-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF Thread of Republican's Turn at Conventions (Palin VP - READ OP)
- Thread starter Amir0x
- Start date
- Status
adamsappel
Member
So, McCain only picks Palin because his first choice of Joe Lieberman is vetoed by senior staff & Karl Rove. Why was Lieberman being seriously considered in the first place? It's not like his liabilities for the ticket were discovered during vetting. "Oh my god! Do you realize Joe used to be a Democrat? And aside from the Iraq War, he's actually a liberal!"
The choice of Palin doesn't just reflect badly on McCain, you have to take Palin herself to task. It's little different than Edwards running even though he had an affair with a staffer. A candidate should be self-aware enough that humiliating personal details, even if irrelevant, would reflect poorly on the top candidate. While nobody seems to have done the legwork vetting, someone must have simply asked, "Is there anything potentially embarrassing in your past?" The McCain camp is being lawerly enough in their claims that McCain knew the daughter's story last week that I'm skeptical Palin revealed it before accepting.
The choice of Palin doesn't just reflect badly on McCain, you have to take Palin herself to task. It's little different than Edwards running even though he had an affair with a staffer. A candidate should be self-aware enough that humiliating personal details, even if irrelevant, would reflect poorly on the top candidate. While nobody seems to have done the legwork vetting, someone must have simply asked, "Is there anything potentially embarrassing in your past?" The McCain camp is being lawerly enough in their claims that McCain knew the daughter's story last week that I'm skeptical Palin revealed it before accepting.
This is mildly interesting:
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/columnists.nsf/debpeterson/story/23D7A0CF8A2E3A61862574B50011DB30?OpenDocument
"Amy Gwin, 43, of University City, grew up in Alaska and competed in the Miss Wasilla, Alaska, competition in 1984 against GOP vice presidential choice Sarah Palin. Gwin said Friday that she won the Miss Congeniality award in the competition, although Palin's Wikipedia entry says she won the contest and the Miss Congeniality award."
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/columnists.nsf/debpeterson/story/23D7A0CF8A2E3A61862574B50011DB30?OpenDocument
"Amy Gwin, 43, of University City, grew up in Alaska and competed in the Miss Wasilla, Alaska, competition in 1984 against GOP vice presidential choice Sarah Palin. Gwin said Friday that she won the Miss Congeniality award in the competition, although Palin's Wikipedia entry says she won the contest and the Miss Congeniality award."
wait, so she also lied about being miss congeniality?
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/columnists.nsf/debpeterson/story/23D7A0CF8A2E3A61862574B50011DB30?OpenDocument
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/columnists.nsf/debpeterson/story/23D7A0CF8A2E3A61862574B50011DB30?OpenDocument
adamsappel
Member
Arde5643 said:
Why do people keep asking about this killer whale video in this thread? :lolChrono said:
Agent Icebeezy
Welcome beautful toddler, Madison Elizabeth, to the horde!
Odrion said:
They can only cover to a point. Palin has gone past that Twilight Zone territory for talking points. They understand that she is batshit insane as well.
Femmeworth
Banned
This just keeps getting better and better.Rugasuki said:
Instigator
Banned
adamsappel said:
Tom Ridge didn't seem so bad in retrospect...
Stoney Mason
Banned
Btw this is the story on CNN.com about the pregancy. Now the pregancy is immaterial to me but these two quotes caught my eye in the story.
These aren't attributed quotes to anybody. There are just assertions that the writer of the story makes within them. Am I being over-sensitive or do those two quotes assume things that should be attributed to a source.
The first postulates something which I assume is analysis in a relatively straight news stories and the second assumes these evangelic leaders speak directly for he swath of conservative Christian voters.
Now I actually believe both of these statements but shouldn't they be backed up by attribution or data from a poll or something rather than just the writer stating them. Perhaps I'm being overly prickly.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/01/palin.evangelicals/index.html
These aren't attributed quotes to anybody. There are just assertions that the writer of the story makes within them. Am I being over-sensitive or do those two quotes assume things that should be attributed to a source.
The first postulates something which I assume is analysis in a relatively straight news stories and the second assumes these evangelic leaders speak directly for he swath of conservative Christian voters.
Now I actually believe both of these statements but shouldn't they be backed up by attribution or data from a poll or something rather than just the writer stating them. Perhaps I'm being overly prickly.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/01/palin.evangelicals/index.html
Tommie Hu$tle
Member
sk3 said:
They are going to run it until they can't anymore. Basically once McCain speaks on the issue it will move on. But, for the most part the McCain campaign was hoping Gustav was going to be more devistating that it turned out to be. It was moderate (when compared to Katrina) so the MSM was quickly able to turn around an focus on low hanging fruit.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Krya Phillps on CNN talking about trooper-gate.
frankthurk
Member
WickedAngel said:
Wow, that's all you have. Ya it's not worth talking to you then.
Xisiqomelir
Member
Rugasuki said:
Beautiful
but not congenial obv
Femmeworth
Banned
:lol Damn straight, Obama.johnsmith said:
adamsappel said:
Hey McCain, remember when you were a maverick and Rove fucking destroyed your chances to be the nominee instead of Bush? Remember when he treated your legacy of service and experience like shit, spread lies about you and generally dirty tricked you out of the job?
Yeah, Karl Rove. So, you must pretty much loathe and ignore him, huh? Yup. Maverick!
WickedAngel
Banned
frankthurk said:
I'm not here to explain basic English to you. If you can't see two situations and correctly decipher the terminology that would appropriately connect them, you need to spend less time on GAF and more time with an English 1101 class.
Look up the words "irony" and "hypocrisy". Study some of the values that Conservatives hold dear. Once you're done with all that, try to connect the dots and join the discussion again.
Tommie Hu$tle
Member
WickedAngel said:
HA HA you need SUPER English!
WickedAngel, you need to do a little less insulting a little more discussing.
The point isn't whether it is ironic, it's whether or not ANY parent EVER can control what a child decides to do, whatever they preach. This is not an argument for or against any particular position you take on sex education. And while I am certainly against abstinence-only education, it is clear to see that this specific event cannot be used as some argument against it.
These perspectives are only means to reduce teen pregnancy, and none will ever be 100%.
The point isn't whether it is ironic, it's whether or not ANY parent EVER can control what a child decides to do, whatever they preach. This is not an argument for or against any particular position you take on sex education. And while I am certainly against abstinence-only education, it is clear to see that this specific event cannot be used as some argument against it.
These perspectives are only means to reduce teen pregnancy, and none will ever be 100%.
WickedAngel
Banned
Amir0x said:
If he's going to purposefully play the dolt, why shouldn't I call him on it? It doesn't take a genius to look at a Conservative VP with a pregnant, unmarried teenage daughter and see the irony/hypocrisy in that (Let alone to drag it out across several posts).
It's hypocritical of her and those supporting her to say she's ready to be a leader when she couldn't even pass her core ideologies on to her own daughter.
That's not even taking into account the deluge of failures that have come to light outside of that relatively minor event.
Lost Fragment
Obsessed with 4chan
Honestly, I think Lieberman would've been a better choice for McCain. Sure, with Palin you "excite" the ultra nuts on the far, far right, but in doing so, you repel independents on a massive scale. Really, if you're on the far, far, right like the folks who Palin is supposed to appeal to, you're going to vote McCain anyway.
McCain played chicken and lost.
McCain played chicken and lost.
frankthurk
Member
WickedAngel said:
Wow, I've got a theory you should check out as well, fits you to a tee.
http://www.pennyarcademerch.com/pat070381.html
Parents who spout conservative values often have kids who don't completely follow those values. It's called being rebellious. It's not ironic. Nor is it hypocritical in any way of the mother.
WickedAngel said:
Ummm, I support Obama. I think she's a horrible pick. I wasn't talking about leading, I was talking about how having a kid that doesn't follow your beliefs is neither ironic (since it's not actually all that unexpected) not hypocritical since the mother didn't do anything.
Lay off the caffeine or whatever is making you so pissy.
Not really feeling like dropping down to your level so I think instead I'm just done with you.
WickedAngel said:
Again, is this a joke? Do you know how many presidents have had fucked up children, who have done fucked up things? Presidents who have gone on to be both good AND bad?
No matter WHAT you preach and tell your children, there is always going to be a good chance that they will ignore you. Nobody can stop that unless you lock them up. You can do your best to lead by example, shower them with love and affection and provide the best foundation for them... and they will still go off and do wrong!
It is pretty insulting to everyone to assert that simply the act of your child doing something you preach against, it must therefore be an indictment of that policy.
All of this making fun the Wasilla City Hall and ragging on small towns is the Democrats falling for the elitism trap the Republicans set for them. In the past several days, the hick, flyover country, and smalltown attacks seem to be flying all over the place. Palin was picked to be elitism bait and despite the obvious trap, the Democrats seem to be taking it.
PrivateWHudson
Member
So what happens if McCain doesn't last until November? Does Palin go to the top of the ticket, or does the runner-up from the primaries get thrown on the ticket? Also what if he makes it to November and wins, but doesn't make it to January?
In the Obama interview with AC, did he say "Was Silly"?
Obama hasn't given into that impulse, and has debated the McCain/Palin camp on issues and judgment.
Not to mention that anyone with common sense can see the folly here and was probably thinking exactly what James Carville showed/said on Larry King -- regardless of ideology or disagreement with him.
Hsieh said:
Obama hasn't given into that impulse, and has debated the McCain/Palin camp on issues and judgment.
Not to mention that anyone with common sense can see the folly here and was probably thinking exactly what James Carville showed/said on Larry King -- regardless of ideology or disagreement with him.
Instigator
Banned
Hsieh said:
Yes, it's a trap, of course.
soul creator
Member
supposedly Bush is gonna speak via satellite tomorrow night
MaizeRage25
Member
Hsieh said:
O rly?
I'm sure she was picked for that exact reason.
Mrs. Manky
Banned
What is with all these Tuckers? Tucker Eskew, Tucker Bounds, and of course, Tucker Carlson. :lol
speculawyer
Member
Well . . . apparently, he knew about the issue. I'm not sure how to interpret that. When one considers that she's got incredibly little experience (20 months as governor of the 3rd from last state in population size), trooper-gate, and this issue . . . . I start to wonder if he is trying to sabotage his own campaign.WickedAngel said:
WickedAngel
Banned
frankthurk said:
Oh cute, a clever link in place of an actual argument.
It's quite simple, really; if you don't find irony in a conservative having a pregnant teen daughter, you don't know what irony means. If you don't see hypocrisy in the assertion that you're somehow a better leader in spite of that and other things (The dozen or so that have come out today), you don't know what hypocrisy truly is.
Instigator
Banned
speculawyer said:
Was there really no other evangelical available in the Republican party?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked