After Palin's speech last night

[silverscreenselect]

Maybe SSS will come to his senses and reconsider voting against his own positions on issues.

Voting against Obama is not voting against my positions on the issues. I have no faith whatsoever that Obama supports my positions on any issues other than paying lip service to them when giving his stump speeches. He is completely untrustworthy, both in an honest and ethical sense, and is the sense of being a reliable supporter of any position.

And McCain and Palin do support your positions on any issues? I find that extremely hard to believe.

We survived eight years of the biggest nitwit in history running this country. I doubt John McCain would have put up with Donald Rumsfeld for six years as Sec of Defense. So under McCain we will have leadership that will be definitely more competent and somewhat more policy tolerable than under Bush. And a Democratic majority can stop if need be a lot of mischief that might occur.

And under Obama? What we will get is government by opinion polls and trial balloons and feelers and clarifications. We will get "reachouts" to "bipartisanship" that will be meaningless bandaids that will be sold to the public as great accomplishments and will be very hard for Democrats to undo at a later date. We will get more stealth justices whom the Democrats again will be hard pressed to oppose.

But most important, we will be getting our party back from the whims of Howard Dean and Donna Brazile and the misogynistic, unscrupulous, race baiting thuggery of the Obama campaign.

If Obama is elected and becomes as poor a president as I feel he would be, the backlash against the Democrats may well last for decades. It took us 26 years to fully recover from the Carter presidency, and at least Carter was honest and principled. I don't want Barack Obama to be the last Democratic president in my lifetime.

[Tocqueville3]

Voting against Obama is not voting against my positions on the issues. I have no faith whatsoever that Obama supports my positions on any issues other than paying lip service to them when giving his stump speeches. He is completely untrustworthy, both in an honest and ethical sense, and is the sense of being a reliable supporter of any position.

And McCain and Palin do support your positions on any issues? I find that extremely hard to believe.

We survived eight years of the biggest nitwit in history running this country. I doubt John McCain would have put up with Donald Rumsfeld for six years as Sec of Defense. So under McCain we will have leadership that will be definitely more competent and somewhat more policy tolerable than under Bush. And a Democratic majority can stop if need be a lot of mischief that might occur.

And under Obama? What we will get is government by opinion polls and trial balloons and feelers and clarifications. We will get "reachouts" to "bipartisanship" that will be meaningless bandaids that will be sold to the public as great accomplishments and will be very hard for Democrats to undo at a later date. We will get more stealth justices whom the Democrats again will be hard pressed to oppose.

But most important, we will be getting our party back from the whims of Howard Dean and Donna Brazile and the misogynistic, unscrupulous, race baiting thuggery of the Obama campaign.

If Obama is elected and becomes as poor a president as I feel he would be, the backlash against the Democrats may well last for decades. It took us 26 years to fully recover from the Carter presidency, and at least Carter was honest and principled. I don't want Barack Obama to be the last Democratic president in my lifetime.

SSS-

Will you marry me?

[earendel]

Voting against Obama is not voting against my positions on the issues. I have no faith whatsoever that Obama supports my positions on any issues other than paying lip service to them when giving his stump speeches. He is completely untrustworthy, both in an honest and ethical sense, and is the sense of being a reliable supporter of any position.

And McCain and Palin do support your positions on any issues? I find that extremely hard to believe.

But most important, we will be getting our party back from the whims of Howard Dean and Donna Brazile and the misogynistic, unscrupulous, race baiting thuggery of the Obama campaign.

NOW I get it - you want the Democrats to lose so that the party will "come to its senses". Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. So McCain gets elected, then in four years he decides not to run again because of age and Palin gets the nomination, goes for 8 years. And exactly where do you see Democrats having a better chance than they do this year? Hillary wasn't going to be able to unite the party, either, and she won't be going away if Obama loses, so it seems to me that if the Democrats lose this year you might not see another Democratic president in your lifetime.

[MarleysGh0st]

So McCain gets elected, then in four years he decides not to run again because of age and Palin gets the nomination

Does everyone assume that McCain wouldn't run for re-election at age 76?

I know the pragmatic answer is that "it's too soon to say," but that never dampers political speculations around here.




Edited to correct the factual mistake about McCain's age. And I just had a question about his birthdate on last month's QoD!

[Rexer25]

So McCain gets elected, then in four years he decides not to run again because of age and Palin gets the nomination

Does everyone assume that McCain wouldn't run for re-election at age 80?

I know the pragmatic answer is that "it's too soon to say," but that never dampers political speculations around here.

Marley

He's 72, not 76. And the way his mother looks at 96, I wouldn't put it past him to be vigorous in 4 years.

[Appa23]

So McCain gets elected, then in four years he decides not to run again because of age and Palin gets the nomination

Does everyone assume that McCain wouldn't run for re-election at age 80?

I know the pragmatic answer is that "it's too soon to say," but that never dampers political speculations around here.

Honestly, unless he has been putting on a darn good act for many, many years, if he is elected, my gut instinct is that he will only serve 4 years, realize that he did what he wanted to do (or tried his very darnedest) in getting "Washington DC" back to what it is supposed to be, and then fade into the background. It is one explanation as to why he was so intrigued by Sarah Palin from their meeting in February, and perhaps a large reason why he choose her. In this scenario, he would feel secure leaving Palin in charge of "carrying on his work".

BTW, at the age of 80, he still will be in good health and looking forward to celebrating living past 100, as his mother will have.

[MarleysGh0st]

He's 72, not 76. And the way his mother looks at 96, I wouldn't put it past him to be vigorous in 4 years.

Oops. Non-intentional mistake there.

And I agree that his mother looks remarkably good for 96!

[earendel]

So McCain gets elected, then in four years he decides not to run again because of age and Palin gets the nomination

Does everyone assume that McCain wouldn't run for re-election at age 76?

I know the pragmatic answer is that "it's too soon to say," but that never dampers political speculations around here.




Edited to correct the factual mistake about McCain's age. And I just had a question about his birthdate on last month's QoD!

He might run again - if he is in good health there would be no reason for him not to, I suppose.

[JBillyGirl]

NOW I get it - you want the Democrats to lose so that the party will "come to its senses". Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

I read somewhere recently that this kind of thinking in 1968 helped get us two terms of Richard Nixon.

[SportsFan68]

Maybe SSS will come to his senses and reconsider voting against his own positions on issues.

Voting against Obama is not voting against my positions on the issues. I have no faith whatsoever that Obama supports my positions on any issues other than paying lip service to them when giving his stump speeches. He is completely untrustworthy, both in an honest and ethical sense, and is the sense of being a reliable supporter of any position.

Even his "signature moment," his opposition to the Iraq war, seems to come and go from time to time. Now that McCain is making a point of the success of the surge (which I disagree with: the main reason things are getting better there is that we are paying people a lot of money not to shoot at us anymore), he seems to have gone into his defensive posture again.

The worst moment for me in the Palin speech was when she showed disdain for "reading terrorists their rights." That really stuck in my craw because I believe that we shouldn't allow fear to take precedence over the Constitution.

Then I remembered how Obama caved on the telecom immunity question and on refusing to censure Moveon.org for criticizing Petraeus.

I have more respect for someone who feels the Constitution should take a back seat to national security than I do for someone who feels it should take a back seat to political expedience.

And with Obama, everything takes a back seat to political expedience.

Thanks for the reply and taking the time to reply, SSS. I appreciate your spelling it out for me to make it possible to understand your refusal to support someone who, at least ostensibly, believes the same as you.


Yeah, yeah, y'all are saying, He's been spelling it out for months, where is her head, doesn't she understand English, or, as my dear sainted mother usta say, "Do I have to draw you a picture?"

OK, I'm terrible at taking hints, and sometimes you do have to spell it out for me.

I'm gonna go rec Gor's post now.

[Bob Juch]

Did anyone read or hear what Palin's speech approval rating was among Republicans?

I just saw that McCain's was 85% but can't find Palin's.

[wbtravis007]

Voting against Obama is not voting against my positions on the issues. I have no faith whatsoever that Obama supports my positions on any issues other than paying lip service to them when giving his stump speeches. He is completely untrustworthy, both in an honest and ethical sense, and is the sense of being a reliable supporter of any position.

And McCain and Palin do support your positions on any issues? I find that extremely hard to believe.

We survived eight years of the biggest nitwit in history running this country. I doubt John McCain would have put up with Donald Rumsfeld for six years as Sec of Defense. So under McCain we will have leadership that will be definitely more competent and somewhat more policy tolerable than under Bush. And a Democratic majority can stop if need be a lot of mischief that might occur.

And under Obama? What we will get is government by opinion polls and trial balloons and feelers and clarifications. We will get "reachouts" to "bipartisanship" that will be meaningless bandaids that will be sold to the public as great accomplishments and will be very hard for Democrats to undo at a later date. We will get more stealth justices whom the Democrats again will be hard pressed to oppose.

But most important, we will be getting our party back from the whims of Howard Dean and Donna Brazile and the misogynistic, unscrupulous, race baiting thuggery of the Obama campaign.

If Obama is elected and becomes as poor a president as I feel he would be, the backlash against the Democrats may well last for decades. It took us 26 years to fully recover from the Carter presidency, and at least Carter was honest and principled. I don't want Barack Obama to be the last Democratic president in my lifetime.

When I read this I heard a part of a line from a movie in my head, and couldn't quite place it at first. Then, I realized that it was Lee Marvin's voice, and that helped me figure out what the movie was. I googled, and was pretty surprised to see how many hits there were, and how it's been used a lot recently.

It's from "The Dirty Dozen." Lee Marvin delivered it to Robert Ryan's character. I'll use what I heard in a sentence that puts it into the context of why it occurred to me. The quote from the movie is in bold:

I've always considered that you were intellectually driven and extraordinarily rational, but you're really quite ... emotional, aren't you.


This demonization of not just Obama, but just about every other Democrat who didn't support Hillary, and your view that Palin would represent an acceptable alternative, is just plain weird. I can understand being blinded by rage and heartache to some extent, but good grief.

[franktangredi]

After last night's speech I would describe myself as an undecided voter. It was an excellent speech and though I understand the issues that Palin has yet to answer, what about the one charge on Obama. I'd like someone on this bored (or in Obama's campaign) to explain to me what experience Obama has. If no one can answer that sufficiently then I don't think I can vote for him despite the fact that he's my party's representative...

Experience is important, but it's only one factor.

When they assumed the presidency, Lincoln was a failed one-term Congressman and Truman -- despite ten years in the Senate -- was considered by many a political hack. They did okay in the Oval Office.

Ulysses S. Grant led a big army to victory and he was one of our worst Presidents.

Governors, by definition, have no foreign policy experience. Senators, by definition, have no executive experience.

Basically, no job completely prepares anyone for the Presidency. And success at any job never guarantees success in the Presidency.

I nominate this as Best Political Post in the History of the Bored.

If nominated, I will not ... oh, er, I mean thank you!

[Sir_Galahad]

Does everyone assume that McCain wouldn't run for re-election at age 76?

I heard it somewhere that he had intentions of only serving for one term. That would certainly set up Palin to run in 2012.

I also heard (although it was in the right-wing blogosphere) that Billary was going to do everything within their subliminal power to make sure that Obama loses the election, thus setting up Hillary for the "see, I told you so" run for the White House in 2012.

Now, wouldn't that be an interesting election season! Palin vs Hillary. Palin would now have 4 solid years of "experience" and.... then, you'd have Hillary's 32 years of "experience."