VP pick Sarah Palin

Senator McCain announced earlier today that his pick for the Vice President is Sarah Palin.  Props for picking a woman, but I can't imagine that a woman as conservative as she is will fare well with most women.  Pro-life and a proponent of Creationism in school curriculum, she can stand solidly on to the right of McCain, a plus for some I'd suppose.  I'd love to be excited about the nomination of a sister as VP, no matter the party, but she and I are about as far apart on beliefs as anyone.  I get that picking some other old white guy wouldn't give McCain the boost he so desperately needs, but perhaps picking someone with more experience might have been a better idea, especially when he's been bashing the Dems on the experience issue for months.

As the Huff Po has already pointed out: is someone with no foreign policy experience the person we want one step removed from the Presidency, especially when faced with potentially electing the oldest person in history as the President?

All I know is that the upcoming VP debates just became much more interesting, indeed. 

Comments

[PunditMom]

I've been feeling for a long time this would be the "smart" choice for McCain for a lot of reasons. Both Obama and McCain will now have issues they need to address -- Obama defending Biden (who I really like, BTW) as NOT a candidate of change and McCain will need to defend Palin on experience.

But maybe they can have these discussions soon, so we can focus more on the issues!

[desiree]

I don't know anything about Sarah Palin. She could a very fine choice, but I find 2 things very ironic.

1.Experience. What happens if something were to happen to McCain...Next in line...Palin. And the GOP said Obama doesn't have enough experience.

2. A mom "dragging" an infant on the campaign trail, during what I would think is the most strenuous leg. I'm just remembering Elizabeth Edwards and what she faced....

[Amy in OHio]

I think McCain knows he's going to lose and wanted a scape goat.

[Redstocking Grandma]

As an experienced mother of four, I promise you that infants are the easiest age to drag anywhere. They don't grab the mic and embarrass you. By the time I had two kids, being with the baby felt like being on vacation.

I am a lifelong Democrat and a staunch Obama supporter. But I formerly supported Hillary, and I have already read enough sexist comments about Pallin on progressive blogs to rip those wounds open all over again.

It certainly reminds me how pissed off I was when Obama didn't pick Clinton as his VP.

[Barbara]

Desiree, Palin has more experience than Obama does. Period. I really hope that issue is over though, because I'm more interested in what our candidates stand for. I don't care where they come from except that it reflects what they will do in office.

Also, as a mom of young ones, I "drag" my babies everywhere because I am nursing. Babies are portable, much more so than kids in school. I fail to see how this is an issue. I'm sure she's a great mom.

Let's stick to what these people are interested in doing if they get in office. Those are the things that are important.

[Kristin]

Barbara,

I'm sorry, but I just did a post on Palin for my blog and I could not, for the life of me, find any substantial record to cite. As for experience, Obama has been in the Senate since 2004 and previous to that he was a state legislator. Palin has been in office since 2006 and prior to that she was mayor of a town of 9,000. Before that, while Obama was a community organizer and college instructor, she was a sportscaster. Not much of a comparison.

I find the whole pick rather patronizing. After his ads in which he decried the fact that Hillary was not chosen as VP, John McCain might be somewhat surprised to realize that we women can tell the difference between a profoudly experienced, extraordinarily committed and unwavering advocate for women and an inexperienced neophyte who would set the cause of women's rights back decades.

[Natalie]

I can't help this is McCain's move to secure the disgruntled Hillary supporters. They don't care where she stands, they just care that she is a woman. (If I hadn't knocked some sense into my bra burning mother, she would probably be one of those that would switch sides just because of McCains woman VP pick!)

One thing is for sure, I will definitely be glued to the debates this year, I think we are in for a ride!

[Stefania/CityMama]

Barbara, Palin has NO WHERE NEAR the experience that Obama does. Where are you getting your information?

Obama was elected a state rep in 1997 and in 2004 was elected to the senate. He has more legislative experience that Hillary CLinton. Plus, he rep's an urban area with a diverse population which faces many of the same issues that someone running a small country might face.

Palin has absolutely NO foreign policy experience and while Obama can also be criticized for the same two things stand out for me: On the most important foreign policy issue that matters to me--the war in Iraq--he and I see eye-to-eye. I opposed it from day 1, so did he. The other thing is that he is a child of the world, he had a foreign-born father (as i do), he has lived outside of this country (as I have). His beliefs have been shaped by those experiences (as mine have). I have always thought of myself as a citizen of the world as well as my country, and I get that impression from Obama.

I don't appreciate McCain trying to pander to HRC supporters by picking a woman and if a Hillary-suporter were to vote for McCain solely because of Palin, then she doesn't support the core values that Hillary Clinton stands for. If I were Palin, I would never allow myself to be used as a pawn in that game and to me that shows a failure in judgment on her part.

Palin was an idiotic choice that just put the final in McCain's coffin, and as I said before, THANK YOU DEMOCRATS for forcing McCain to play that hand. He will lose. Yes we can.

[Aaron]

What an interesting pick. Certainly raises my opinion of McCain, but it will raise questions as well.

[Kristin]

I don't think it speaks well of McCain at all --- he apparently thinks that women will like anyone in a dress regardless of their stances on abortion.

He doesn't give us much credit.

[Santiago]

I think it is a very good choice. If I were an american citizen, I would not hesitate: McCain+Palin. Obama sells smoke. This woman sells facts: married to a man of another race, mother of five children, and a son with Down syndrome.

Santiago, Granada (Spain)
http://opinionciudadano.blogspot.com/

[Santiago]

I think it is a very good choice. If I were an american citizen, I would not hesitate: McCain+Palin. Obama sells smoke. This woman sells facts: married to a man of another race, mother of five children, and a son with Down syndrome.

Santiago, Granada (Spain)
http://opinionciudadano.blogspot.com/

[Stefania/CityMama]

Santiago, what does any of that have to do with running the most powerful country on earth?

[Interested American]

So a sitting governor isn't experienced? Hmm... must look up that word. Oh, and her other experience, not valid either? Wow... guess I just don't know the English language like I thought I did. Experience running a state seems very relevant to running a country, as does being an officer in the military. But who's counting.

And creationism is bad? Hmm, we should only teach scientific theories that aren't supported by the facts and leave out alternatives? Got it. I also can't completely grasp why mothers are pro-abortion, but that's just not for me to ask, clearly. I get censured enough as it is.

[Kirsten]

Barbara, From what I've read Palin is not more experienced than Barrack Obama. Palin has been a Govenor for two years. Whereas, Barrrack has served three years in the senate and served seven years as a state legislator. If you spend a little time browsing the internet it doesn't take long to decifer who has the least experience.

I wonder if they'll bring up the controversy surrounding Palins dismissal of Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan because of the shenanigans surrounding a police officer and her sister. Hmmmm...

Her beliefs do not represent me in any way shape or form and she's not the woman I would choose to make history.

[Barbara]

Oh, you are going to make me defend a Republican, really? I was speaking of actual accomplishments while in office, starting with city council. As for how big her town is; well as a woman in a small town, that good-ol-boys stuff is for REAL. It takes brass tits to bust through that.

My main point, is that issue is crap. What these candidates would like to accomplish as president matters. I really fail to see attacking Palin, Obama, McCain or my favorite, Biden on the bases of "nanana boo-boo" is crap.

I'm not going to judge this lady's parenting, unless she's a child abuser. I'm not going to judge her years in government, because I tend to be skeptical of career politicians. I'll look at what she's done in her adult life that will add to her ability to serve. I am totally going to rock out on the fact that she's a mom AND is running for VP. I'm still not voting for her.

Now don't ever make me do that again.

[Amy@UWM]

Have to agree with most of the comments here. Clearly this was McCain's attempt to pander to the HRC supporters, but I can't believe he picked this woman over other potential female running mates who have more experience. I am so not a Republican, but Elizabeth Dole who has decades of government experience immediately comes to mind. I suppose he's trying to pander to the right side of his party while trying to make his ticket younger.

Just seems to me to reinforce that he's going to be about ruling the country all on his own (will he really listen to this woman's opinion?) just like Bush monarchy...

[Amy in OHio]

What does her marital status or motherhood have to do with being second in command of the United States?

Is that all we are to some people - wives and mothers? Look deeper folks, there's a lot going on in us women folk.

[Emma Goldman]

I think the choose of Palin will resonate with American woman who are not ideologues--unlike the women posting here--who represent the majority of female voters. The suggestion that Palin was an effort to pander to HRC supporters is absurd. It is an effort aimed at gaining the support of regular working people, blue collar workers, religious conservatives, and fiscal conservatives who support a smaller and more efficient federal government. In other words, it is aimed at appealing to the productive citizens who pay the heavy costs of big government and receive little in return. It is directed to the components of the Reagan coalition. Have you seen the reaction of Republicans today? The GOP has not been so energized in years. This is not because McCain may pick up a few HRC voters. It is because the Republican ticket has, for the first time in years, a person--a person, not a woman--who not only reflects, but understands (unlike George Bush), the constituency and principles the party. Try to get a little prospective, ladies!

[desiree]

Barbara,

I too have dragged my kids 4 to be exact all over because I had to. I never said anything about her skills as a parent nor would I, knowing from experience what works for one family will not and should not work for every family. I was just commenting on how ironic I found the choice. In my FIRST line I stated I don't know much about her, she could be a very fine choice.

[Jean from Texas]

I understand that she didn't go to an ivy league school, does not have a law degree, has never been a community organizer and doesn't have any friends who have bombed publc buildings. Clearly not qualified to be President.

[gloria lofland]

Sometimes we have to sit back and take a breath. What do we have here? A mother who have choosen to be VP of the greatest State in the World. A women who feel,s she can and should lead a multitude of Millions with different lifestyles, religions, and cultures. So its said. Let us as a people see what she offers to the World in terms of fixing a broken society. Little is known of her but just maybe see will tame a maverick and he will take her suggestions and opinions to heart.Or is this just another way to keep a Democrat out of office and politics as usual. The good part about it is the final answer is in the hands of the people --ALL PEOPLE-- And quess what we the DRIVE-BYE'S is not as Uninformed as some may think.

[Zoe]

I am not American. If McCain become President, America will be once and for all off the world economic map. That's sad but it will allow me to go on holidays there with a tiny budget. I might even buy a property. Seriously, it will be like the average Jo in Europe will be the rich Jo in America. The Russian will be laughing too:"we had our Boris yeltsin, now America has its Sarah Palin"...Cast your ballots people...I need some holidays :-)

[Jean from Texas]

Zoe:

Sorry, girl, America is ready to move ahead without your advice. We can make our own decisions and do not need guidance from effete European socialists. I think we still have an appreciation for individual liberty that Europeans will never understand. There are still enough citizens in this country who realize that more government is not the answer to prosperity. That is why I believe that both men and women will ultimately turn to McCain and Palin. The productive and hard-working Americans in the couuntryside, suburbs and cities of this nation will not accept the additional burden that an Obama administration will surely impose on them or the disasterous consequences these burdens will have on our productivity and wealth-creation. Thank God, there is still enough respect for individual automony and personal liberty to resist the temptation to take the final head-first plunge into socialism. And, Zoe, when we restore economic freedom under President McCain and, later, under President Palin, every nation will prosper because the free market, which has always been the source of American prosperity, will drag your sorry asses upward with us.

God Bless America. God save her and keep her people free to decide for themselves what they will do with the fruits of their labor. God preserve her to encourage the imagination of creative people to provide the jobs and income Americans want and need by freeing them to proper as they benefit their fellow citizens.

[Stefania/CityMama]

Interested American, to answer your question: No. Being a sitting governor for almost two years (wow!) of a largely rural state that has a smaller population than the city of San Francisco does not qualify as experienced. You cannot qualify running Alaska (for almost 24 months) to running the country.

[Jean from Texas]

Stephania:

I take it that you are not an American; therefore your naivity about the governments and political geography of the US is understandable.

By the same measure that you apply, then, three years in the Senate without any particular accomplishment is not adequate experience either--and Obama is at the top of the ticket. Palin actually has more executive experience than any of the other three candidates. Unlike Obama or Biden, she has a record as a reformer. She has been commander in chief of the Alaska National Guard.

She even has more executive experience than lifetime politician Biden and represents a much more important state. Biden's state, Deleware, is a much more insignificant venue than Alaska. While Alaska is the largest state in area and rich in natural resources that need to be managed, Deleware is a small piece of land that Americans pass through on the way to other places. It barely exists on paper. Biden's experience, moreover, demonstrates his lack of qualifications to be President. As a Senator, his career shows seriously flawed judgment. In foreign policy, for example, he opposed every Reagan policy that eventually led to the end of the cold war. As Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Biden's opposition to excellent judicial candidate, like Clarence Thomas, raises serious question for those of us who favor a stricter adherence to the Constitution. Frankly, Palin has accomplished more in a short political career than Biden has achieved in a lifetime of feeding at the public trough.

I would contend that Palin is considerably more intelligent than either Obama or Biden. When the two debate, it will be clear who has the judgment to be President--Palin.

[zumpie]

Jean, gotta say you sound mighty Republican. And sorry but A) a free market economy is a fantasy and B) your party supports warmed over supply side economics, anyway.

As for how McSame and Klondike Barbie are gonna transform our nation from its sorry current state, how exactly---when they support the same policies that firmly placed us here to begin with, will that happen?

And Reagan was just as senile as McGrampy and Clarence Thomas was NOT an excellent supreme court appointment (unless you dig mediocre sexual harrassers). Also Delaware is the seat of many, many large corporations (and actually has 1 more electoral vote than Alaska).

I'll agree with you on one point, though. We'll all be thrilled and the country will be rescued come NOvember---because our country will be back in capable, Democratic hands. And this country was founded on the separation of church and state. Leave God out of it, please

Oh, P.S. socialism is an economy, not a government---and quite a few people in socialist countries enjoy far greater personal freedoms and liberties (your Republican buddies took those away, too) than WE do these days.

[Jean from Texas]

Zumpie:

We just fundamentally disagree about what is good for America. All of the prosperity our citizens have enjoyed has been the product of free people voluntarily exchanging with free people. The fantasy is that governments can create prosperity. No government, here or elsewhere, has brought economic growth through taxation and spending. It is sad that the Democrat party is so economically illiterate. Once the party of Jefferson, who advocated leaving individuals alone to create and enjoy the fruits of their labor, the party has no policies to promote wealth-creation, only redistribution. These policies, in fact,invariably kill wealth-creation and increase unemployment and poverty. Obama is the most extreme example of this type of economic illiteracy to ever receive the nomination of a major party.

Fortunately, numerous polls show that average Americans understand basic economic truths much better than liberal ideologues. Most average Americans still understand that the best policy for promoting prosperity is for government to get out of the way by eliminating policies that hamper capital accumulation and reduce incentives to creativity and effort. This residual of common sense among average Americans is why I am confident that Obama will not be the next President.

One thing that I hope we can all agree on is that party labels are not important. Truth is important. The welfare of our nation and its people is important. The preservation of individual liberty is important. The security of America is important. All of us, hopefully, embrace these ends. I am not confident that either ticket in this election is prepared to achieve these objectives for our country. As I compare the candidates, however, I have to conclude that the McCain/Palin ticket, on balance, will do far less damage to these goals.

[Jean from Texas]

Zumpie:

I need to add to the post above that the Republican party is nearly as economically illiterate as the Democrat party. Bush has demonstrated this repeatedly in his second term with such policies as the bailout of Bear Stearns, the "stimulous package," the bailout of high-risk mortgage holders, continued deficit spending, and inflationary monetary policy by the Federal Reserve. Also, the Republicans did virtually nothing while they controlled Congress to eliminate government programs and regulations that have made Americans poorer by hampering the private sector.

In an Obama administration, however, I foresee that failed policies of the past would be multiplied exponentially. I have the same apprehensions about McCain. While there is some hope that McCain will offer some reform, however, it is almost a certainty thqt Obama will seek to implement policies that further undermine economic growth.

[Jean from Texas]

Zumpie:

One last thought. I have children who will be completing their educations and entering the job market in the next 8 years. I am proud of their work ethic and their intelligence. I am proud that I have raised them with the with the values they need to succeed and achieve self-sufficiency, happiness and, if they choose, wealth. I want them to enjoy opportunities at least as great as those that my husband and I had when we embarked on our careers. If Obama stifles free enterprise with increased taxation; if he fails to pursue petroleum reserves, nuclear energy and other immediately available sources energy; if his policies punish productive and successful with greater financial obligations to the government--all the inevitable results of what he wants to enact--will my children have the opportunities I want for them? I'm afraid not. The future seems much darker under Obama for my children and my children's children. To coin a phrase, my vote for the McCain/Palin ticket will be a vote "for the children."

[zumpie]

Jean, seriously???? McCain/Palin present a brighter future??? Would this be with all the billions being wasted in Iraq? Or as they systematically destroy the planet? Or as they continue to pander to corporate welfare?

Did your children attend public schools? Will they attend public colleges? You DO understand those are paid for with tax $$$, right? Tax $$$ that are currently wasted in Iraq? Do you want your children possibly drafted as grist for a quagmire the Republicans created and that McCain supports?

Also, do you have a daughter? If she's raped do you really feel her future will be brighter if she's denied choice and has to carry her rapist's sperm for 9 months???

As for oil---there isn't all that much in the wilderness, anyway. And here's a thought----learn to conserve! Try taking public transportation or walking, instead of driving 2 blocks in your doubltessly HUGE gas guzzler.

I'm sure you're a nice enough woman, but your posts honestly reveal EVERYTHING that is wrong with this country today: self-involved, easily led and painfully short sighted. A vote for McCain/Palin is a vote for armagedden would be more accurate.

Yeah, it's REAL bright future we're offered there. Also, apparently, America's Hottest Gov's own daughter fails to follow her "strong Christian values". Whether Trig is Sarah's or not, Bristol is preggers again (and I think it's really 4 months--guess since she never received basic sex education, she couldn't connect the dots).

Oh, also--your patronizing tone towards Europeans (and I'm not one) is outdated, uninformed and inappropriate.

[Jean from Texas]

Zumpie:

I'll try to answer questions. Up front, I have two daughters and I am proud of both of them. Your question about abortion is unfair becausee you only propose an extreme example and not an array of situations. This would be like me asking you whether you would want your daughter to abort a fetus every year and never give you any grandchildren. Let's take a middle case---one that is far more common and far more likely to occur to either of us. Let's assume that one of my daughters became pregnent at the age of 16. What would I want? I would want her to discuss her circumstances with her father and me and try to make a decision as a family. Yes, I would encourage her to bring her child to term and either offer it for adoption or keep it and marry the father, whichever choice made sense for her. Unfortunately, your candidate favors laws that would discourage my daughter from consulting with me before making this critical descion and would prevent her from even being provided with information about the choice of life--he is terribly, terribly wrong.

Zumpie, would you want your daughter to have an abortion under any and all circumstances? I thought that you were "pro-choice," not "pro-death." Somehow, when a young woman decides to treat her fetus like an vestigal organ, you assume she must be making a rational choice. On the other hand, if she actually decides that what is growing inside of her is a human life, she must be mentally impaired or the victim of coercion. You want the law to discourage this "choice." So does Barack Obama. I'm sorry, but I can't agree with the presumption that every law should favor the choice of having an abortion. And I most definately cannot agree with Obama that it is moral, or should be legal, to let a child die even after it is born alive. Frankly, this is monterous. How do you defend it?

Your attitude toward Bristol Palin really telegraphs a terrible attitude of intolerance. I would suggest that you don't have the credibility to criticize the close-mindedness of the religious right. This young woman, with the loving support of her fmily, has chosen to have her child and marry the father. And you apparently believe that this is an excuse for ridicule? I admire the Palins even more than I did before; they are living up to the principles they profess to believe in. Shouldn't we rejoice when someone chooses life? Or do you take the position that women should rejoice only when a pregnancy is terminated? Excuse me if I skip your bizarre celebration.

My children attend public schools because I can't afford to send them to private schools. I would prefer to have a choice. Politicians like Obama are responsible for the fact that I have limited opportunities for my children. Unfortuately, the Democrat party, which is beholden to public employee unions, refuses to allow me as a parent to have any say in the type of education my children acquire, in spite of the outrageous property taxes that I am required to pay. Moreover, politicians like Obama drain my family's financial resources through their tax and spend policies; I don't have enough left to pursue alternatives that I believe would be better suited to my childrens' individual needs.

Up front let me admit that I am a federalist and I do not believe the Constitution gives the federal government a role in education. Assuming that it does, however, Obama will do nothing to improve the educational system. Like every other Democrat, he will serve the public employee union special interests by doing everything he can to maintain their monopoly over the education of our children. His only solution to any problem is to increase taxes and throw more money at the entrench government bureaucrats who give generous financial support to his party. More of the same from Mr. Change. How about some real change? Let's give parent more control over their childrens' education by breaking up the monopoly. Instead of bleeding us dry to provide a transfusion for the terminal public school system, let's introduce choice and competition. This is REFORM! McCain supports this REAL CHANGE; Obama does not. As the parent of a "special-needs" child, I especially appreciate McCain's position. It is one more reason that I will vote for McCain/Palin.

[zumpie]

Jean, again---how typical of the right. "I don't want to pay taxes that benefit others, just me". And I'll use publicly funded resources, but don't tax me. There is a very simple word for that: hypocrite. Also, again, do you understand that our country is billions of dollars in debt from a right wing sponsored war? Is it okay for your tax dollars to go for that?

As for your special needs child, since McCrabby advocates fewer social programs, wouldn't that include programs for the disabled. Or are you (again) okay about tax money being spent when it benefits YOU and YOUR family?

As for the abvortion question, your response is one of the most extreme and assinine I've ever read. I brought up the topic of opposing abortion in cases of rape because that is what Palin does. Which you should know. No pro-choice person thinks everyone should have an abortion morning, noon and night.

With my daughter, I would let it be HER choice, like every other woman in this country has a right to. McCain and Palin would change that. And just because Obama would give your daughter MORE choice, doesn't mean she'd be prevented from confiding in you.

Oh and it's been stated that Bristol Palin "chose" to keep the baby and marry the father: 1) I doubt she had a whole lot of say in it (and I personally think it's her second baby AND if they hadn't been pressured, she'd be off to learn toy making from Santa---returning with Grandma Heath's miracle baby in his sleigh). 2) If she really did have this choice, why should it be denied every other woman in America? Which is what overturning Roe v Wade would do.

Are you REALLY this close-minded? BTW, what is someone who makes Palin look leftist posting on a liberal blog anyway? Do you really think anyone here is going toa gree with your fundie claptrap?

[Jean from Texas]

Zumpie:

In other words, just as I suggested, no reasonable young woman could possibly conclude that the baby inside her is a human life. She should have a choice, but it is inconceivable that she would choose to let her child live! What hypocrisy! What morbid dedication to a culture of death! Anyone who would choose life under any circumstances is a minion of the extreme right. When did the Democrat party become so cruel? As I said, you are pro-death, not pro-choice. Obama is the same. Clearly, I am not the one who is close-minded.

[Jean from Texas]

Zumpie:

In other words, just as I suggested, no reasonable young woman could possibly conclude that the baby inside her is a human life. She should have a choice, but it is inconceivable that she would choose to let her child live! What hypocrisy! What morbid dedication to a culture of death! Anyone who would choose life under any circumstances is a minion of the extreme right. When did the Democrat party become so cruel? As I said, you are pro-death, not pro-choice. Obama is the same. Clearly, I am not the one who is close-minded.

[Jean from Texas]

Zumpie:

BTW, I assume that you are being intentionally ironic when you state that (1) I am closed-minded, but (2) you want the blog to be open to only one point of view--yours. Wow! Talk about your "liberal facism!"

[Jean from Texas]

Ron:

Like you, I gasp in amazement at the speculation that Zumpie has to engage in to try to support her position.

Zumpie, based on your last response, it is obvious that your commitment to individual liberty stops at the end of your vigina. I don't want a "government program" to solve my problems. Government is the problem. I want to make my own choices concerning the disposition of the income that I earn. In other words, I want freedom from the increasing burdens that government is imposing on me. And where government is soaking me for thousands of dollars per year to support a service like public education, I want the freedom to make a choice about the type of education that my tax dollars buy for my children. McCain supports this freedom; Obama does not.

Barack Obama is not the answer to problems of the middle class voters like me. Obama will only impose greater burdens on us and further limit our ability to make choices for ourselves. His fiscal and monetary policies will add hundreds of billions more to the national debt. He plans to increase entitlement programs when the federal government is already facing bankruptcy because the entitlement programs already in effect increasing in cost exponentially. His proposed taxes and regulation on business will cripple our economy and put the American dream further out of the reach of my children.

Obama is not the answer to my problems or the problems of this country.

[zumpie]

Jean,

Sorry, but you really ARE a right wing nut job. My last post on the subject. Oh and choice equals pro-death??? The hell???? And no, my comment about hiding Bristol in the North Pole is meant to be ironic. YOU are a republinazi.

P.S. Again, we'll have plenty of money for social programs HERE once the Iraq quagmire is ended. Or again, is it okay to spend tax dollars on THAT, just not programs, that actually benefit people? People other than yourself, I mean?

Ron, I think the baby Bristol is currently carrying (as do many others) is her second because I think Trig isn't her brother, but her son.

Oh and I'm middle class---and there's no question that Barack Obama offers FAR more support for the working people of this country than does McSame. But the Republican goose is now cooked---thanks to HIll Billygate!

[Jean from Texas]

Zumpie:

I'm not going to engage in an ad hominum exchange with you. So, anyone who believes in economic freedom is a "rightwing nut?" I think that we know who the extremist is. You would take an unlimited amount of my income and redistribute it without my consent--a complete abrogation of my personal liberty. Yet, you claim that your pro-choice position is necessitated by a commitment to individual autonomy. There is really no logic that can reconcile these positions.

You don't have "billions of dollars" for social programs. First, these dollars belong to those who earn them. "We" [meaning government] can only acquire these dollars by taking them away. Apart from the violation of individual liberty that this confiscation involves, it is demonstrably true that the middle class will always pay more for these programs than the benefits they receive. Moreover, every billion dollars that the government takes out of the private sector is one billion dollars that is not available for investment by the private sector that creates jobs and opportunity for people of all classes. Finally, we don't, in fact, have the money to pay for the one trillion dollars in additional spending that Obama has proposed. As you rightly point out, we are already billions of dollars in debt and cannot pay for the programs that our beneficent rulers have already enacted. If you believe that this new spending can take place without vastly increasing the federal deficit (and further weakening the dollar and generating serious inflation) or by raising taxes on the middle class, I have a bridge to nowhere that you might be interested in.

Fortunately, I am confident that the Obama assault on liberty and prosperity will remain hypothetical. Americans understand the proper role of government and the laws of economics better than you do, Zumpie, and, unlike you, they still believe in the efficacy and morality of economic freedom. Americans are the most generous people on the face of the earth, but they are not ready to sacrifice their freedom to the degree that Obama is demanding.

[zumpie]

Jean,

I bet your favorite book is the Bell Curve. The author of that's a libertarian who babbles hypocritically about "economic freedom", too. Fortuantely, Americans ARE smart enough to recognize that the Republican party offers them nothing but the same. AND come November, we'll finally be rid of the Republican party.

[Jean from Texas]

Zumpie:

Brilliant retort! Now, anyone who wants economic freedom is a racist! I guess those slaves who took the underground railroad must have been the biggest racists in history! I think you need to find another country more suited to your authoritarian mind set. What a shame that the Soviet Union dissolved!

[zumpie]

Ron, obviously, you haven't been following any of this. America's Hottest Gov didn't even announce her pregnancy (at a supposed 7 months) until March. She never really "showed" at all, despite her previous pregnancies having been quite obvious with significant weight gain. Even close staffers had no idea until she announced it. During this time Bristol was on extended absence from school because of mono (or that's what they said at least). AND photos of Bristol show a teen with a tummy.

Trig was supposedly (and I say supposedly because there is no birth certificate at the hospital) born on April 18th. And how is this sick or stupid? Back in the 50's (and on Desperate Housewives) mothers did fake pregnancies and raise their grnadchildren as their children (Jack Nicholson and Eric Clapton are two famous examples of this). Sarah Palin is a conservative governor who advocates abstinence only. A pregnant 16 year old daughter doesn't look good.

Gov Palin also released her daughter's pregnant status as a method of quelching rumours that Trig is her grandson by stating that he is 4 months old, but Bristol's 5 months, so there Ha! Trig is Sarah's baby.

Except we still have no medical corroboration of this, just Sarah's self-serving words (and personally, I think putting her own daughter in the center of a national maelstrom is despicable). If Trig really IS Sarah's son, just release the medical records and put a stop to all these rumours. Surely they'd be extensive, given it was a high risk pregnancy of a 43 year old mom and a child with genetic defects.

But no, we simply have, "Bristol's 5 months, so Trig isn't her baby". Bet Bristol's baby THIS time is about a month or so late....

[zumpie]

And Jean---what a pity for you the Third Reich was foiled! And BTW, the author of the Bell Curve IS a libertarian and DOES like to drone on about "economic freedom". Except, again, he'll happily reap the benefits of taxpayers' dollars when they suit him, he just doesn't want to spend any of his.

That's not "economic freedom", it's selfish hypocrisy. Just like your opinions.

[Jean from Texas]

Zumpie:

While we are walowing in the mud like leftist pigs, let's note that Barrack Obama was born 5 months after his parents were married!!!! What is your point, apart from confirming Ron's suggestion that you are crass and moronic? God, is this soap opera conspiracy stuff what passes for political dialogue in your world? You don't need to respond--I've listened to Air America and know the answer is: "Yes." I amend my prior statement. There is no nation on earth that could do you justice. You need to find another planet.

[Jean from Texas]

Zumpie:

You need to read a little more history. Hitler was one of your people. He was a socialist and his party platform explicitly called for the destruction of capitalism. The National Socialist Worker's Party, like you, believed that economic freedom was mere "selfishness" and that inividual citizens of the Reich should be required to sacrifice their individuality for the collective good, by force, if necessary. Sounds a lot like Obama and you, doesn't it? I imagine the Fuhrer would have asked you to join his cabinet.

In fact, it is ironic that liberals today are trying to revise their image by calling themselves Progressive. American Progressives in the early 20th century expressed admiration for Hitler and Mussolini precisely because they were not bound by archaic precepts like individual liberty.

[Jean from Texas]

Zumpie:

Again, corporate welfare such as you refer to in your last post is largely the product of liberal policies and Democrat administrations. Take, for example, farm subsidies that were established under Democrats Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt. We should abolish this type of government handout to corporations. This is the last thing that Obama wants, however; his goal is to hand out even more taxpayer funds to corporations that will do the government's bidding, even if consumers suffer from these policies. McCain had the courage to go into Iowa and oppose corporate subsidies for the production of ethanol--a policy which is now threatening to substantially increase food priceds in the US and even create famine in the most impoverished nations in the world. I give him credit for having the courage to do this. I haven't seen any similar courage from Obama.

The fact that you confuse government handouts to corporations with true free market capitalism is another example of your naivity. BTW, lowering taxes on businesses is not a "handout." This is money that businesses have earned by providing a product or service that consumers desire. It is not a handout to let companies keep more of what they have earned through honest creativity and labor. Lower corpporate taxes, moreover, benefit citizens by creating investment and employment opportunities.

Obama and you remind me of Louis XIV of France during the height of absolute monarchy. You talk as if all property belongs to the state and that individual citizen are allowed to own it only through the grace of the federal government. This may comport with your view of your role as a citizen of America; it does not comport with mine.

[Jean from Texas]

Ron:

Christian love, yes. Respect, an open question. It is hard not to feel contempt for people like Zumpie who have no respect for the rights of others and who don't give a second thought to using the government as a hired thug to rob other people for their benefit. Pitiful! As I said earlier, she can't seem to envision that individual rihts extend beyond her own vigina. Perhaps before we can respect people like Zumpie, they need to learn a little self-respect. I'll buy the cheetos if you bring the beer.

[Mette]

I agree with you all that say that Sarah Palin is not a good choice for a safe Americe. You have to think about the future of America, weather you are a Democrate or Republican. To select a mother of 5, she is a mother of a 4 month old baby that has Downs Syndrome. As a mom myself of a child with Autism I really feel for thai child. Poor child. These children need more stability and care than your normal developing child. I know how much time and energy it takes to rais a special child. This is NOT fair to the child. And ontop she will become a grandmother in 4 months.... This is so insane!!! It would only happen in America to select a SOCCERMOM for a VP to a 72 yr old preisident that has had cancer SEVERAL times!
And she has only been outside America on ONE occasion, that is when she visited the American troups in Quait and Germany. She doed NOT know the world, nor is she capable of leading our country.

[zumpie]

"Christian"??? Sorry Jean, but I'm pretty sure Jesus would be a Democrat (you know helping others, anti-war, challenging the establishment).

Oh, BTW, I see that "reformer" Gov Palin has previously been quite dependent on all those earmarks she supposedly opposes (and actively lobbied for them). Just like the bridge to nowhere. Oh---and her successionist roots.

And one of HER top advisors didn't even know about Bristol's "blessed event" until two days ago. AWESOME vetting job, there "maverick" (as in impulsive, poor decision maker) McGrampy!!! I'll be enjoying MY cheetoos and beer (if I drank beer)as I watch YOUR party implode further. This is gonna make Goldwater look like a success for you guys!!!

Oh, p.s. I do respect the rights of others. Putting MY laws on someone else's body is entirely the provenance of you Republinazis. Isn't there a right wing blog you can join your fellow fascists (which, BTW, was what the Nazis were--and since Bush has long attempted to curtail free speech, I'll certainly place HIM there). And leave us here to plan all our victory parties. And laugh at probably THE WORST VP selection EVER.

[Jean from Texas]

Zumpie:

I am seriously intrigued by your last comments. First, I think it is wonderful that you know Jesus so well and communicate with him about political issues. Second, I would really love to hear your explanation of why you think Jesus is, or would be, a Democrat. Third, should I interpret your comment as a statement that you believe that public policy should be predicated on religious precepts? I thought that only the "religious right" believed in mixing politics and Judeo-Christian principles.

BTW, Zumpie, do you ever tell Jesus that he should never have been born; that Mary was, after all, an unwed mother and, likely, an unwed teenage mother, like Bristol Palin; that the only reasonable solution to Mary's predicament would have been to terminate her pregnancy to avoid being "punished with a baby"; that Mary's decision to wed Joseph have her baby must have been the product of coercion and a "shot gun wedding"; that Mary and Joseph should have ditched the journey to Bethlehem and directed their donkey to the nearest abortion clinic; and, finally that those swaddling clothes would have been better used to wrap up Jesus' fetus before tossing it in the rubbish bin, after, of course, extracting the stem cells? How does Jesus answer your inexorable logic?