Tsunami John (McCain's pick for VP)

[IchorFigure]

Thanks. She didn't say she believed in creationism or that she would ask that it be taught, only that she would not opposed it being taught. Her answer sounds like a bare-minimum pandering to the religious guys. So, she passes on that score, in my book.

I'm not real sure on this. She is obviously not an explicit supporter of teaching Creationism or I.D., but "teaching the controversy" is still wimpy and damn close. After being blasted out of the water at Dover "teaching the controversy" has become the new, lower standard for Creationists to work toward.

[agrippa1]

Well let's see... normally the federal authorities help in this matter, but god knows where they were, and our national guard were busy circle jerking and getting shot at out in the desert. Also, we've been trying to get Washignton to help with the levees for years and they blew it off. Our local people were doing the best they could with limited resources and being the idiots they are... but the Bush Administration didn't exactly come to the rescue either.

Are you saying that N.O. didn't spend millions of federal dollars meant to reinforce the levees - on renovating docks to support their gambling boats?

Are you saying that N.O. didn't spend millions of federal dollars to draft an evacuation plan, only to fail to implement it with four days of warning from the federal government?

Are you saying that the welfare of N.O. citizens is primarily the responsibility of the federal government and not the state, the city, the neighborhood or the individual?

Are you willing to defend the good people of N.O. who fired on national guard and military forces who threatened to interrupt their loot-fest?

Are you willing to defend the government of N.O., whose own police force (first responders - what a joke) not only went AWOL immediately after the hurricane, but actually played a leading role in the savagery of the days following Katrina?

Are you willing to defend the governor of La. who, when faced with a disaster of unprecedented proportions, followed her "principles" and engaged in a pissing contest with the federal agencies trying desperately to take control of the situation?

Are you going to seriously argue that all of the tragedies that proceeded from the impact of Katrina were not predictable, given the level of incompetence and corruption that pervaded the city of N.O. and the state of Louisiana, and that the Federal Government was somehow therefore responsible for providing all of the relief normally provided by the local and state authorities?

I would hazard to guess that the answer to all of these questions, if given honestly, would be a resounding NO.

But we digress.

...

The one factor that no one has mentioned here is Gov. Palin's credentials as a true Washington outsider, an outspoken crusader against corruption, and a person willing to confront the status quo - even challenging her own party - head on and unflinchingly. IMO, corruption is the number one problem facing our government and our nation today, and all the minor bickering over Creationism, abortion rights, etc. pales by comparison to the fact that our government (both parties) is for sale to the highest bidder. If we can't fix the latter problem, the others don't even matter.

She has at least four distinct advantages over Obama:

First, she actually has experience in executive positions - as owner of a fishing business, as mayor of a (yes, small) town, and as governor of a (yes, low-pop) state. Obama, by contrast claims never to have used a schedule while in the Illinois state legislature and can't find his notes from that time. (Not a very organized guy to take on CEO of the US) He's never held what could objectively called "a real job" as far as I can see. That is, a job with real, measurable responsibilities, and objective measures of success or failure.

Second, she has talked the talk and walked the walk against corruption. When then Gov. Murkowski failed to deal with her charges of corruption against a member of his administration (who was later convicted of that charge), she quit in protest (integrity), then ran against that same Gov. (courage) beat him in the primaries, won the Governorship, and cleaned out the old cronies (competence). She has a charge of corruption against her, but a careful reading of the circumstances shows that she acted in the interests of the state in a matter that affected her personally. Obama, for his part, is hip deep in an apparent money-laundering scheme involving a now-convicted (of corruption) political operative, and a prominently corrupt Iraqi businessman. His campaign is unprecedently closed and secretive regarding his past experiences, actions, and most importantly, his associates. (what we do know about them, frankly, stinks).

Third, she believes in individual responsibility, unlike Obama, whose most memorable line (for me) from his latest teleprompting (I think some called it a "speech") is "we are all our brother's keeper; we are all our sister's keeper."

And fourth, she has a level of humility commensurate with her achievements.

Edited August 30, 2008 by agrippa1

[fletch]

If she accomplishes nothing more than convincing the bull-headed McCain to drop his worship of the "pristine" and open up Anwar, she will have been a good choice. Issue #1 for me in this election is energy. Obama seems content to let the bad guys monopolize the production of oil while we place our resources off-limits. If he cant see the danger such a position poses to our national security, then he really is unqualified to lead this nation. To then proclaim that we will kick our "addiction to foreign oil" in ten years without using our own oil, coal, or nuclear power is the type of insane fantasy that should get him laughed off the stage. McCain, at least, seems to have seen the light on this issue and he strikes me as the type of guy who would cast aside his environmentalism if he felt the national interest was at stake. At least I hope so.

[NineInfinity]

There must certainly be some people voting for him solely because of his race, that makes them racists and unethical.

The city of Philadelphia is a good example of this. In fact, Obama didn't even bother to venture to any of the poor black areas in the primary campaign because he already had a ridiculously high margin over Clinton just because of his race. Of course, no one is going to complain about this in the media, but they will harp on the racist bigots in the south who won't vote for Obama because he is black.

[RationalBiker]

As a slightly comical aside to the more serious nature of this thread, I was amused by something I heard on the radio about the news of her selection. I was riding with my wife back from the Amish country of PA and we were listening to Rush Limbaugh (I know, but we had to find SOME news source out there) awaiting the news. When Rush anounced the selection he pointed out how "tough'" this woman was because "she hunts moose!!!" My wife and I both chuckled. I've never really considered moose hunting as an important quality for a VP pick, but hey, it can't hurt right?

Later, my wife wanted to hear Bill O'Reilly's take on the selection and he kept making the same mistakes that apparently the 'liberal media' had been making; he was saying that McCain had lost the 'experience' upper-hand because Palin has no experience. He kept comparing her to Obama when she's just the VP nomination, not the P nomination. He emphasized the whole thing about how should be be a heartbeat away from the presidency, but that holds no water with me. If Obama got elected, it would ENSURE the inexperienced person took the Oval office, not merely had a remote possibility of taking the office should something happen to McCain. That argument simply makes NO sense to me. Other issues aside, I would rather have the experienced person in the driver seat while the inexperienced person could be nurtured along, not the other way around as it would be with the Obama team.

I have something of a pragmatic view in the case of this election; neither side looks appealing to me, but I think that Obama could have much more of a detrimental impact to me personally as he is likely to try to take more money from my wallet than McCain. McCain's impact on other social issues (like abortion, etc.) can possibly be dealt in other ways and are less likely to actually impact me, at least short term.

[Sarrisan]

On the subject of Palin, I am more and more deciding that I like her, personally. On the surface, she looks just as religious as McCain, but it seems her professional record says a bit differently.

This article at LGF, while not really focusing on her stance itself, seems to indicate that she is pro-gay rights. Considering that she also seems to be more or less a moderate when it comes to Creationism being taught in schools, I am coming to think that she may be the kind of religious person who - amazingly, I know - is willing to keep Church a personal matter, and out of politics.

Anyone have any evidence to the opposite?

P.S. Also, from Wikipedia, "Palin has strongly promoted oil and natural gas resource development in Alaska, including opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling. She does not believe that global warming is man-made. She opposed listing of the polar bear as an endangered species, and supported a controversial predator-control program involving aereal hunting of wolves."

Of course, that same article seems to refute all of what I just said above.

Politics is so damn confusing...

[softwareNerd]

George Reisman blogged about Palin's actions vis-a-vis the oil-industry, pointing out that what she did was similar to Obama's socialist plan of taxing the oil firms and dole out the money to voters. While Palin might put a less socialist spin on it, she didn't just talk about it, she did it. (More here.)

[EdSalti]

Nothing quite like a little political zig-zag to send the most rational of us running for our soapboxes, the better to flail at the nearest horse carcass unimpeded.

Sarah Palin was an inspired choice. I had hoped for Condi Rice, but I think there may be some baggage there not visible to the general public.

Governor Palin was chosen because she is a she. Simple as that. It remains to be seen just how disaffected the Hillary supporters are, but Ms. Palin will pull a number of them away from "the empty suit" who stole the nomination away from their girl. She is, after all, just the beat of an aging heart away. McCain has a strong, attractive, articulate woman on either side of him. I think the guy is a shoo-in.

B.T.J.M.O., I.C.B.W.

[dadmonson]

There is a vicious rumor going around about her and her daughter. Anybody heard it? Some Democrats are trying to smear McCain's campaign by acting like High School gossipers. It's a shame really.

Edited August 31, 2008 by dadmonson

[agrippa1]

There is a vicious rumor going around about her and her daughter. Anybody heard it? Some Democrats are trying to smear McCain's campaign by acting like High School gossipers. It's a shame really.

The incidence of Down Syndrome births in women 20-24 is one in 1562, above age 45 it is one in 19.*

Occam sez: Do the math.

*(source: Huether, C.A. (1998). "Maternal age specific risk rate estimates for Down syndrome among live births in whites and other races from Ohio and metropolitan Atlanta, 1970-1989". J Med Genet 35(6): 482–490.)

Edited August 31, 2008 by agrippa1

[fletch]

The incidence of Down Syndrome births in women 20-24 is one in 1562, above age 45 it is one in 19.*

So what does this tell us about the woman?

[agrippa1]

So what does this tell us about the woman?

The rumor is that the baby is actually Gov. Palin's teenage daughter's, and that the governor faked her own pregnancy to cover up her daughter's shame.

It tells us nothing about Palin, it tells us a little about the mentality of some of Obama's supporters.

[Grames]

It appears George Reisman has gone off half-cocked. Don't Be Misled Gov. Palin ain't no socialist.

The key text in the linked article would be this:

What the article you linked to is discussing is a severance tax. State severance taxes charged on production of oil and gas and minerals are common throughout the United States. Also sometimes called "production taxes," they're charged by the state from beneath whose land valuable resources are extracted, and they're designed not to punish the energy companies, but to recompense the state for its loss of a non-replaceable resource — one that must be quantified and taxed upon removal, if it is ever to be taxed at all. Severance taxes are therefore based on production from within the state, not on profits earned by the company extracting that production — even though the production may be measured in, and the tax assessed upon, the market value or gross revenues (as measured in dollars) received for that production, rather than an "in kind" delivery to the state in barrels or cubic feet as such. See, e.g., Tex. Tax Code §§ 201.051 & 202.051 (Texas production taxes on gas and oil respectively).

Reisman needs to do better than this if he is going to blogging about current events. I would like to know what he has to say about a state gov't owning mineral rights, but characterizing Gov. Palin as a looter equivalent to Obama is just lazy.

[The Wrath]

Haven't read much on her yet.

In McCain's case, the VP nod matter more than ever. Let's face it...at his age, we have to seriously consider the possibility that she will become an unelected president.

[fletch]

The rumor is that the baby is actually Gov. Palin's teenage daughter's, and that the governor faked her own pregnancy to cover up her daughter's shame.

Hadnt heard that one. You gotta think that McCains investigators would have turned that up if there was any truth to it. But that is one hell of a vicious smear.

[dadmonson]

The rumor is that the baby is actually Gov. Palin's teenage daughter's, and that the governor faked her own pregnancy to cover up her daughter's shame.

It tells us nothing about Palin, it tells us a little about the mentality of some of Obama's supporters.

I promise you I'm not this retarded, but the baby could be Asian(there is a huge Inuit population in Alaska) and they could be trying to say that the baby has down syndrome because they know of the statistics. Here is a picture of Palin and her husband with the baby.

http://www.suzyb.org/SarahTrig.jpg

Yes, I'm bored.

[agrippa1]

I promise you I'm not this retarded, but the baby could be Asian(there is a huge Inuit population in Alaska) and they could be trying to say that the baby has down syndrome because they know of the statistics. Here is a picture of Palin and her husband with the baby.

http://www.suzyb.org/SarahTrig.jpg

Yes, I'm bored.

Maybe you should have yourself screened.

Sorry, I would normally self edit that response, but, c'mon...

(on edit:)

Seriously, though, let's say, just for the sake of argument, that Sarah Palin's daughter was impregnated by an indigenous Alaskan (not much embarrassment in the race, given Mr. Palin is one-eighth Yu-pik), and Sarah decided to protect her daughter from the shame of not having the child aborted. Exactly what bad thing do you imagine this says about Gov. Palin? Would you be willing to scream "COVER UP!!!" over a private family matter that reveals nothing other than a firm commitment to family and principles? Would you rather elect one of these other asshole politicians who wouldn't hesitate to abort an embarrassment, regardless of their so-called principles? Do you understand the phrase "hatred of the good for being good," and how it relates to attacks of this sort?

Edited September 1, 2008 by agrippa1

[Grames]

Over the weekend two stories appeared on McCain's veep selection process.

Washington Post: Palin Made an Impression From the Start

The Weekly Standard: How Palin Got Picked

[Fireball]

The Fifth column is now parading the lineup of left-wing shills, hacks and stooges:

John Kerry: Sarah Palin doesn't believe in man-made global warming! That's insulting!

Ed Schultz: Sarah Palin's teenage daughter is pregnant! What a hypocrite!

Stephanie Miller: Sarah Palin has zero foreign policy experience!

First, global warming is a left-wing hoax, so this shows Mrs. Palin is not gullible. Second, Obama's mother was a teenager when she gave birth to Obama, yet democrats are fine with that. Third, Bill Clinton had zero foreign policy experience when he took office in 1993, but democrats said that didn't matter because he presided over Arkansas' National Guard.

Be prepared for liberal democrats to smear and slander Sarah Palin with spectacular brutality. Yet this approach could backfire. Hillary had 18 million supporters and 5 million were expected to vote for Sarah as of last Friday. Right or wrong, many of those female supporters will vote based on sex; they want to see a woman in the White House during their lifetime. And such untempered hatred aimed at Sarah could sway even more undecided women to vote for the McCain/Palin ticket.

[dadmonson]

Stephanie Miller: Sarah Palin has zero foreign policy experience!

Bill Clinton had zero foreign policy experience when he took office in 1993, but democrats said that didn't matter because he presided over Arkansas' National Guard.

Where were you when Republicans(Including McCain) were attacking Obama by saying he had no experience? That was there main knock against Obama.

[D'kian]

Where were you when Republicans(Including McCain) were attacking Obama by saying he had no experience? That was there main knock against Obama.

No, that was a valid criticism. There's a difference between "no foreign policy experience" and "no experience."

The presidency is an executive position. The president mostly sets policy and makes decisions involving the day to day running of the executive branch. McCain presumably has some executive experience from his time in the Navy (depending partly on what was his top rank and post for how long). Palin has executive experience from running a business, being major of a small town and governor of Alaska for two years. Obama, as far as I know, has little or no executive experience. He may have legislative and political experience, but surely not as much as McCain; and as surely more than Palin.

How much weight experience has for a president is an open question. Running the executive branch can't be that hard, and there's a lot of help fromt he Chief of Staff on down to every cabinet secretary, etc. Appointing the right people may be another matter. Setting policy, I assume every politician has a policy he wants to set already, or an ideaology, or a base to please for the next election, or an electorate to please for the next election. That may suck, but there will be no lack of policies to imlement one way or another.

Foreign policyexperience, however, is important. Specifically the knowledge of what threats there are out there, what can realistically be done about them, and what allies we have Also what policies the candidate advocates on various foreign issues. For example what's to be done about Iran's nukes, the war in Iraq, what can be done to hunt down Al Qaida and bin laden and other terrorist groups, etc etc.

Political experience also counts. Take former Mexican President Vicente Fox. He had some good ideas for fiscal and tax reform (mainly simplifying and lowering taxes), but couldn't get them as much as a fair hearing either in the Congress or the media. He had tons of executive experience, too, having run Coca Cola in Mexico for several years, and having been governor fo Guanajuato state for some years as well. But no political experience, and it showed.

[agrippa1]

He may have legislative and political experience, but surely not as much as McCain; and as surely more than Palin.

Do you think a guy from the Chicago machine made this campaign happen on his own, or even by his own actions? Obama's past is about as clear as mud so far, and the only associations that have come to light are extremely Left-wing and extremely radical. We know that he got a sweetheart deal on his house (to the tune of $300k in potential tribute) from a guy who has since been convicted of political corruption and who ties Obama closely to money from a corrupt Iraqi arms dealer. Who is behind Obama? What is their agenda? Obama has described himself as the blank screen - and his performance has backed that up, espousing ideals from every political walk with a sincere, charismatic, telegenic personality. No one can answer: who or what is behind that screen?

My point here is that we don't know how much of Obama's success is political savvy and how much is programmed by unseen handlers. He is worse than an unknown, because we know there is something powerful beneath the facade of his candidacy. We just don't know if it's an extremely cunning and successful intellect, or something other.

[RationalBiker]

In McCain's case, the VP nod matter more than ever. Let's face it...at his age, we have to seriously consider the possibility that she will become an unelected president.

I may be ill-informed, but I don't know of anything about McCain's health (despite his age being 72) that suggests he's even remotely likely to kick-off at any moment. I see this more as a nice scare tactic for the Dems. I give this very little consideration at all. After all, if Obama gets elected, there is a 100% chance that an inexperienced person will take the office.

[dadmonson]

Maybe you should have yourself screened.

Sorry, I would normally self edit that response, but, c'mon...

(on edit:)

Seriously, though, let's say, just for the sake of argument, that Sarah Palin's daughter was impregnated by an indigenous Alaskan (not much embarrassment in the race, given Mr. Palin is one-eighth Yu-pik), and Sarah decided to protect her daughter from the shame of not having the child aborted. Exactly what bad thing do you imagine this says about Gov. Palin? Would you be willing to scream "COVER UP!!!" over a private family matter that reveals nothing other than a firm commitment to family and principles? Would you rather elect one of these other asshole politicians who wouldn't hesitate to abort an embarrassment, regardless of their so-called principles? Do you understand the phrase "hatred of the good for being good," and how it relates to attacks of this sort?

True, but that is politics. A vast majority of people know that it doesn't matter. It's just that media has to have something to talk about.

Here are what some religious people had to say about all this...

"We have always encouraged the parents to love and support their children and always advised the girls to see their pregnancies through, even though there will of course be challenges along the way. That is what the Palins are doing, and they should be commended once again for not just talking about their pro-life and pro-family values, but living them out even in the midst of trying circumstances.

"Being a Christian does not mean you're perfect. Nor does it mean your children are perfect. But it does mean there is forgiveness and restoration when we confess our imperfections to the Lord. I've been the beneficiary of that forgiveness and restoration in my own life countless times, as I'm sure the Palins have," Dobson said.

- James dobson, Focus on the Family Founder

"This is the pro-life choice. The fact that people will criticize her for this shows the astounding extent to which the secular critics of the pro-life movement just don't get it."

"Those who criticize the Palin family don't understand that we don't see babies as a punishment but as a blessing. Barack Obama said that if one of his daughters made a mistake and got pregnant out of wedlock, he wouldn't want her to be punished with a child. Pro-lifers don't see a child as punishment."

-Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission

"Fortunately, Bristol is following her mother and father's example of choosing life in the midst of a difficult situation." "We are committed to praying for Bristol and her husband-to-be and the entire Palin family as they walk through a very private matter in the eyes of the public."

-Tony Perkins, Family Research Council President

If a Democrat, Libertarian or Green had done this, you know these same people would be crucifying them as a prime example of the decline in American culture.

Also, Barack Obama talks about the relevance of the baby issue here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLu4IlvAJf4

Edited September 2, 2008 by dadmonson

[D'kian]

Do you think a guy from the Chicago machine made this campaign happen on his own, or even by his own actions?

Yes. A ward heeler worth two cents would have Obama at least 10 points ahead of McCain, not barely keeping up.

Who is behind Obama?

I think Obama is the culmination of left wing ideology: the zero.

Look, Obama is a narcissist. He's a man of real but limited acomplishments who at 47 years old already has written his autobiography. He's highly charismatic and does what he has to in order to get elected. Ay Rand drew a distinction between politicians who want to get elected in order to implement certain policies, and those who advocate certain policies in order to get elected. Obama is in the second camp.

What will he do if he gets elected president? I doubt even he knows, or even cares much. Probably he'll do what he thinks will get him re-elected.

I'm saying if there's nothing to see about Obama is because there is nothing. But I don't think he's the puppet of a Democrat version of Karl Rove.