McCain's VP Choice

1. 67

   hubby7posted 16 years ago

   What does everybody think about John McCain choice of Sarah Pahlin as his Vice Presidential pick?
   
   My feeling is that she might be a bit too parochial with too little experience. That my feeling. However, I admit I don't know much about her right now. Does anyone? Perhaps upon learning more about her, I will chance my opinion.
   
                                   hubby7

   report
2. 60

   knolyourselfposted 16 years ago

   Worst VP pick in history. Like going from Dog Catcher to Vice Pres. The media is good at dressing up pigs, George
   Bush for instance, but this is asking a bit much even for them.

   report
3. 59

   Prophecy Teacherposted 16 years ago

   I think it's a pragmatic pick. Kinda like Obama dyeing his hair in the primaries to look young and after the primaries letting his gray show in order to look mature and statesmen like. That's pragmatic.
   
   I think it's the same kind of pragmatism that the Democrat party and the media showed in heavily and massively and unabashedly supporting Obama in the first place - because they knew it is impossible for Hillary to be president. They compromised their principles in order to be pragmatic about electability.
   
   Poll after poll showed that more than 50% of the electorate had said they would not elect Hillary President under ANY circumstances and that proved to them they would loose the election.
   
   Concerning McCain - his pick was pure pragmatism. He had not consolidated his base of conservative voters and because he isn't a conservative - held no likelihood to do so. In his surprising showing at Saddleback - McCain was showing in his answers - that even if he wasn't a true conservative - he would at the very least make the most important decisions concerning conservatives - his calling. He had to. In order to win. He affirmed that he would only appoint strict constructionists to the High Court. (which ultimately guarantees a Roe vs Wade overturn)
   
   He believed life begins at conception (Making abortion murder).
   
   He said he would like to give a child credit for each family of 7500 per child. This went little noticed - but by saying so he appealed to the huge broad middle of the electorate. (Folks with familys) That's an increase from 2500/child to 7500. That amount comes straight off the amount of tax owed. Big big tax break for working family's.
   
   McCain came out of that debate so strong - the polls had him neck and neck with Obama - even into the 3rd day of the Democrat Convention. In seeing Hillary's lackluster support for Obama - and the continued agitation of Hilary supporters - McCain made a Bold, Brilliant and Pragmatic choice as his VP.
   
   In one motion:
   He consolidated his base to an immovable rock.
   He Energized that base to raise $$ and get out the vote
   He appealed to every woman not already aligned.
   He reinforced his image as a Maverick by selecting a maverick herself.
   He brings vitality to a slot which will debate Biden - seen as an old guard guy.
   He instantly stole the limelight from Obama
   He goes into his own Convention with striking momentum (esp if the polls narrow Mon and Tues.)
   He reinforces the idea that the Democrats really don't want a woman in the White House
   He picks a candidate that hardly anyone can say anything bad against (In doing so - they themselves look bad)
   McCain softens his harsh image
   McCain will appeal to the Libertarians, the undecided and the - what's the word the Dems use - oh yeah - the disenfranchised.
   The choice does indeed invite a single line of attack - but Obama and Biden will only look like fools attacking a woman whose son is in Iraq, who's baby is handicapped and who's lifestyle is the essence of goodness.
   
   I also think Palin stands as stark contrast to the woman the Democrats picked. They picked a hard nosed, strong willed, defiant, political hack machine, proven to be insolent in the primaries who couldn't even credit her husband in his role for her success - on the day she spoke at the convention.
   
   Palin on the other hand - has succeeded at everything she has ever done - has been a leader all her life - stands by her morals even if they hurt her - goes up against seemingly difficult odds of men, Republicans and integrity. All while being a mother of 4 (at the time) She gave her husband great credit and wasn't ashamed to clearly and unabashedly say what he was, does, and believes.
   
   Is she ready to be Vice President? Absolutely. Is she ready to be President. Close but no enchilada. Never the less, the American people are great prognosticators of vim, vigor and vision. In her they see themselves. It is highly unlikely they saw themselves in Hillary.
   
   I believe John McCain did the pragmatic thing - and the evidence was strong to do so. When someone is 72 years old, and has lived the life McCain has - they do not throw hail Mary passes - he judges based on instinct - and goes for it. It's called wisdom.
   
   It's precisely the wisdom that Obama didn't show - in being pragmatic about Hillary - which would have given him the election. Instead - he chose arrogance when he turned his back on her and it will most likely cost him the future.
   
   I suspect Pilan will tear Joe Biden up in the debates. Furthermore,  any attack will backfire on the Dems as America will perceive it as unjustified by brutes attacking a good and moral woman trying to raise a good, moral and difficult family. The Dems have their work cut out for them - and I think they will not catch their footing for at least another month.

   report
   1. 67

      hubby7posted 16 years agoin reply to this

      It's precisely the wisdom that Obama didn't show - in being pragmatic about Hillary - which would have given him the election. Instead - he chose arrogance when he turned his back on her and it will most likely cost him the future.
      
      Hi Prophecy Teacher,
      
      You make some very interesting points as to why McCain choice of Palin as his vice presidential running mate is a wise one. However, the focus of this post will deal with the quote above. You state that Obama showed both arrogance and impraticality in not choosing Hillary. I, for my part, would beg to disagree with you. First, I would argue that Obama did--though I would not use the term "wisdom"--show good judgment in choosing Biden as his running mate. He wanted someone who he could work well with over the next four years. In addition, he needed someone who could help him round out his ticket. He did precisely that by choosing Biden as his running mate. It might be argued that by choosing Hillary, he would probably have been a shew it as far as the Presidency is concerned. The downside to that is that with Hillary as his vice presidency, he might had to suffer through 4 years of hell.
      
      As to whether Obama was arrogant in not choosing Hillary, I beg to differ. She just was not a "fit" for the ticket. The two would be unharmonious together. Obama didn't want that. He wanted someone who was compatible with him (i.e. not in agreement with him) on his ticket. Hillary just did not meet that criteria. That's why she was not chosen and not because of Obama being arrogant!
      
                                                         hubby7

      report
4. 60

   knolyourselfposted 16 years ago

   'Concerning McCain - his pick was pure pragmatism. He had not consolidated his base of conservative voters and because he isn't a conservative'
   Not conservative. You must a be a little to the left of Benito Mussolini.

   report
5. 60

   allshookupposted 16 years ago

   Well, honestly I was hoping for Huckabee. I don't know much about her yet. But from what I have learned in the last 2 days, I like her. I don't particuarly think a woman needs to be in this position. But I know Obama and his VP don't. So, I'm giving her a chance. And, from what I am learning, she's conservative and pro-life. Both of which I am. So, so far, I'm happy with her. I do wish he had chosen a man, but since he didn't, I'm really glad he picked a conservative. I will keep watching close to see what else I can learn.

   report
6. 59

   Prophecy Teacherposted 16 years ago

   No Conservative believes McCain is one. NONE.

   report
   1. 67

      hubby7posted 16 years agoin reply to this

      I concur with you, Prophecy Teacher.
      
           hubby7

      report
7. 60

   knolyourselfposted 16 years ago

   That's because no conservative is a conservative. Bout the only conservatives in this country are the Amish.

   report
   1. 0

      Zarm Nefilinposted 16 years agoin reply to this

      Smack

      report
8. 60

   allshookupposted 16 years ago

   I thought we were talking about his VP choice. Or at least I am. From what I see so far, she is showing conservative values. I have only been watching her for a couple days. I'll know more in the future. But I was not talking about McCain, I thought this thread was about his choice for VP.

   report
9. 0

   pgrundyposted 16 years ago

   Conservatism in the U.S. has morphed into something fascist and alien. Look at our national debt under the current crop of 'conservatives'. Real conservatives are rolling over in their graves.
   
   Not only is Sarah Palin not qualified to be Vice President, she's scary right-wing wacko. She wants Roe v. Wade repealed. She wants Creationism taught in schools. She sued the current Republican administration for naming polar bears an endangered species because she was afraid it would interfere with promoting even more drilling in Alaska wildlife preserves. Her entire political career is less than 9 years long, the biggest part of it spent as mayor of a town of 5,000 people.
   
   The move to make her VP by McCain was pure Republican cynicism, a culture wars stunt designed to get the focus off the HUGE momentum Obama built over the course of the Democratic convention. This duo is the worst ever: It's a freak show now, a carnival--and that's just how the news media like it.

   report
10. 60

    allshookupposted 16 years ago

    I am not proud of the things this current administration has done. Concerning the war, I don't feel 1 drop of American blood should have been shed. That's what nukes are for. But I don't think you should judge the whole party because of the one man who is in power now. McCain is a different man and Sarah surely is LOL.  Also, I agree with everything you just said about her. I too want Roe v Wade repealed, I am pro-life, I had rather kill the polar bears and be more self-sufficient here at home in the US than depend on the arabs for oil. I'd lots rather see lower prices at the gas pump than see pictues of polar bears walking around up there. I am anything but a tree-hugger. Creation is how the world came to be, therefore I agree that is the only thing that should be taught in schools. Evolution is a lie. Why would you want to lie to your children? I am behind her about all the things you just said. I want to learn more to see if I stay that way. But so far, I love the stands she's made and the fact that she isn't afraid to go against the main-stream media to make her stand. I admire her for that. I'm watching everything and reading everything I can about her because I want to know more.

    report
    1. 0

       pgrundyposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       I know many men and women will feel as you do. The problem from my perspective is this is my country too. It's also the country of Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and quite a  few Buddhists, not to mention lots of Christians who DON'T believe Creationism belongs in science class, and lots of women who worked hard to secure a woman's right to make the very private decision to end an unwanted pregnancy. It's my country too.
       
       Creationism belongs in a comparative religion class. I have no problem with it there. But to teach it as or instead of science is not right. It isn't science, it's religious doctrine. We have separation of Church and state here written right into the first amendment to the Constitution. Religious doctrine has no place in public schools. If you feel strongly that it is the truth, teach it to your own kids at home. We all have the right to believe whatever we wish to believe, but not the right to force our beliefs on others who don't share them.

       report
       1. 67

          hubby7posted 16 years agoin reply to this

          Hi pgrundy,
          
          You took the words right out of mouth except that I would have added that I find the words below both frightening and alarming especially coming from a mouth of a religious person:
          
          "Concerning the war, I don't feel 1 drop of American blood should have been shed. That's what nukes are for."
          
                                                            hubby7

          report
    2. 76

       robie2posted 16 years agoin reply to this

       What???????  I don't believe I just read that-- you were kidding right??? Did you say " that's what nukes are for?" You would be for nuking millions of innocent Iraqi people? Are you saying you have more respect for the life of an American embryo than an Iraqi teen-ager? Say you were joking--please please please say you didn't mean that.

       report
       1. 67

          hubby7posted 16 years agoin reply to this

          Hi robie2,
          
          I am glad that I am not the only one who caught that!
          
                             hubby7

          report
    3. 0

       Zarm Nefilinposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Yet you would support the indiscriminate killing of unborn children within the womb's of mothers who were carrying within the country in which a tactical nuke was used to terminate the lives of millions of humans, (after the fallout), with extreme prejudice?
       
       Even the principle of double effect would not save you.
       
       All that being said, here is a response to the topic at hand:
       
       
       This pick was an excellent pick from the perspective of getting the social conservative vote that put psychopaths like George Bush into office in the first place.
       
       
       "The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them." Orwell

       report
    4. 67

       hubby7posted 16 years agoin reply to this

       [Creation is how the world came to be, therefore I agree that is the only thing that should be taught in schools. Evolution is a lie. Why would you want to lie to your children?
       
       Hi Alshookup,
       
       Let me try to shake you up a little bit? How do you know that "creation is how the world came to be"? Were you around when it happened? You also state that evolution is a lie. That being the case, creation is the only thing that should be taught in school. Therefore, you ask, do you want to lie to your children? Let me play the devil's advocate by the arguing the contrary: Creation is a lie. Evolution is true. That being so, only evolution should be taught in school. Let me throw the question back at you: Why do you want to lie to your children? My point: Just saying that something is so does not necessarily make it so!
       
                                             hubby7

       report
11. 60

    allshookupposted 16 years ago

    I didn't put anything on here to offend anyone. I am only answering the topic of McCain's VP Choice and why I feel that way. I realize that it is every American's country, but I'll never feel it's ok to kill a person because you don't want them after you have taken the action to get them there. (abortion)  It's that baby's country too. S/he should have the choice to live or die. Also, nukes can be used for making a point. Threatening. Not killing. To make them listen. I don't believe our soldiers should have been killed over there. It should have been handled different in my opinion. Bedtime for me. Have a good night.

    report
    1. 76

       robie2posted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Ahhhh then what you are saying is that we should threaten to use nuclear weapons but not be prepared to carry out the threat--a dangerous game if you ask me-- not to mention bullying and cowardly.  I'm not offended and I'm not trying to offend you.  Your argument about nukes just doesn't make any sense to me-- I wan't trying to open a dicussion about abortion only to understand why you value the lives of American soldiers and the unborn but not the lives of Iraqis.It doesn't make sense to me.  If one life is important than all are in my view.

       report
       1. 0

          pgrundyposted 16 years agoin reply to this

          On certain topics there is no possibility of rational discussion between people who disagree. That's why the Republican party pokes at those hot spots again and again--to divide and conquer. It worked for them twice, they're going for a home run. Some of these topics include: abortion, 'nuking' our enemies, patriotism, Creationism, and religion. I expect them to bring up these issues frequently, and to keep saying Obama will raise taxes for ordinary people, which is not only a bald-faced lie, it's a reversal of the truth. McCain's health plan would tax health care benefits provided by employers--so if you are lucky enough to have health care through your job, the cost of that, including the employer-paid portion, will be taxed. That will hit the middle class hard. Also, McCain plans to preserve tax breaks for those making over $5 million a year---less than one quarter of one percent of all Americans. Obama plans to raise taxes for people making over $250,000 each year. Less than 1% of all Americans makes over $250,000 a year. Most Americans households (not individuals) make between $30K-$60 a year. Only 20% of HOUSEHOLDS even make over$100K a year.
          
          So we can look forward to two months of constant appeals to our irrationality and lies about taxes. It really bothers me.

          report
12. 80

    crashcromwellposted 16 years ago

    I would like to bring this back to the original topic here. I've actually written a hub on this subject, and it's my hottest hub today. I would not yet go so far to say that Sarah Palin is the worst veep pick in history. I still remember Dan Quayle too well, and I just don't know Palin well enough to make that comparison. I will say that McCain may have made a strategic error in selecting someone younger and less experienced than Obama for his running mate, because it will be difficult for him to rail on Obama being too inexperienced to be president.
    
    I also think that McCain did this out of desperation. He knows that in order to be a viable candidate, he's got to bring some Democratic votes to his side. Choosing a woman to be his running mate may have been the best thing he could do, but I am confident that Democrats are disciplined enough this year to look right through that. Compare Sarah Palin's positions on issues that are important to most women, and I can't imagine anyone who supported Hillary Clinton switching sides simply because McCain's veep choice happens to be a woman. She's a woman who is wrong.

    report
    1. 59

       Prophecy Teacherposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       She's that way to you - because you really want her to be - but...
       
       
       I guess you haven't read the latest poll:
       
       http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews1547.html

       report
    2. 67

       hubby7posted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Hi crashcromwell,
       
       I beg to differ with you on this point. Believe me, there are women who voted for Hillary simply because she was a women in the same way that there are blacks who voted for Obama simply because he is black! It had nothing to do with what she stands for. As the saying goes: "He might be a dictator but he is OUR dictator". That being so, I can imagine some Hillary supporters switching sides simply because McCain chose a woman as his vice presidential running mate!
       
                                                  hubby7

       report
13. 80

    crashcromwellposted 16 years ago

    I make no secret of the fact that I am a supporter of Barack Obama, so in that regard who John McCain picks as his running mate is of little consequence to me. My hub on this subject is targeted toward Democrats who may have considered voting for McCain because he chose a woman. I acknowledge that there are folks like you who were going to vote for McCain before his selection, and that's fine. McCain will get plenty of votes. I simply don't see where his choice of Sarah Palin is going to help lure Democratic women into his camp. Many women who supported Hillary Clinton did so because they agreed with her political positions, and those women (and men) are not going to be impressed by Gov. Palin.

    report
    1. 67

       hubby7posted 16 years agoin reply to this

       I agree with you, crashcromell. Women who are strong supporters of Roe vs Wade are not going to sudden forget what they stand for and vote for Palin. Women in America are SMARTER than that. Do you need evidence? Look at Hillary Clinton herself. Also, look at Michelle Obama. These are two smart and strong women. Another thing: Women who believes in the merits of science and evolution are not going to suddenly do an about face and vote for Palin. Do you think that women in American--and this is addressed to no one--are that stupid? Who are you kidding?
       
                                 hubby7

       report
       1. 80

          crashcromwellposted 16 years agoin reply to this

          That is precisely the position I took in my hub on this subject. It's insulting to supporters of Senator Clinton - men and women - that they would set aside all they believe in and support McCain simply because he has chosen this ill-qualified woman to be his running mate.

          report
          1. 0

             Zarm Nefilinposted 16 years agoin reply to this

             Well stated.
             
             I agree with these sentiments.

             report
14. 60

    allshookupposted 16 years ago

    To address what was said to/about me last night after I was in bed, I had rather not have to use nukes. I would like for this to have come to a stop with talks. But, if anyone attacks our country again like 9/11, they should be used. We need a President and Vice-President who is not afraid of using them should the need arise. They are for our protection. Like I said, I hope they never have to be used, but if they are needed, yes, we should use them. And I want to find out where Palin stands on this issue. I would like to know if she has the backbone to act if it were to come to it, God forbid. We need someone in office who will protect our country. Do any of us want another 9/11? That was my point. I want to know more about her stand on this plus more on her stands on all the issues. If anyone has a site where I can find that out, I would greatly appreciate having it. I want to learn all I can about her. I miss the days of Ronald Reagan where we knew he would stand for us. How did we know he would? Because he took action and stood, no matter if it was popular or not. I want to know if she is that type of Vice-Presidential material. The reason I brought up abortion is because I was trying to tell why I feel like I do about her so far. That is what this thread is about. All babies (what pro-choicers call embyros or fetus) are people with rights, and I like the fact that she stands up for them not to be murdered. I was just trying to explain why I like her so far. Like I have said over and over, I want to learn more about her so I can make a totally informed decision by election day.

    report
    1. 59

       Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       I can barely believe what I am reading. You are in favor of using nuclear weapons - a more indiscriminate weapon which has never existed, yet you think abortion is wrong because a fetus has rights ? You would rather not use nuclear weapons, but you hope there is some psychopath in office who will do, if the need arises?
       
       You must be a christian - only a christian would advocate the use of nuclear weapons against innocent babies.
       
       And you are allowed to vote? Good grief!

       report
       1. 89

          Jewelsposted 16 years agoin reply to this

          This is exactly why the US election is of interest to the rest of the world.  Thoughts like these are the most inhumane that exist.  Just blow them up.  Have we learned nothing from Hiroshima. I pray to anyone/thing that will listen - please wipe this way of thinking off this planet. It's so difficult to read these sentiments.

          report
15. 60

    knolyourselfposted 16 years ago

    Save em all, fore they are born, kill em all afterward.

    report
16. 68

    DJ Funktualposted 16 years ago

    LOL.  You rule Mark!

    report
    1. 59

       Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Well, I mean....

       report
17. 60

    allshookupposted 16 years ago

    All this time I thought the title of the thread was 'McCain's VP Choice.' If you don't want everyone's opinion, make the title something like......'Only Post Here If You Believe Like I Do'...then you could be happy. Your attack on me has nothing to do with this thread. You didn't have anything in your post about why you like or I'm sure dislike her. Your thread is all about me and my beliefs. Not about what this tread is about. No matter how you insult me or what I believe, you will never change my views. I'm sure it makes you feel good and proud of yourself for doing so. I like her because from what I have learned so far, we believe alot alike. I want to learn more. I want to know where she stands on all issues. It's important that we are informed before voting. And that goes for everyone running. And you can trash me all you want about my stance on protecting America. But, if you live here, I don't feel you want it destroyed. I really would hate to see American men, women and children murdered again here on our own soil.

    report
    1. 77

       Uninvited Writerposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       But you would rather see non-American men, women and children murdered. Do you not realize that the use of a nuclear weapon in the Middle East (I assume that is where you are thinking of) would have far reaching effects on all of Europe and Asia and basically the environment of the entire world?

       report
    2. 59

       Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       And what exactly do you think banning abortion and dropping nuclear weapons on others will protect America from?
       
       But if you are going to voice such opinions, you must expect there will be others that disagree with them.
       
       Even baby-killing, freedom-hating, anti-American atheists such as myself.
       
       Although I imagine this woman will be the perfect choice for you. She is a life-long member of the NRA, favors drilling in the Alaskan Wildlife preserve, is big on "family values," with 5 children of her own (she got you beat there), she was the local leader of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes in high school and is a member of The Assemblies of god:
       
       http://ag.org/top/
       
       Anti-Abortion
       Pro-big business
       Pro-guns
       Christian
       
       
       Right up your alley I would think.
       
       And if you do not see the obvious dichotomy of being anti-abortion yet pro-nuclear war, well......
       
       Do your kid a favor and send him to school.

       report
18. 60

    budwoodposted 16 years ago

    Well, I was for Obama because he seemed to be really great at basketball.  A real presidential qualification.  Now, I hear that Sarah is a pretty-mean basketball player herself.  So I'm not sure what to do?!!  I hope you understand the dilemma!.

    report
    1. 59

       Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Seems like a shoot out is in order to me

       report
       1. 99

          Sally's Troveposted 16 years agoin reply to this

          I agree.  At 20 paces, between allshookup and a rep from the rest of the gang.
          
          It's unfortunate that hubby7's question degenerated into this vituperous thread.
          
          allshookup, the forums are treacherous waters to air your convictions when you are very serious about what you believe in, to the point where your emotions and convictions speak louder than your logic.
          
          20 paces seems right. 
          
          May the best whomever win.

          report
19. 80

    crashcromwellposted 16 years ago

    Thank you for refocusing the conversation on the topic at hand. I've already made my opinion known, and so far there is nothing that I've seen or heard that is swaying me from my original opinion.

    report
20. 59

    Prophecy Teacherposted 16 years ago

    Hey Hubby7 - thanks. When I said the word arrogance - I meant political arrogance. (I don't mean Obama is arrogant - I don't think he is)
    
       The Biden choice was an alternative to Hillary - but Hillary has many years of foreign travel and knowledge. She spent her first term traveling the world getting ready for the Presidential run. And even though she's a President's wife - she ate dinners with all the people her husband did - and I'm sure they talked about everything. That's enough to qualify anyone.
    
       So Hillary was clearly qualified for everything Biden is.
    
       Hillary had received 18 million votes during the election - that is what she brought to the ticket. She brought the votes and without votes - you can't win. That's where the politics comes in. That is what stands in direct opposition to Pilan. Pilan brings votes period.
    
       It was political arrogance not to take advantage of that when every election for the last 3 has been a nail biter - like this one too promises to be. Biden does not bring votes.
    
       Biden got only 1% of the primary votes and dropped out early because he had absolutely no support.
    
       Biden dropped out of the 2000 or 04 race because he plagiarized whole speeches from an Englishman.
    
       Biden has said some terribly misguided things as well.
    
       Pragmatism would have been to select Hillary and leave her to the dust bins of the VP. Obama sets the rules for the VP - he could have made her world small. (And would have)
    
      But I thoroughly agree with your point (And this is why he did what he did) he couldn't live with her. He would have been throwing up every moment. He just couldn't do it.
    
      But remember Reagan - he greatly disliked Bush 41. Couldn't stand him because of the election - and because 41 was a liberal to moderate person. (But in the end, Reagan picked him against his better judgment - because 41 was a moderate and the moderates were afraid of Reagan's staunch conservatism - Reagan needed him to WIN)
    
       Even tho - 41 was a former head of the CIA, Ambassador to China, Congressman and Senator. He was well qualified - Reagan didn't like him.
    
       Turns out - Reagan was right. Bush didn't learn about the tax cuts he saw Reagan do - and raised taxes when Reagan was out - and lost the election to Clinton in a nail biter.

    report
21. 60

    allshookupposted 16 years ago

    Apparently you didn't like my answer to the original subject of this thread. When I saw it at first, I thought you would want everyone's opinoin. It seems since you don't, you have now changed the subject to people's personal beliefs. When I posted that first time, I had only planned to leave that one post because I thought it would just be everyone who wanted to to leave their opinions. I never dreamed my post would become so popular lol.  But, since you are asking the question on your thread, I will futher post. Even though y'all already know my answer to it, I will type it since you asked. I am what some people call a primitive Christian. I believe the Bible and in Genesis it plainly states 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.' That's all I need to know. I live by faith. That's what we do. I blindly trust God. And I take great comfort in that. I have quiet a few personal stories that have proved Him over and over to me. But, I feel by the way you and others on here talk  to/about me, sharing it with you would be of no use. But I have seen miracles with my own eyes. Even before I saw them though, I believed. That is where my peace comes from. I am old, but I wasn't there to see creation. But I have no doubt God was there and He did it. God always has been. In the beginning was the Word and the Word was God. The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it in my heart and mind. So, there you go, there is what you asked me to answer.

    report
    1. 59

       Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Actually, no - this is what you said that seemed to upset everyone (edited for easier reading):
       
       
       
       Do your kid a favor and send him to school.

       report
22. 67

    hubby7posted 16 years ago

    Hi Prophecy Teacher,
    
    Your reply is both downright mean and amusing at the same time!
    
                                        hubby7 

    report
23. 60

    allshookupposted 16 years ago

    I don't form my belief system to conform to anyone else's beliefs. Nor to make anyone else happy. That is between God and me. It's a personal decision. I realize what you think of me, you have made it plain. But isn't it great to live in a country where we are able to voice all of our opinions in freedom? I thank God for that. We who live here are very blessed.

    report
    1. 59

       Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Of course you didn't - that is plain.
       
       Y'all want ter bleive thar ain't no such than as evolution, thatz your n god's biznis.
       
       Do your kid a favor and allow him sum edumucashun.

       report
       1. 67

          hubby7posted 16 years agoin reply to this

          Hi Knowles,
          
          Your last comment to allshookup was inappropriate and outright mean. You owe her an apology. Sure we can disagree with anyone on this forum. However, we should never--and again, I say NEVER--talk down to, poke fun at,  or ridicule anyone who is a part of this forum. To do so is in poor taste and will discourage people from posting and being part of this online forum. So let us all follow the golden rule of treating people like you would like to be treated. Let us all respect one another from henceforth and not put down, belittle or call each other names. With that said, let us all try to stay on the topic of what do you think about McCain's vice presidential running mate choice.
          
                                   hubby7

          report
          1. 59

             Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this

             Hi 7
             
             You are talking down to me in exactly the same way. But, I tried to warn her about a scammer on another thread and she attacked me verbally:
             
             
             
             I have a different rule to you.
             
             I tend to treat people in the way they treat me and I will ridicule and poke fun at people whom I consider deserve it. Any one who says things like this:
             
             
             
             And then produces a hub that states that god has told her to homeschool her only child because she does not want to have him taught about evolution is likely to come in for some ridicule from me.
             
             These are public forums and I have never resorted to personal attacks. I will make fun of people though. It's the atheist way.
             
             NEVER tell me how to behave again and NEVER speak to me in such a condescending fashion.
             
             I think I have already made it plain my thoughts on McCain's choice of VP. The scary thing is that he is old and unlikely to live long enough to see 2 terms out should he be elected and there is a very real chance a woman who is anti-abortion, pro drilling in the Alaskan wildlife refuge and in favor of teaching creationism in schools will become president of the USA. * shudder *

             report
             1. 67

                hubby7posted 16 years agoin reply to this

                report
24. 60

    allshookupposted 16 years ago

    God has convicted my husband and me to homeschool him. Thankfully, we answer to God, not to any humans. God is who we are accountable to. But thanks so much for your concern for my son. I have to go now for a meeting. Y'all be safe and I'll catch up with you later on.

    report
25. 78

    Shadesbreathposted 16 years ago

    You guys don't think like real Americans, so I will speak for the common man.  She's hot.  I'm voting for her.  End of discussion.

    report
    1. 78

       t.keeleyposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Dittofication, to borrow our president's tongue for a moment...
       
       

       report
    2. 0

       Zarm Nefilinposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       hahahhahahahahahahahahahahahaha
       
       

       report
26. 68

    DJ Funktualposted 16 years ago

    I'm constantly shocked at the ignorance that comes from the mouths of people who don't do their own thinking.  How can you be so staunch in your beliefs when you only receive one side of the argument? 
    
    I follow God blindly and proud of it. 
    You make the Scientologists seem cool by comparison. 
    
    I firmly support Mark's right to mock people for ANY reason whatsoever.

    report
    1. 67

       hubby7posted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Sorry, DJFunktual, I don't. I believe that it, as I indicated heretofore, is in bad taste. Then again, mind you, I'm new to posting in public forums. Perhaps this is the nature of the beast. Perhaps the 1st Amendment takes precedence over human decency, common courtesy, and ettiquette. Or, perhaps I'm just a bit old fashion in my sentiments.
       
                  hubby7

       report
       1. 0

          Zarm Nefilinposted 16 years agoin reply to this

          Mark Twain made fun of idiots too and there was no cow that was sacred to him.  None.
          
          So does John Stewart and Steven Colbert.
          
          It is called exercising Freedom of Speech.
          
          Freedom of Speech dies when people cannot make fun of each other on some levels.
          
          A personal attack has to do with a serious accusation leveled at a person about the fundamental nature of their character, that said I have made many many personal attacks.
          
          I don't have a problem with it really, because in the end the Christians expect me to "turn the other cheek" when they give an eye for an eye a LOT of the time.
          
          Mr. Knowles however does not engage in personal attacks, and I think you do him a disservice to suggest that making fun of peoples' beliefs is a personal attack that should not be done.
          
          We are not on the House floor of the US Senate and Mr Knowles is not Senator Kennedy.
          
          This is an online forum and if you cannot take some lighthearted ridicule then you are too thin skinned.
          
          Bottom Line
          
          P.S
          
          You are old fashioned, the internet and internet behavior is not regulated by real life social scenario norms, and if you think it is I think you need to check yourself into a mental ward for persistent delusions.
          
          

          report
27. 68

    DJ Funktualposted 16 years ago

    10 Hubs, 6 fans.   LOL hubby. 
    
    Perhaps it is you that is in bad taste.

    report
28. 67

    hubby7posted 16 years ago

    Hi Funktual,
    
    What do you mean by the phrase that perhaps it is me who is in bad taste? Two questions: What do you mean by bad taste? And second: Explain to me in clear terms how I might be in bad taste. I'm absolutely befuddled by your statement.
    
                                   hubby7

    report
29. 60

    allshookupposted 16 years ago

    hubby7,
    I would like to thank you so much for saying what you did on my part. I would like to explain to you why I said what I did on that post on the business forum. A woman was talking about being on another website. I told her I was already a member, never asking anyone to come to my site, I never invited anyone to it or anything. I simply answered a question she asked. Just simple things like that. (Please look at it if you wish.) Then I go back and see my words quoted in a post by Mark and under it saying....This is a spammer and went to talk about it. To me, since it was under my quote, it is saying that I was a spammer. He has been on every forum I have posted on to post things behind me like you see on this one. He also likes to take bits and pieces of what I say and make it one quote, as you can see on this thread, and make it look like I say only those things. If someone new comes in and don't go back to see everything I said in the whole post I made, they would think those are the only things I have said. Which I feel is his intention since he does it so much. The quote you saw was me replying to yet another of a long line of attacks on me.  Again, thank you for taking a stand for me, it was very nice and very thoughtful of you. I think we should all be able to voice our opinions on here freely. But, some people take your words and crop and paste only the things they want to pick out. Not the whole posts. I would hope that everyone who posts on forums go back and read the entire posts that I do, not just the sentences he wants to pull out to try and make me an evil person. You may be new here, but you have certainly made a popular thread. Good job!

    report
30. 58

    Writer Galposted 16 years ago

    In some parts of the country, we call "pragmatism" pandering where the end justifies the means.  Sarah Palin may have cemented the conservative base but to believe Hillary supporters will fall lock-step in line behind her is an insult and glaring evidence of the disregard in which conservatives hold women.  The only thing these two have in common is a uterus.  Does it say anything to conservatives that Obama's campaign received over $8 million in contributions within six hours after Palin's speech? 
    
    McCain's "pragmatic" selection not only casts doubt on exactly who this guy it but reeks of cynicism.  We've heard a lot about McCain the Maverick but all we've seen is a man so intent on getting elected that he'll say and do just about anything and is so cynical of the voters that he thinks we'll buy it.  I used to think McCain was a moderate, willing to cross party lines to do the right thing.  Given the chance, I would have voted for him in 2000 and 2004.  But the McCain I'm seeing now is either a closet conservative who's lied to us for many years or a confused old man who's simply forgotten who he's supposed to be.  Either way, this is not the person I want leading my country for the next four years.

    report
31. 60

    Sprinkler Manposted 16 years ago

    2008 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE COMPARISON TALKING POINTS
    
    ISSUE JOHN McCAIN (listed first)
    BARAK OBAMA
    
    Favors new drilling offshore US
    Yes
    No
    
    Will appoint judges who interpret the law not make it
    Yes
    No
    
    
    Served in the US Armed Forces
    Yes
    No
    
    Amount of time served in the US Senate
    22 YEARS
    173 DAYS
    
    Will institute a socialized national health care plan
    No
    Yes
    
    Supports abortion throughout the pregnancy
    No
    Yes
    
    Would pull troops out of Iraq immediately
    No
    Yes
    
    Supports gun ownership rights
    Yes
    No
    
    Supports homosexual marriage
    No
    Yes
    
    Proposed programs will mean a huge tax increase
    No
    Yes
    
    Voted against making English the official language
    No
    Yes
    
    Voted to give Social Security benefits to illegals
    No
    Yes
    
    CAPITAL GAINS TAX
    
    MCCAIN
    0% on home sales up to $500,000 per home (couples). McCain does not propose any change in existing home sales income tax.
    
    OBAMA
    28% on profit from ALL home sales.  (How does this affect you? If you sell your home and make a profit, you will pay 28% of your gain on taxes. If you are heading toward retirement and would like to down-size your home or move into a retirement community, 28% of the money you make from your home will go to taxes. This proposal will adversely affect the elderly who are counting on the income from their homes as part of their retirement income.)
    
    DIVIDEND TAX
    
    MCCAIN
    15% (no change)
    
    OBAMA
    39.6% - (How will this affect you? If you have any money invested in stock market, IRA, mutual funds, college funds, life insurance, retirement accounts, or anything that pays or reinvests dividends, you will now be paying nearly 40% of the money earned on taxes if Obama becomes president. The experts predict that 'Higher tax rates on dividends and capital gains would crash the stock market, yet do absolutely nothing to cut the deficit.')
    
    INCOME TAX
    
    MCCAIN
    
    (no changes)
    Single making 30K - tax $4,500
    Single making 50K - tax $12,500
    Single making 75K - tax $18,750
    Married making 60K- tax $9,000
    Married making 75K - tax $18,750
    Married making 125K - tax $31,250
    
    OBAMA (reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)
    Single making 30K - tax $8,400
    Single making 50K - tax $14,000
    Single making 75K - tax $23,250
    Married making 60K - tax $16,800
    Married making 75K - tax $21,000
    Married making 125K - tax $38,750
    Under Obama, your taxes could almost double!
    
    INHERITANCE TAX
    
    MCCAIN
    - 0% (No change, Bush repealed this tax)
    
    OBAMA
    Restore the inheritance tax
    
    Many families have lost businesses, farms, ranches, and homes that have been in their families for generations because they could not afford the inheritance tax Those willing their assets to loved ones will only lose them to these taxes.
    
    NEW TAXES PROPOSED BY OBAMA
    
    New government taxes proposed on homes that are more than 2400 square feet.  New gasoline taxes (as if gas weren't high enough already) New taxes on natural resources consumption (heating gas, water, electricity)  New taxes on retirement accounts, and last but not least....New taxes to pay for socialized medicine so we can receive the same level of medical care as other third-world countries!!! 
    
    
    You can verify the above at the following web sites:
    
    
    http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/elec … index.html
    
    http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues … .taxeshtml
    
    http://elections.foxnews.com/?s=proposed+taxes
    
    http://bulletin.aarp.org/yourworld/poli … taxes.html
    
    http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-che … ack_obama/
    
    http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-che … hn_mccain/
    
    Stay away from Obama unless you really want to throw your life and your rights away!!!
    
    I didn't mention that he wants to create a new Civilian National Security Force - Do a search on this and see what comes up. How many actual days has he been in any type of office 170 plus days. How did this person get elevated to be the president elect?
    
    He is a post turtle. He has no business being on top of the post and you have to wonder about the idiot(s) who put him up there....

    report
    1. 77

       livelongerposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Many of these are untrue. One fabrication makes reading the rest easy - I don't bother.
       
       You'd have to be seriously uninformed to believe this claptrap. Is that your target audience?

       report
    2. 60

       allshookupposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Thanks for the post Sprinkler Man. And thanks for the links. I hope they read and understand them. That they are not opinions, but facts. Good job. Sadly, I feel they will still argue with the truth. But I appreciate you putting links on here to where people can go and read the truth. I hope they will choose to not stay in the dark about the things you have shown and choose truth. Time will tell.

       report
32. 77

    Uninvited Writerposted 16 years ago

    Actually, some of your facts would convince me to vote for Obama if I could

    report
    1. 60

       Sprinkler Manposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Why waste your time writing something like this? Why wouldn't you point out what you like about him? Why would you vote for him, even though you can't?

       report
33. 0

    RFoxposted 16 years ago

    For Sprinkler Man:
    
    It's interesting when I see Americans who are opposed to socialized medicine. It's obvious you have health benefits or you wouldn't think the current system is so great.
    
    The US already has 3rd world health care for most of its citizens or haven't you been paying attention? Go and talk to low income earners who are now bankrupt and without a home because they had the audacity to fall ill.
    
    What do you think the movie "Sicko" was all about?
    
    I've lived on two continents with socialized health care and there's no way I would live in a country where my basic human right to be taken care of medically was stripped away because I couldn't afford it.
    
    That's what happens in the US. Pay up or get out of the hospital. Can't afford cancer treatments, too bad. Your husband has a heart attack, then sell your home. Your child has a rare genetic disorder that needs surgery for them to have a quality life but the surgery is considered elective then screw you.
    
    This is the current state of American health care. If Obama is for some kind of socialized medicine then you all should vote for him on that point alone.
    
    Just my two cents. (From someone who has a genetic condition.)

    report
    1. 68

       SparklingJewelposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       I come from a completely different mind set when it comes to health care.
       People need to learn to take better care of themselves so that they will not get chronic sicknesses and deadly diseases.
       There are so many wholistic health care, preventive and wellness, modalities and lifestyle changes that can be made that would dramatically cut national health care costs to a minimum, if they were practiced.
       I think we should put our money in teaching and  learning about these lifestyle changes and modalities that can prevent and stop illnesses that can become diseases.
       We need a new consciousness on self care instead of relying on someone else to take care of us...and that includes the government.
       It is so unhealthy and debilitating for the soul to become dependent on others to care for them and to become reliant on a system to take care of us.
       Just plain foolish and deadly...!
       
       I don't want to be "mandated" to spend my money on a system of health care that is not health care...but just support for failed concepts and insurance systems and corporations.

       report
34. 60

    allshookupposted 16 years ago

    This is exactly why the US election is of interest to the rest of the world.  Thoughts like these are the most inhumane that exist.  Just blow them up.  Have we learned nothing from Hiroshima. I pray to anyone/thing that will listen - please wipe this way of thinking off this planet. It's so difficult to read these sentiments.-- Jewels
    
    I can agree with you on one thing. The US election is of interest of the rest of the world. They are waiting to see if we elect a wuss who will sit on his hands and do nothing to protect the US so we can have another 9/11 or worse. Or to see if we elect someone with a backbone who is not afraid to protect America, even if it cost him his own life. That is one of the biggest issues I have in electing a President. Does he love America enough to keep her safe? One man running has already proven that he loves America that much. You can gripe at me about my opinions all you want, they are just words to me, nothing more. I believe in keeping America safe. You will never wipe this thinking off the face of the earth. Do you not know that Russia, China etc are out there just waiting for the chance to take us over? Do you think China is sitting over there right now talking about how to keep some endangered species from becoming extinct? No! They are looking for weakness in the US. They are getting ready.  Hello! Wake up! It seems people are worried more about killing polar bears than protecting the people in the country we live in.

    report
    1. 67

       Mishaposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       LOL China already owns USA.
       Jewel, don't worry, Chinese will not allow them to nuke the world once more.

       report
       1. 60

          allshookupposted 16 years agoin reply to this

          Yeah Jewels, don't worry, once China nukes us, you will have nothing to worry about. You'll be dead. Then it will be too late for any of us to make a difference. We have a chance now to make one. What saddens me is that people take things too lightly,(as seen by what was just written) then once the decision has been made, it will be too late. How can you take things that are so serious as a joke? It wont be a joke when it comes to you and your family. When you family is dead or missing, how many jokes will you be making then? And yes, it can very well come to it if we don't take a stand. Pretending it couldn't happen is only lying to yourself. Ask the people of the country of Georgia how funny it is.

          report
35. 77

    Uninvited Writerposted 16 years ago

    Nobody wants to take over the US...why would they want to inherit all the problems?
    
    If you are so afraid, maybe you should build a bunker...
    
    McCain would not make the world any safer for the US

    report
    1. 60

       allshookupposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Your head is in the sand. People who believe any of what you just said are in out-right denial. Or just plain old don't know what they are talking about. Wake up!

       report
36. 67

    Mishaposted 16 years ago

    China won't nuke you. Nobody in his right mind (and Chinese are in their right mind) nukes his own property

    report
    1. 60

       allshookupposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Since you feel Communists are in their right mind, you will never see what is the right thing for a democracy to do or who should be in office. And if any American feels that communism is the right thing, they should go to where that is a way of life. Don't stay here where people are free and life is what you make it. Go live there so the government can control each and every thing you do. How many children you can have, what you do for a living, how and when you can worship, etc. And take the polar bears with you. We gun-toting women might get hungry and I know you wouldn't want any harm to come to them.

       report
       1. 0

          SirDentposted 16 years agoin reply to this

          I think Misha lived in a comunist country for a while Allshookup. If you knew him you would know that he is from Russia.

          report
    2. 0

       Zarm Nefilinposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       I lol'ed pretty hard when I read this as your reply.
       
       Dead on.
       
       China can financially reign us in any time they want without deploying a single soldier.

       report
       1. 0

          sandra rinckposted 16 years agoin reply to this

          took me a second...hahahhahah.

          report
37. 0

    SirDentposted 16 years ago

    Obama
    
    Palin

    report
38. 60

    allshookupposted 16 years ago

    Ahh your a Russian citizen. No wonder you feel the way you do. Now I understand why you want China to own us as you said above. Explains everything. You'd love that.

    report
39. 67

    Mishaposted 16 years ago

    I don't want them. They already do
    http://hubpages.com/hub/What-Does-China … e-Bail-Out

    report
40. 60

    knolyourselfposted 16 years ago

    So what is you got All Shook Up - Commuphobia.

    report
41. 59

    Mark Knowlesposted 16 years ago

    Sprinkler and All shook up
    
    I have to ask a few questions.
    
    You both claim to be christians, yet your main preoccupation seems to be with electing some one who is prepared to "defend" you, from a threat, using nuclear weapons if need be.
    
    Yet as christians, you are supposed to turn the other cheek and show love to everyone.
    
    How do you reconcile the two?
    
    Never really understood that myself.
    
    And you seem to be putting aside the fact that Mr. McCain was a lousy soldier. I mean, he spent most of his days "protecting" his country in a box in Vietnam. Why would you want a loser such as that in office? If I was looking for a leader who would defend me, I would want a successful soldier.
    
    And allshookup, this one is just for you.
    
    When god gave you dominion over the animals, did he not also give you the responsibility to protect them as well?

    report
42. 60

    Sprinkler Manposted 16 years ago

    I love you Mark!!! You are so great, I love everything you write. You are always right, I don't know how you do it. It must be hard being as great as you are.
    
    If one day I could be like you, I would really be something then!!!

    report
43. 59

    Mark Knowlesposted 16 years ago

    Feel free to borrow my sarcasm smiley sprinkler. I notice you did not answer the questions though.......

    report
44. 60

    nwunderlichposted 16 years ago

    I am just saying - the VP isn't bad.
    
    Her prior experience is as an executive, which is what she is running for. All executives run into the same types of problems, just the magnitude is different.
    
    I heard a funny quote once (don't remember from where) that the only Constitutional requirement for the VP is to "Have a pulse." She has one. She is also a good speaker, and will make a good representative for McCain's presidency. That's the job of the VP. She's the public face who represents McCain.
    
    Put aside what the current Asministration has done. She's a good pick for McCain's ticket. That is what her job is - to be complementary. And she does that just fine.
    
    As a side note -where did we, as a nation, get the idea that a VP pick has to have extensive expereience in anything? I'm not saying some experience isn't necessary, but extensive? She has more executive experience than the whole Democratic ticket. So where's the problem? Unless you don't like her politics, or that she's a mother running, where's the problem with her pick?

    report
    1. 59

       Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       Oh, magnitude You mean like the difference between 2 and 17,000,000 - nothing worth worrying about. Almost the same in fact, only numbers, no real difference.
       
       And the fact that her running mate is a 72-year-old cancer survivor, and she stands a very real chance of becoming President if McCain is elected. Magnitude, lol
       
       Sarah Palin does not believe in sex education for teenagers
       
       All I am saying is - the VP is very bad.

       report
45. 80

    crashcromwellposted 16 years ago

    As a side note -where did we, as a nation, get the idea that a VP pick has to have extensive expereience in anything? I'm not saying some experience isn't necessary, but extensive? She has more executive experience than the whole Democratic ticket. So where's the problem? Unless you don't like her politics, or that she's a mother running, where's the problem with her pick?
    
    Actually, early in American History, the names of all four candidates (President and Vice President for the Democratic-Republicans and Federalists) would be placed in nomination before the Electoral College. The candidate who received the most votes would be President and the candidate that received the second most would be Vice President. There was a distinct possibility that the President and Vice President could come from different parties.
    
    More recently, when Theodore Roosevelt was selected Vice President for William McKinley, his detractors were excited, because in those days, the Vice President was nothing but a warm body waiting for the President to die.
    
    Of course, we know that sometimes presidents like McKinley die in office, which I'm sure none of Roosevelt's enemies figured would happen.
    
    Sarah Palin stands an excellent chance of becoming President by default, with McCain's advancing age and well-documented health issues, and so it serves to follow that we ought to take a good hard look at her when making our decision whom to vote for in a couple months. I've already decided Obama is my guy, but if I were sitting on the fence, I would not be impressed.
    
    McCainiacs like to tout all of Sarah Palin's executive experience, saying she's got more than the whole Democratic ticket. But she's also got more executive experience than her own boss, if that's the measuring stick. Plus, if you look back at recent presidencies, not all the Presidents who served as Governor before becoming President have been very good Presidents.

    report
46. 77

    livelongerposted 16 years ago

    crashcromwell: I think experience is usually looked at in a positive light, because it suggests that a person will have good judgment (the idea being that they've learned from all those past experiences). Also, there's the expectation that an experienced person will spend less time "learning the ropes", so getting up to speed will take less time.
    
    I'm with you that experience, though, is not as reliable an indicator of someone's success. I'd go so far as to say too much experience - particularly in Washington - just increases the likelihood of corruption (all the favors granted over the years need to be paid back, right?) and possibly pessimism.
    
    I don't think Palin's lack of experience is the problem. The problem is that her short record shows amazingly poor judgment, again and again and again. She has strange priorities and values, and has a scary way of contradicting herself and lying with impunity, and attributing governmental decisions to the will of God. I don't know how a right-minded person can think she's anything approaching reliable when it comes to running this country.
    
    Good point: not sure why McCain supporters are touting Palin's executive experience when McCain has absolutely none!

    report
47. 80

    crashcromwellposted 16 years ago

    The thing I keep thinking about as far as Sarah Palin is concerned is that we are about the same age (I'm 41). She got her degree in journalism, which I did as well. She has spent most of her career working in municipal government, a field in which I worked for eight years, working as a municipal administrator for boards of selectmen. That's executive experience. I also held elective office in the legislative branch of my old hometown and as a member of the School Committee.
    
    So now I'm thinking, maybe I should run for Governor of Maine. Who knows? If I win, I could be the 2012 Vice Presidential nominee! Why not? It's good enough for Palin!

    report
48. 77

    livelongerposted 16 years ago

    crashcromwell: The selection of Palin has absolutely nothing to do with her educational/employment background. It has everything to do with the "narrative" profile she has.

    report
49. 60

    knolyourselfposted 16 years ago

    Crash - there you go, but you probably don't have the legs.

    report
    1. 80

       crashcromwellposted 16 years agoin reply to this

       No, I don't see any action figures of me coming out!

       report
50. 67

    Mishaposted 16 years ago

    Yep, that's exactly the point.

    report