing no different. The connection to Bush and to the same-old same-old politics are unmistakably present whether or not McCain's running mate happens to come from some far-away state. Written by Moderate Independent Voice
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Don't think any political party can claim the top spot for drugs and hookers. Those vices are universal. Some prominent democrats may just prefer sex with employees. And most of the crimes committed with guns are done by democrats (or people who would be democrats if they weren't already convicted felons released back on society by democrats). I'm pretty certain that none of the record-setting murders in New Orleans, Memphis, or Chicago were committed by libertarians. Written by
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Guilty as charged, although "hate" is a bit too strong. My dad, younger sister, and some of my oldest friends are Republicans. As I've told kpf before, I cannot risk having the Republicans win. As much as the Democrats are a constant disappointment to me, they're much, much, better than the GOP (Exhibit A: Bush/Cheney and the last 7+ years). Were I certain that McCain/Palin wouldn't win, then I'd absolutely consider voting for Nader or someone else (perhaps the socialists), but probably not the libertarians, who are just conservatives who happen to like guns, drugs and/or hookers. TW Written by Tee Dub
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Spoken like the true Republican hater that you are. The only reason you're relieved about Edwards is because he was blatantly exposed for the slick-talking trial lawyer liar that we all knew he was. And we all know that Obama is a vote-buying rabble rousing anti-patriot who is trying to settle a 200 year old grudge and enthrone himself as black royalty of America. What's sad is that if you people are in the majority, that disgusting fact will be exposed as well. But we'll be stuck with him as president before it does. If you think that the Wall Street bailout was expensive, wait till you see the Obama's bill for the slavery bailout. Have you considered the Libertarians or Ralph Nader? They didn't start a war OR vote for someone else's. Written by
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." I said earlier in this same thread that the man (Biden) isn't perfect, and if any of you had less selective memories, you'd know that I even posted here that Mike Bayham's line reminding us of Biden's plagiarism was funny. Much more grave than the plagiarism, though, is the fact that Biden voted for Bush's War, and it's hard for me to let that one go. However, here's my guiding philosophy on this, and you should feel free to take this as advice, if you wish - I don't get wrapped up in ANY politicians, because they'll ALWAYS disappoint you. I am thankful, for example, that John Edwards didn't win the Democratic nomination, even though he was my candidate early on, as he was running the most progressive campaign. We dodged a bullet on that one. Here's the bottom line - the choice this year is simple. We have seen where eight years of GOP policies have led - they've been "a bridge to nowhere," if I may borrow a phrase. But if you think four more years of that are just what the country needs, then by all means, vote for McCain/Palin. It's still a free country, with open elections... suit yourself. I'm just hopeful that folks like you are a minority. TW Written by Tee Dub
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Being a 36 year veteran east coast liberal politician gives you a free ticket to plagiarize in Tee Dub's value system. I wonder how many years of liberal academic experience Tee needs to give himself a free ride on plagiarism. Or maybe he rates career politicians so highly that no amount of academic experience can earn the same right to lie that he grants to Biden. Written by values vary
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Thanks for the reminder, long memory. Here is that heartfelt diatribe from Tee Dub on plagiarism: "Listen, pinhead - I may be a lot of things, but I am intellectually honest. I cite sources for anything that's not mine. I never take credit for any statement that I didn't write myself, and I put quotes around the statements that are not from me - so that's enough from your dumb*ss, you hear me? Go verify it, dipsh*t... you can find my posts here on this site - use the buzzback feature, and see if you can find anything that I've plagiarized. You won't find a g.d. thing that I've plagiarized, you little prick. GFY. TW" Wonder why Tee doesn't use the same obscenity-abbreviated tirades against a man who wants to be a heartbeat away from the presidency?? Written by here it is
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I recall Tee Dub going postal over an allegation that he repeated the opinion of others in this forum instead of thinking for himself. He elevated the accusation to full-blown plagiarism and defended himself, while attacking plagiarism as an evil unmatched in the annals of sleaze. Now he's defending a serial plagiarizer as prime vice presidential material. Typical selective liberal value system. Written by long memory
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Tee-Dub, I doubt it very seriously if you are smarter than a 5th grader..... Written by
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Well, gosh darn, there, Sid, I think I finally understand what you mean now! I just think y'know, that we soccer dads and hockey moms across the country, well, you know, it's, aw shucks, it's time for change, don't you know? And gosh darn it, as a lifelong maverick and lower-48 outsider, bless her heart, who said "Oh, gee, thanks but no thanks on that bridge, there, Congress!" VP candidate "Bible Spice" and her running mate "John McSame" are just the ones to do it, don't you know? I mean, golly gee willikers, why worry about what happens here on this 6,000-year-old planet? We're all going to get our rewards in heaven, don't you know? TW Written by Tee Dub
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Absolutely amazing, Palin got the name of the General wrong and she is back to being a Bimbo? Biden spum what General McKiernan actually said. Biden lied. Biden should get a competent running mate not McCain. Like it or not Palin has more actual governing experience, experience with establishing budgets and working within them, experience in managing more than a Senator's office staff than the other three. But Obama gets a pass every single time. I'm not sure what the definition of a rock star is but Cheney, a rock star, c'mon. i guess Johnny Cash sung opera? We are considered "dim" for supprting McCain and Palin because palin is a "Barbie Doll" etc. Obama has no experience "only words only speeches" and he is the agent of change, what flavor Kool Aid you been drinking out there. Look at the facts, Obama is running against George Bush. He is running on a platform of unicorns, kitty cats, baby powder and promises that can not be kept unless we suddenly become a socialist state. Who is dimwitted? Written by Sid
on 10/4/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Audra, I understand that no one likes to be called stupid, but I'm sorry, if you're impressed by Sarah Palin, well, you're kinda dim. The smart conservatives are lining up asking her to resign for the good of the campaign. I've also seen the McCain campaign's list of "lies" that Biden was supposed to have told, and I was less than impressed, to say the least. They weren't really lies, just questionable/debatable details surrounding the exact nature of Obama's and McCain's future plans and past votes/actions. Maybe Palin didn't lie (this time) because she said absolutely NOTHING of substance - just a bunch of empty platitudes and repeating the same shtick over and over again. Biden is far from perfect, but the notion that Sarah Palin is in any way prepared to be a 73-year-old man's heartbeat away from the presidency is pure folly. TW Written by Tee Dub
on 10/3/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I ask again, how often has it worked in a campaign for president, to look to win by riding your "rock star" of a running mate? Moreover, given that we've essentially had 8 years of a Cheney administration, do we want the running mate to be stealing the show? Look, if, as everyone, I'm sure, would hope, McCain should happen to win and not have anything happen that would prevent him from being able to serve his complete term then Palin would figure to be merely a minor footnote in the administration about like Dan Quayle was with the Bush the father administration, her "unique" version of the Constitution and what powers it grants to the vice-president notwithstanding. No...the guys running for the top job are what matter the most. What does it say about McCain that he felt that he had to gamble on such a person as Sarah Palin? Peel away the personality and folksiness and there's nothing there. I'm sure that there are dozens of other Republicans McCain could have picked whose qualifications would have been much less questionable than Palin's. Even Jindal, although I still think that Jindal needs to prove himself for an entire term as governor, would not be so vacuous. Now more than ever the country does not need mediocrity in high office. McCain is an honorable man and no one disputes the service he's performed for the country but that he had to go and pick this lady has to give one serious cause to question the old guy's judgment. Written by Richard P.
on 10/3/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Please Audra, let us not replace the Bush idiot with McCain and idiot Barbie doll who may become President Barbie!!! Written by
on 10/3/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I love it how on here all "you smart" democrats have said nothing except to call "us dumb republicans" "stupid" and "yahoos". Unbelieveable! This is all you people have. I saw that debate and Joe Biden won NOTHING! He spewed "facts" off the top of his head that clearly did not add up and totally outright lied several times. But you "intelligent" people should know better than us "dumb yahoos." Written by Audra
on 10/3/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
What are you repugs smoking? You have to be kidding me. This lady is appalling. While she may be smart and personable she has no substance. If all it takes to energize the Republican base is for her to stand there smile, wink and talk about energy it is a very sad base. The bar here was set so low that a snake could have slithered across it. Please get a competent running mate. Preferably one that doesn’t sound like Goober from Mayberry RFD. Golly Gee wiz I don’t know jack about world politics but I can field dress a Caribou. And don’t worry; I won’t be answering any questions along the way. (PATHETIC) As your republican strategist, (Leslie Sanchez), put it “only the intellectual conservatives are questioning her credentials not our true base”. That means the rest of you are stupid. Written by Fed up American
on 10/3/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
The consensus is Joe Biden won the debate. It was a good night for Sarah Palin in that she did not melt down or self destruct. When your expectations are very low, it's easy to exceed them. At least you dropped that silly argument that Gwen Ifil was biased.The front line of the campaign is moving closer to Louisiana. McCain abandoned Michigan yesterday and is now forced to defend Indiana, a state that hasn't gone Democratic since 1964. Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina and Florida are now in the Obama column. McCain may be in danger of losing here by November 4th. Written by David Quidd
on 10/3/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Speaking of facts . . .did you happen to hear Gov. Palin make numerous references to a General from the civil war, which makes me think she couldn't read trhe notes clearly, which also means she didn't know that his name is McKiernan, not McClellan. . . they did a good job of prepping her; but she stayed very red faced for most the debate and was clearly no serious match for Joe Biden - but she stood her own, and that's good. Still she DOES NOT BELONG IN THE WHITE HOUSE, we'd do better with the family from 'Family Guy'. Written by Get serious
on 10/3/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Biden had lots of "facts" many of which were based on no facts at all. He spouts out costs of the war, etc. but the numbers don't add up. Palin won. The independent voters on CNN and CBS said Biden won, numerous other polling data showed Palin as the winner. Can't really believe polls right now anyway. Palin held her own and got under his skin. Biden did a great job of not losing it as he normally does. The press counted her out, the liberal Hollywood set counted her out but she proved them wrong. There is alot of normal working class folks out there that saw this as someone fighting for them against the liberal machine and entrenched politicians. Written by Sid
on 10/3/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Gov. Palin certainly did not embarrass herself or the GOP, but the net effect of her generally good performance was simply to reignite the enthusiasm of the GOP base. The fight for this election is over the eight or nine percent of undecided voters, since, with only four weeks left, the McCain and Obama votes are now very solid. Did Gov. Palin move any of those undecideds in the few remaining swing states to the GOP? I doubt it very much. Did she raise her stock as a significant future player in the national party? Probably so. Did she play well in the very red State of Louisiana? Of course, but so what. Louisiana is going to vote for McCain by 15% or more already, so it is immaterial? Written by CL
on 10/3/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Hey Jeff, Don't spend time defending your opinion on Palin........just send the ones that claim "substance" with Biden to fact check. 10 absolute lies and 6 others that would be open for debate.......but 10 absolute, cannot be denied lies including actual votes on the war that Biden stated for Obama and McCain. Facts are facts. Written by Nat K.
on 10/3/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
So Jeff
What is more important "Style" or "Facts"? You seem to think that style is more important, when I had you on the other side of the fence. We all saw her acting out like a 16 year old teenager in that interview, which suggests she had some kind of emotional trauma at that age, as she reverted to it, on que!
President Palin, I think NOT!
Facts facts Lets stay on the side of facts, not party politics. Written by oh please!
on 10/3/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I knew that, short of her soiling herself during the debate, Jeff would call it a "home run." Fortunately the independent voters gave the debate to Biden by a wide margin (and they're the only ones whose opinion matters, since you'd expect liberals to think Biden won it, and yahoos to "think" Palin did). TW Written by Tee Dub
on 10/3/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
