Re: OT: US Pres election
 

I'm going to chalk it up as reading too much into certain statements regarding how you felt about the media. ;) I've been straining at my leash the last few days, and am maybe a bit too trigger happy.

And I do believe in dissidence - for without it we never get clarity. Your left eye will never agree exactly with your right eye, but you just need to make sure they both are seeing the same thing. ;)

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

The Republicans remind me a bit of the Dahomey. The Dahomey got an enormous amount of money by selling their fellow countrymen to Europeans as slaves-an unfortunate business that the US was involved in. They then turned around and used that money to buy cheap guns (which did help them secure their position in the short-term), and cheap liquor (which had all the benefits on society that cheap liquor traditionally imparts), and they kept on down that garden path of joy until the nations around them rose up, united in disgust and hatred and outrage, and thus ended the Dahomey Empire.

I, unlike many, have never been as bothered by the arrogance, insensitivity, and immorality displayed by the current regime, as I have been extremely bothered by their incompetence, short-sightedness, and unwillingness to give the American people a reason *not* to vote them out of power. If you're going to take advantage of power, then I can accept that-I even have learned to expect it. But do it in a way that atleast inspires *some* level of confidence-It's not that they're evil, it's that they can't handle power-Nixon could handle power, and J Edgar Hoover, to give you an example. Not what most people would call saints, but definitely competent and in control. Ultimately, they ended their careers ignominiously, but they were admirable power-keepers. The current regine is just sloppy and clumsy, and like the Dahomey, they're making of themselves a target, for no really good reason, because they can't handle being in charge.

The American people-honestly, we don't need our leaders to be heroes, or moral-look at the presidential careers of Ulysses S. Grant and Jimmi Carter-we just need them to give the *impression* that they are, publically, and to keep the trains running on time. If they happen to *be* heroes, or good looking, or both, we'll worship them (JFK)-but we still need to know that the country's in strong hands, sure hands, if not always *good* hands-and George W, and Cheney don't even compete in the looks department, and they're laughable as heroes, so their incompetence and shoddy handling of disasters-that they honestly might have taken steps to prevent before they happened, just cannot be excused away.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

OK, that attitude scares me.

Competent evil would be just fine?

If they were just good at keeping the major disasters down to a minimum you wouldn't care about the corruption, or the destruction we've wrought in far away countries?

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

Ofcourse not!-and that's not what I said. Please read what I've posted in it's entirety, before you reply to it-especially before you reply to it in such a hostile, antagonistic, irresponsible way.

Well, since you probably won't, and since I don't want everyone else who doesn't bother to think I'm some kind of satanistic evil-monger just because of your reply, what I actually *said* was that it didn't bother me *AS MUCH*.

What I mean by that is that having someone in power who's *capable* of looking out for their own interests-and if they're President of the United States, the majority of their interests certainly lie *with* the U.S., if not entirely within it-is more valuable than having someone who's not capable of doing so. The degree of goodness in their hearts notwithstanding, the main thing is that what needs to be done, gets done, and that the country be run well, and with pride. Compare that to our current regime, who've acted like a bunch of greedy stooges for the past 8 years.

It'd be great if Ghandi run for Presidency, but unfortunately, he's dead. So's Jesus and Buddha and Mother Theresa. All the saints and patriarchs? Dead, dead, dead. And God the Righteous and the Just has refused to run, so we're stuck with mere fallible humans to lead the country, and I'd rather have someone who could play the part of President convincingly, then be ashamed every time I turn on CNN.

And I didn't say just me, I said the American people (which does include me). Compare Clinton to Bush, with the full realization that Clinton was nearly impeached for something that had absolutely no effect on his ability to run the country-except possibly in a positive way, as a reducer of stress.

I'm tired of being embarrassed to be an American. I love my country, I love the ideals that it stands for, and the different people and ways of life it encompasses, and I'm tired of hearing from these little countries that our people had to *escape* from, in order just to live their lives, how we're all a bunch of screw-ups.

I want somebody in there who's basically a good person, ofcourse I do, but I also want somebody who's smart, who's a survivor, and who's got a real interest in being President.

Right now we don't *have* someone who's capable of keeping major disasters down to a minimum, so corruption here, and destruction in other countries, is secondary to that. I'm sorry if you don't feel the same way, but when my own house is on fire, I'm a little distracted by the fire-fighter who's saving my house, from his buddy who's stealing my tv--and I'm not paying close attention to the flood across town.

Sad to say, but I'd much rather have Nixon in office, than Bush.

When we have somebody in office who we don't have to worry so much about, then we'll be free to worry about other things.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

I reread your first post and it still reads that way to me, possibly because my opinion of our current administration is of corruption first and the stupidity and incompetence a distant second.

Most of the apparent stupidity seems to me to be more arrogance and the belief they're above the law. The kind of thing we see on display in the current banking crisis. We see CEOs running their financial empires into the ground and ask how could they have been so dumb not to see this coming, but they got their millions in bonuses in the good years and now they walk away from the ruin with more millions in severance. Who's dumb here?
Bush and Cheney have run the country into the ground and probably gotten away with it. They're started wars, funneled billions to their friends and saddled the country with the largest debts in history. If their interests lie with the US, that sounds stupid, but I've come to the conclusion that they don't. The Bush family has their new estates in Paraguay. Cheney'll be off to Halliburton's new headquarters in Dubai. What do they care?


I am glad it was a misinterpretation, though. I'd still rather have someone well-meaning, but out of their depth, than a competent crook. The competent crook can do far more damage.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

We are almost there.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

yes it won't be long until...MY HAPPY NEKKID DANCE OF JOY!

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

KNOCK ON VIRTUAL WOOD
I wouldnt tempt fate. He can still do some lasting things in his last days of office. Just look at the change he made to the Endangered Species Act. Now the branch in charge of dams will decide if a dam is harmful to the environment, the branch in charge of building military bases will decide if there is harmful impacts from it, etc.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

Of course, he will. For the moment he can still hurt McCain's chances. After the election, it'll be a free for all. No consequences for any last minute looting. And pardons all around if there's the slightest chance they'll be necessary.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

I think America knows that McCain is not the answer.:cool:
In any event we are going to find out real soon.


"If you don't vote, democracy doesn't work."

-Frank Zappa

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

I wouldnt bet on what "America knows".
It might seem one way amoung a person and his peers,
but the polls show it to be an amazingly close race so far.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

I don't trust polls, they are used to mold public opinion. They just want to make the race seem close. McCain thinks what the current president is doing is just wonderful, the public does not.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

Yeah, but Obama's black.

That still counts a lot more than it should.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

I tend not to trust polls either (as I stated previously). They can be manipulated too easily by the crafter of the questions. In my own community it looks to be a close race.

I work in a county government office and you can bet that I get to hear a lot from the community about their political views. My primary function is as Deputy Treasurer / System Administrator (small county!) and I often work the elections just to help the County Clerk's Office when they are shorthanded so I get a fair amount of exposure to the public. In my state the governor is a Democrat but the tendency has been to elect Republicans. I for one tended to vote Democrat during the Clinton years, but have always prided myself on my independence (little 'i' as in not affiliated with any party). I find myself tempted over the last eight years of "Bush bashing" to vote a party line where a "D" next to your name guarantees that my vote goes to the other guy. I am sure that I won't go that route, but you might get a sense of my disgust with partisan politics in general. Both parties are guilty of it, but the constant undermining of the currently elected president (be he Democrat or Republican) pisses me off and tempts a retributive vote.

All that said, those who know me, know that I usually keep my political and religious views pretty close to the vest. I just find the silence of folks who share my point of view deafening (because I suspect that many don't frequent these boards) and I would hate for anyone reading this thread to think that everyone hated President Bush, wouldn't vote for John McCain, and disagreed with the decision to finish what was started in Iraq.

Will that make me the most popular fella on the forums? Probably not. But please know that I respect the views of all of the previous posters and even consider many of you friends. :)

(Oh, and for what it is worth, I don't give a rat's butt what color any of the candidates are.)

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

What was started in Iraq should never have been started, it's a complete waste of human life and money. Now to say we have to stay the course and keep spending an incredible amount of money. Thats just dumb.
I can't agree with that line of thinking.
Current events indicate that Afghanistan isn't going so good. Iraq was the
administrations prime blunder. Surely Pakistan, a country that actually has nuclear weapons (and a whole lot of extremists) should have been considered first, no?

I don't see alot of people that are getting hit on the chin by this economy rushing out to vote for the old guy who believes this was all sound judgement. George W Bush's approval is at an all time low, and McCain will pay for that.
We needed this regime change 4 years ago.

Anyways I'd just like to say I respect everybodies right to an opinion.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

I didn't think the war in Iraq was a blunder-a mess yes, but not a stupid mistake on the part of the Bush administration. War is never a mistake, when it comes to political favor. Even the Vietnam War didn't usher Nixon out of office.

And as far as Bush-bashing goes, the American people, as a whole, were *behind* Bush when 9/11 happened. The Iraq war sounded like a good idea then-we were going to get rid of Saddam, and the weapons of mass delusion, and then take out the terrorists, using Iraq as a staging ground.

My dad, for instance-an extremely bright and talented man, who's also quite reactionary and a lot more right-winged than I'm entirely comfortable with-loved and praised and defended Bush to me when he first entered office. For the several months in office, he was a "savior" and "the best man for the office", because he was going to whip the terrorists Texas-fashion (single-handed and bare-fisted, if need be), restore the country's pride in the whitehouse, and then lift our economy to unforseen new heights.

Now my dad hates him. Can't stand Bush. Misses Clinton-which at the time he couldn't stand.

Bush and his cabinet screwed the pooch. Plain and simple. If he and his followers had made better choices, people wouldn't *be* bashing him. It wasn't the war on terrorism that unmade Bush, it was Hurricane Katrina, and the gas prices, and the fact that even isolationist America doesn't like being spit on by other countries-and we really don't like it when the other countries have good reasons to spit on us.

Bush is a joke, because he's made of himself a laughing-stock. Not because he's Republican, or rich, or war-mongering, or any of those things. It's because he's a goofy bastard that can't do the job-and consistently rubs our faces in the fact that he can't do the job. The fact that Cheney managed to shoot his best friend in the face, while in office, didn't help things either.

Bashing Clinton because he had sex with an intern is lame, irrelevant, and sensationalist. Bashing Bush because his cronies let a bunch of Americans die unnecessarily, and made the world hate us, and are systematically destroying American businesses, the environment, and the Constitution, is just being sensible and patriotic.

I do know exactly what you mean, Ballbarian-I've lived under the same system you have, for over 30 years, and I'm open to your way of thinking. I don't like how irresponsible and irreverent-to-the-point-of-blasphemy-and-disgrace the media is, either, but there's a time and a place for questioning our leadership, as free citizens who are also responsible for the freedoms we have--and this is it.

And I'm hoping that the black thing will even itself out, actually--there are lots and lots of traditionally conservative states that also have large Black and Hispanic populations, and Utah's one of them. It might actually work in Obama's favor. I can see lots of people not wanting to vote for Obama, but I can't see that many people actually bothering to vote for Mccain.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

I thought I'd also flag up two articles:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/bu...in&oref=slogin

http://www.slate.com/id/2199810/


Both examine similar statistical measures. It's fascinating to see that apparently, the Democrats have historically done a better job of running the economy. Not only that, but the Republicans have also massively benefitted the wealthier compared to the poorer.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

And Congress' approval rating is even lower, yet an incumbent losing is rare enough to be major news.

Part of the problem is that a majority of voters in each district think their Congressmen are doing a good job, and it's all the idiots that the other districts keep electing to office that are screwing things up.

I've voted in every election since '82, yet I've never voted for either my current House Representative, or his predecessor.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

But it did force Johnson not to run for re-election.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

Sorry for the double post but...

We all know now that two of the most prominent reasons to invade Iraq (WMD, Saddam supporting terrorism) were a load of utter rubbish, and we were sold a pack of lies where contradictory evidence was removed and the evidence supporting it inflated. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis are now dead (although things wouldn't have been much better under Saddam), thousands of servicemen from various countries are dead. It's incited terrorism against the West, and the country was heavily infested by Al-Qaida, which before it had no support there. It's still in near civil-war. And then there's the stuff like Abu Ghraib.

Iraq is not just a mess. It is a blunder. A vast, overwhelming blunder, which made the USA/UK look aggressive, hypocritical, and stupid. It has devastated our international respect and political power, and also shown the limitations of our military. The cost has been enormous as well.

Ballbarian stated "the constant undermining of the currently elected president (be he Democrat or Republican) pisses me off and tempts a retributive vote". Leaders are always undermined because that's just the way it is: they will have opponents and critics. But I'll tell you why this president is being particularly undermined. He has been awful, and his sub-30% approval ratings prove the point. Criticism is the stick that encourages good performance. If presidents (or anyone in any task) don't perform well, it's entirely right and proper people beat them with that stick.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

One of this things this country needs is a law, preferably an amendment that states no elected office can be held for more than a certain amount of terms and none of them can be consecutive terms. America suffers amid stagnation of the political body

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

I will probably offend others and make me look like a lunatic, but I knew even before the fighting began that Saddam was a scapegoat and there were other interests at work. Rumsfeld's slip of the tongue on television where he mistook Saddam for bin Laden was a farce, and I thought "nobody is going to fall for that, right? right?" but evidently that thought was wrong. As bad as the Iraq leadership was, and as much as Saddam has openly threatened Israel, the Iraq was a sovereign country, and I don't accept the self-righteous act of overriding an U.N. decision by the U.S. government just because it differed with their opinion and because they can. It was a war of aggression from the U.S. and seeing how easily they ignored any other aspects instead of listening to reason with that tunnel vision made me fear who else would be safe from an overzealous attitude like that.

When 9/11 happened it was already clear, at least to some, that there was going to be a war. It wasn't possible that that terroristic act would go without a reaction. The way things jumped and gone head over heels didn't portray the U.S. in a good light, though. Rather like the school bully, if I wanted to express it in the least negative way. Let's hope the future leadership learns from that.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

I completely and totally agree, Ich. Declairing war on Iraq as an act of aggression was one of the worst, most shameful things we've ever done as a country. Whatever the provocation may have been, it's something we've never done, and we could be proud of that.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

I think that you are stepping into a land mine here.
I do agree with you (even more so since I feel there is never a good reason for one country to invade another country and taking out their leader even if it all had been true).

But you need to look closely at the arguments that have been given. When someone says it was not a mistake and then points at the polls, he is trying to say that it was apparently not a political error for that politician to do it. At the same calling it a blunder means he is agreeing that the reasons given for the action turned out to be false.

As much as it irritates me, I would have to agree with those. We as americans in general did not get nearly as ticked off at Bush about it as I wish we had.

Gandalf Parker
--
Its easy to understand.
Under the Democrats we will be the Federation.
Under the Republicans we will be the Ferrengi.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

[quote=Gandalf Parker;641562] Very good point here. Richard M Nixon was impeached for far less. George W Bush may be the worst US president ever.
He took a robust ecomony left by Bill Clinton and utterly ruined it. Now he's trying to ruin it more by passing that 700 billion dollar bail out. Why should ordinary people have to foot the bill for stupid decisions made by financial firms?
I'm glad they didn't pass it. :up:

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

This bailout is not some gesture to save the economy. It's a ploy to rule from the grave. By spending $700b out of the treasury, Bush will cripple any plans the next president or two plans to do. Doesn't matter if McCain or Obama wins as both would be limited to only what exists in the current budget.


Why is this a bad idea: David Corn summarizes the left's case against the bailout in this article. His main points are:

• The taxpayers will not only bail out U.S. companies, but also foreign ones
• Million-dollar-a-month CEO salaries will continue
• The five-member oversight board will include three Bush appointees
• Few home owners will be saved from foreclosure
• There are no guarantees that the treasury will get warrants commensurate with its investment
• There is no regulatory reform in the bill

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

I am voting for Obama both with my checkbook and ballot.

Does he impress me as the absolute ideal candidate? No. But he is very intelligent and we have spent eight years with a president who is not intelligent. As for McCain, he strikes me as a man of mediocre intelligence who has skated through life using charisma, a broad smile, money and bluster.

Palin is not even worthy of standing in Hillary's shadow.

But my big question is, FDR where are you now that we need you again?

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

George W Bush has been using fear on the american people ever since 9/11.

If you carefully look at all the evidence suurounding 9/11 ,it makes you wonder if it was really a terrorist attack. Those buildings seemed to come down in a controlled fashion. Like they were demolished along the main support beams.

Now he's using fear of economic collapse to attempt to pick our pockets.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

Oh no, not this.

In a city full of sky scrapers, you don't want buildings tip over like dominoes. Builders have known this for over a century. All modern skyscrapers (I'd say mid-60's and on) are designed collapse in upon themselves in case of catastrophic structural collapse and fall in on their own supports instead of outwards. Ask any engineer who's designed a skyscraper.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

The jet fuel that was supposed to have caused the failure all went up in a big fireball upon impact. So how could it have caused that to happen?

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

First off you have heat from the fires which weakened the steel enough to allow the weight above the area of damage to push down enough to bend the remaining supports. Once the damaged steel gave an inch, gravity took the rest.

The next thing is that the plane didn't need to take out the supports, merely damage them enough to let gravity do the rest.

And this was damage caused by the sudden and quick halt of a jet liner slamming into a fix, immobile building.



We are a spoiled people, seeing so many big budget special effect films thrust upon us, we forget that the energy needed to destroy something is often far less then hollywood makes us think.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

Actually, I think if the big CIA wanted us to think that 9/11 was a terrorist attack to cover their "terror for 8 years plan", they would have made it much more hardly spottable that a simple "jet fuel wasn't hot enough to make the skyscrapers collapse". Just my opinion of course. Or maybe they did so, so now I think they wouldn't have... oh, never mind.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

I object to the contrived state of war we are in where there are no clear goals. And therefore no real way to win said war.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

There is a way to win this war, but the way we are doing it isn't working. Bush's strategy is keep throwing wave after wave "surges" of men at the problem until its fixed.

The way we need to win this war is by establishing power grids, running water, basic services and what not. You don't win an occupation by occupying the enemy's territory, you win it by keeping your enemy occupied. We should've organized companies in Iraq to hire iraqis to do the reconstruction and pay them a fair wage instead of outsourcing everything and building what we wanted only and paying 1000% over top-bid.

It goes back to an old saying in the West. Whiskey for drink'n, water for fight'n.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

One of the things I've read about Osama Bin Ladin is that he's spent a great deal of time and money making friends and helping people, to the point where a lot of people in the Middle East view him as something of a Robin Hood figure. He interacts with them, he helps them, he's one of them, and that's a big strength and power-base for him.

How much of that is the U.S. doing? How many of the actions that we've taken in the Middle East since the Gulf War started, that have put us in a really positive light? I'm sure a lot, but I'm worried about the blunt force and heavy handedness that's been employed. How hard are *we* trying to make friends with the "common people" in other countries? How much are we being viewed as "The Terrorist" over there?

I've read about how China is investing huge amounts of money in Africa, because it's one of the few places in the world that America and the European Union don't already have a lot going on in. Why don't we? There's incredible resources, incredible manpower, unstable governments, and we've got an African American running for office-and winning. It seems like something we should be doing, as a country, if only to make it more difficult for China.

The U.S. is real good at blowing stuff up and killing people in other countries, but we need to get better at making friends and doing business, world wide.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

The sad reality of the present is that our government is far more interested in disrupting the progress of civilization than helping it along.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

While I have in the past suspected the US government of conveniently going to war just before re-election time, Im not ready to suspect something on this scale even from the big W.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

A) He said he wanted be a war-time president.
B) He always felt ashamed of his father's inability to unseat Hussein.
C) He considered himself a divine messenger, a warrior of the apocalypse. I don't think he went to war expecting public opinion to clinch the election - he went to war despite that, for very very personal reasons.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

When I said disrupting the progress of civilization I'm referring to the sum of america's foreign policy since nixon.

As for Bush, He's done a fine job of stopping america's progress for a good long time.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

A very large concern I have with the Republican party is their demonizing of intellectuals. What kind of society can we expect to have when a person is elevated because they have lesser ability?

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

It's not quite that. It's not that Republicans are idiots or that their leaders don't enact a nuanced view of the world and embrace intellectual endeavour.

Politics can thrive on black and white. Present a simple picture of the world, and it can be very comforting as it's both easy to understand and can readily tie in with people's belief systems. On the other hand, if you present things as grey area, that there are many conflicting views, nuances and complexities it starts being much harder for people to grasp what is being advocated, and furthermore by accepting both sides it challenges belief systems.

I'd suggest many Republican voters like the world expressed in black in white, whereas intellectuals pretty much must be thinkers who dwell in grey areas. Consequently, there's a clash of attitudes, and it is worth Republican politicians playing up to their electorate.

All political groups tend to demonise certain sectors of the population when they perceive it will win them more support, the Democrats do it too.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

Agema, the process of demonizing a sector gets personal sometimes.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

Agreed. I'm an academic, anti-intellectualism infuriates me.

I would guess intellectuals tend to vote Democrat and can count as political enemies. But whilst my (our?) sector usually just gets offhand, crowd-pleasing abuse, many other sectors really get it in the neck: serious abuse and prejudicial policies.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

It's easier to convince the simple minded than the educated of a lie.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

But it is harder for the simple minded to create a lie that is in any means convincing, wich I think is a good quality and in all means humane (I hope no one says its humane to lie).

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

However a number of our presidents have proven that the simple minded can adequately deliver a convincing lie - at least, a lie that is convincing enough for enough of the population to matter. ;)

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

I am not voting for Obama because I do not like his political ideology, nor do I trust a man who can go to a church for 20 years where hateful racial speech was conducted regularly and then say that he never heard it. Right. I do love Joe Biden despite his anti-gun stance. In fact I believe that Joe Biden is the best person for the top job on the democratic side. This year I will be supporting McCain and Palin. While I certainly do not like everything that McCain stands for or has done, I feel that he is a better choice for America than the Obama alternative. Despite McCains many flaws, he is at least, less dishonest than Obama and that gives him a slight advantage. I also like Palin very much. I think she is exactly what we need in Washington, and its about time we get it too.

Obama can stay in the senate where he can continue to do his duty in that special way that he does. And We get to keep Biden and McCain and gain Palin if John can win the election.

But given the vile voter fraud that is taking place in Ohio right now, I doubt McCain will win and in four years, we will have no choice but to fire Jimmy Cart #2 and find us a new Ronald Reagen.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

Not to offend any one, but I find this opinion, which is shared by many, to be odd. I fail to see how any one could be so frightened of Palin taking office when they support Obama.

Compare the two, Obama a three year senator who has spent the last year running for office compared to Palin, a women who has managed a large family, her own business, was a mayor and is now Governor of one of our largest energy producing states; Alaska. I think Palin is far more qualified to run our nation than Obama. Sure she isn't up to speed on all aspects of foreign policy and what not, but lets face it, she was and is up to speed on her job as Governor of Alaska and I am sure given the potential for a job change, will get up to speed on national and international issues within an acceptable amount of time.

This argument that Palin is somehow stupid because she is a down to earth friendly and likable women, who just so happens to be Governor of Alaska, is rubbish. She is not Tina Fey, nor is she Dan Quayle. And those who have been trying to say that she is are little more than paid hit men assigned to damage her reputation and convince Americans of a lie. A lie that none of us should be swallowing at any level. You don't get to become a governor unless you have the skills to lead and govern and do them well.

There is absolutely no doubt that Sarah Palin is far more qualified to run our nation than Senator Obama. Sure she's less qualified when compared to Biden or McCain but certainly more qualified that Obama.

In fact Obama shouldn't even be in consideration for this job, a VP position sure, but not the top Job in the land. That honor should have gone to Joe Biden.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

Read my blog for even more right wing anti-left wing rhetoric. :D Link is in my signature.

Re: OT: US Pres election
 

Are you serious....? What fairy tale world do you live in where we are assured that our public servants are capable, just because they landed in office?

If you can listen to her speak for 5 minutes, and not see the glaring problem, then I am not sure you will be able to overcome your bias while talking to a third party. Of course, I have felt the same way about our good ol' GW for a long time now, but somehow a whopping 18% of us actually still think he's doing a fine job.