What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

It's going to be Historic either way!!

  • #101
Scotty, to be frank, you're wrong. Not because you're FACTUALLY wrong, but because his opinions most certainly DO count. If HE feels that way, you can bet your boots other people do, too....that translates to lost votes. Regardless of wether those lost votes are based on valid reasons, they're still lost votes.

He figured that he would surely lose if he picked any of the known factors as vice-president, and he had a chance to win by picking her.
completely made up, and makes no sense at all.
picking a experienced candidate is BAD? and picking an inexperienced (according to you) candidate is good? nice logic!

I do see the logic here. He's giving McCain the credit for realizing that Americans are sick of the same ol, same ol...so McCain picks someone DIFFERENT. Every known possbile VP for McCain is just more of the same.

Obama DIDN'T need to do that because is IS that.

Now are Obama and Palin really that different from every white-man politician out there? Probably not, however they LOOK different which is (sadly) enough to swing a substantial portion of the vote.

Remember, not everyone out there is as smart as you are. If they were, you wouldn't be smart, but rather average, now wouldn't you? :poke:
 
  • #102
Well, the facts as far as how the VP pick goes in regards to the 'other' picks was actually really simple.

Liberman and ....(forgot his name, you can tell how much I really haven't been paying attention to the GOP camp) Were pro-choice. Republican bigs wigs told him there would be a walk out on the RNC if he picked them. They had been vetted, were running for president in the primaries, and were both political figures, but were eliminated after the Saddleback event when McCain decided to take a pro-life platform decision.

The thing that makes me doubly unsure of Palin herself isn't the daughter bit, there's plenty of views that she has that I will AGGRESIVELY disagree with(ID in schools, pro-life[thus, anti-choice], etc.), but the cold hard fact is that she IS CURRENTLY under investigation for abuse of power of the Alaskan Governor's office for trying to get her sister's ex-husband fired from his state trooper position for, apparently, no reason other than she doesn't like him.

The current spin is that she 'didn't know' her personell were harassing the State troopers office, demanding his dismissal, but it's a little too personal to think she had nothing to do with it. I'd rather not have someone under suspicion of abuse of power in the white house, thank you.
 
  • #103
Scotty, I understand where your coming from but I think that opinions say a lot more than facts in politics. And Obama can't be viewed as an "unkown"...you don't have to like him but he isn't exactely nobody anymore.

I'll tell you what...I do agree with you that Palin's daughters pregnancy is irrelevant. I feel really sorry for that girl. Everyones making such a big deal over her pregnancy. She's only 2 years older than me and the entire country is talking about her like she did some moral felony...that most be embarrasing.
Between the teenage pregnancy, her husbands drunk driving, her governor power abuse scandal, and the fact that her husband was in the Alaskan sessesion group (don't know to much about that last one, I got it seconed hand and haven't actually read up on it yet I don't even know what the groups called), I think many people will question whether she actually promotes the family-values, conservative sort of lifestyle that the McCain campaign is aiming to convey through choosing her. True none of that may be relevant (except the governor scandal) but it will almost certainly have a negative impact on her campaign, like it or not.
PS: Scotty and others not trying to be confrontational here, but these political debates are fun! I hope I'm doing alright hehehe.
 
  • #104
I too could care less about Palin's daughters pregnancy. What drives me nuts about the whole situation is the entire conservative base is rallying behind her because she's not going to have an abortion, and how she is making such a great moral decision. Where in the world did they get the idea that just because someone has a baby when they are a teenager and not married that the first though in anyone's head would be to have an abortion? It's ridiculous, and I believe, extremely insulting. This isn't a rally call people, it is just something that happens. Luckily, Palin's daughter is part of a supportive family with the financial means to make sure her baby is brought into a word where he or she will have opportunities that many will not.

If anything, I think the one thing that shows here is that amongst her "strong family values and morals" is that her family obviously missed something or negated some important sex education, which in my opinion, is one of the biggest obligations we have to our families, and one of the greatest tools to open up discussion on not only sex, but numerous other topics; thus bringing the family closer and creating a stronger bond.

I would think that the first thing Governor Palin and her husband would think after hearing this news is something along the lines of "boy, we must not have educated our daughter on the life changing act of sex well enough, and we didn't educate her enough on the importance of safe sex, and birth control. Obviously only saying 'don't have sex until you are married' was enough." But, that is just me.

xvart.
 
  • #105
I would think that the first thing Governor Palin and her husband would think after hearing this news is something along the lines of "boy, we must not have educated our daughter on the life changing act of sex well enough, and we didn't educate her enough on the importance of safe sex, and birth control. Obviously only saying 'don't have sex until you are married' was enough." But, that is just me.

xvart.

wow..you know what they taught their daughter??
you know that they only said 'don't have sex until you are married' and nothing else?? apparently you do..

fascinating..
how did you get this personal specific knowledge?
are you a friend of the family?
a relative perhaps?
a snoopy next door neighbor?

its amazing the details people claim with such certainty that they know..

Scot
 
  • #106
The thing that makes me doubly unsure of Palin herself isn't the daughter bit, there's plenty of views that she has that I will AGGRESIVELY disagree with(ID in schools, pro-life[thus, anti-choice], etc.), but the cold hard fact is that she IS CURRENTLY under investigation for abuse of power of the Alaskan Governor's office for trying to get her sister's ex-husband fired from his state trooper position for, apparently, no reason other than she doesn't like him.

Not to mention she's all about banning books, and tried to chase the head librarian of her jurisdiction out of town for not obliging the whims of her constituents. There are much better picks for a fascist figurehead VP, if you ask me - at least the boring candidates know, for the most part, how to do their jobs.
~Joe

PS - http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1837918,00.html - 13th paragraph down
 
  • #107
wow..you know what they taught their daughter??
you know that they only said 'don't have sex until you are married' and nothing else?? apparently you do..

fascinating..
how did you get this personal specific knowledge?
are you a friend of the family?
a relative perhaps?
a snoopy next door neighbor?

its amazing the details people claim with such certainty that they know..

Scot

Again, Scott, in the political arena, truth is irrelevant.

PERCEPTION is everything. Why do blatantly false negative campaigns work? Two reason: 1) there are enough stupid people out there to beleive them and 2) even those who don't beleive still have a seed of doubt planted (that is, if they're undecided voters).
 
  • #108
its amazing the details people claim with such certainty that they know..

Excuse me, Scot; but, let us take a moment to look at her public views on such relevant topics, which I assume that if she believes are correct for the general public they would only be implemented in the privacy of her home.

Consider for a moment when she was asked: "Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?"

What was her answer?

"Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support."

What will find her support?

Abstinence only programs. Is this starting to sound familiar? I could be wrong, but wouldn't a safe assumption be that she practices what she preaches? So Scot, before you condemn me and others so quickly, please consider that some of us do know what we are talking about and do read occasionally.

I could cite the sources, but I couldn't decide which of the numerous news pages I should use. But, just type in to a search engine "Sarah Palin Sex Education" and you'll find some credible sources pretty quickly.

I'm sorry it wasn't obvious, but I did take some liberty in my conclusions, but they are not that unreasonable given the evidence you require. Needless to say, I was making a slight jest at the situation to highlight the larger issue of sex education and the failed policy of abstinence only. So, let me rephrase: "Obviously saying 'abstinence only until you are married' was not enough."

You're right, Scot; Palin could have had a wonderful open discussion about sex with her daughter and gone over every possible birth control method; but based on the evidence, I doubt it. She very well could have talked to her daughter about safe sexual practices and sexually transmitted diseases; but based on the evidence I doubt it. Is my logic a little more clear now?

xvart.

edit: additionally, I just have to comment on this one right here:
scottychaos said:
precisely because she is an unknown.
Or not...thats just your opinion, based on nothing.

She is an unknown. There are polls out there that confirm as much. On August 29, 71% had either never heard of Sarah Palin or did not know enough about Sarah Palin to have an opinion. -Gallup
 
Last edited:
  • #109
Everyone knows that you can talk to a kid till your blue in the face and they will not always listen. Most people know that too. I think the child being pregnant means nothing. The fact that she is not getting an abortion means a lot. Stand by what she pushed for. You cannot go back in time and force the girl not to have sex, but you can push her to keep it now that its here. But any who that is irrelevant.

I personally like the choice for VP. I could care less about the stuff going on up in Alaska with the state trooper ex-brother-in-law. There may be a reason for her to get him fired. I dunno what happened there and have not read on it.

I think it is disgraceful that someone in the democrat camp has released Sarah Palin's Social Security number and there were emails from some democrat operatives (according to someone interviewed on Fox I know I know) that by this time next week they plan to humiliate Sarah Palin and force McCain to drop her from the ticket. I think this is despicable. The Dems did something similar to another candidate where they did something under the name of the candidate to smear that candidate.

Dirty pool people dirty pool. Why not debate and go about it the right way instead you have to underhandedly try to sway the public. Ridiculous.
 
  • #110
The fact that she is not getting an abortion means a lot.

That is where I disagree because that opinion presupposes that she would have got an abortion if she was anything but "prolife;" which is definitely not that case. Aren't there more teen pregnancies than abortions, by a long shot? Isn't what she is doing pretty standard practice for the most part? That is my point.

xvart.
 
  • #111
Although Obama refuses to address the Bristol Palin pregnancy issue(and rightly so!) There are more simple conclusions to draw here.

Sarah Palin is now taking a VP job over taking care of a special needs child and a daughter who is both a minor and pregnant. Most people would tun down most opporotunities in light of this, especially the special needs child bit. So she's gonna criss cross the country on the campaign trail and nobody seems to know who's gonna take care of the kids. Don't say Dad, he's already said he's going back to work doing whatever he does. Will she take the beby with her? Will Bristol Palin just have to tough it out? Pretty tough stuff.

And let's not forget the Epic story of Trigg's birth. Sarah Palin's water breaks in Texas during a speech, instead of going to the hospital immediately, she catches a flight home to Alaska( counting the layover and refuel in Seattle, a 13 hour flight) Land in Anchorage, and has her husband drive her to a backwater hospital 45 minutes away.

So apparently she has no problem with this neglect issue. I tend to not like people like this.
 
  • #112
her daughters pregnancy is irrelevant to what her stance is on abstinence teaching or what ever....anyone that thinks different hasnt raised a teenager.........to most it really doesnt matter cause anyone with a good sized family has had to deal with the issue.....i have a huge family with 17 aunts and uncles by blood, not including their spouses....have run into this exact issue with 3 different cousins that i can think of off the top of my head......not to mention my wife had a kid her senior year of high school.....to anyone who has raised a teenager or comes from a good sized family that doesnt have their head jammed in the sand this really is a non issue....republican OR democrat......as much as i hate Obama....if it was his daughter i wouldnt care either......its a nonissue with most of America.....

as for who is voting or not voting because of her what i find most interesting is that i have personally spoke with many die hard republicans that 3 weeks ago were saying they were just going to stay home in November and not vote.....now that Palin is running as McCain's VP those same ppl have said they are headed to the polls in November to vote for McCain......dont think Palin is going to siphon off much of any Democrat votes.....but she is making a bunch of republicans that were going to sit out the election get out and vote....that could make a huge difference........

as for trying to get her ex brother in law fired.......most in Alaska didnt think she was exactly in the wrong even before she was nominated VP, i remember talking with some alaska guys about this months ago......how it happened aint exactly right but most accounts put him as a crappy trooper and an abusive husband.......does it excuse it? no but it makes the situation more understandable.......

if this is the "dirt" they have on Palin......its pretty pathetic dirt........especially compared to anyone thats spent time in DC or Chicago politics.......why is no one talking bout Obammy's half brother living in a slum in Kenya on $1 a month........seems a guy that cares so much for the middle class of the US could throw his own brother a $100 now and then.......i find that fact more interesting than Palins pregnant daughter and actaully more relevant to the election cause if i guy aint going to care for his own blood you think he will care about you?
 
  • #113
Rattler, are other people's daughter's pregnancies relevant to her stance on sex education? I'd venture to say yes. Abstinence only programs cause MORE unwanted teenage pregnancy. Her daughter is a symbol of that failed, ignorant policy - I'd venture to guess that her pregnancy was not wanted at the time. Now I fear the couple is being forced to marry to further assuage the religious right.

Palin is a disastrous VP choice, with almost no relevant experience. Her state has a total population below that of Albuquerque, our 60th largest city. Nobody had heard of her, nobody mentioned her as a choice, and the McCain camp didn't begin vetting her till the day before the announcement. That's just bad judgment.

And the facts are:
- She called for book banning in her libraries and tried to fire the librarian who resisted.
- Is under official investigation in trooper-gate, and NOT by Democratic operatives
- Supports teaching creationism in schools, which his just plain ignorant.
- Staunchly Anti-abortion
- Anti-environment, pro drilling.
- Had associations with a secessionist party which claims she was a member. Her husband was a member till 2002.
- Has extensive pork spending on her brief record, and despite dishonest claims to the contrary, was a big supporter of the "bridge to nowhere" in Alaska up till it became a national disgrace.

She is the pick of a desperate candidate, and it's not going well. I stand by my prediction she's off the ticket shortly.

Capslock
 
  • #114
and i stand by my stance yah wanna make a bet on weither she stays on the ticket?

handing out condoms to your kids can still make yah wind up with a grandkid.....it aint an issue....teenagers are going to be teenagers......i have a teenage daughter.....went through school with teenage sisters.......was a teenager myself......90% of what parents say goes in one ear and out the other.......most parents preach to their kids abstinence is better.....very small percentage listen........besides i believe it is the PARENTS job and no none elses job to teach sex ed to your kids........sure in the hell shouldnt be left up to the schools.....thats pure laziness on the parent part.......

And the facts are:
- She called for book banning in her libraries and tried to fire the librarian who resisted.
have not read up on this will look into it more tonight

- Is under official investigation in trooper-gate, and NOT by Democratic operatives
as it should be but they are making a mountain out of a mole hill

- Supports teaching creationism in schools, which his just plain ignorant.
so long as evolution is taught side by side i dont care, will encourage more critical thinking in the kids
- Staunchly Anti-abortion
so? i dont have a problem with this....McCain says he wants to revoke Row versus Wade which i agree with....McCain thinks its a state issue, not a federal one.....he aint looking to change the law in Cali or whatever.....just taking an unconstitutional ruling off the books as it should be
- Anti-environment, pro drilling.
these arent mutually exclusive, im pro drilling.....wish they would punch more hole here faster and i am a hunter that uses the land that has no money in any oil company nor do i own any mineral rights
- Had associations with a secessionist party which claims she was a member. Her husband was a member till 2002.
she is a US citizen, its her right, see the 1st amendment.... dont see any issue with it.....infact think the south was 100% fullywith in their rights in what they did
- Has extensive pork spending on her brief record, and despite dishonest claims to the contrary, was a big supporter of the "bridge to nowhere" in Alaska up till it became a national disgrace.
she also has done wonders with the Alaska budget.....actions speak louder than words
 
  • #115
All together now!

so? i dont have a problem with this....McCain says he wants to revoke Row versus Wade which i agree with....McCain thinks its a state issue, not a federal one.....he aint looking to change the law in Cali or whatever.....just taking an unconstitutional ruling off the books as it should be

hhhhuuuuuuuuuaaaaAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!
 
  • #116
Palin is not an unknown just cause you dont know her.....................she has been on my radar for the last 16 months.....where have you been? hell ive been talking bout her since the begining primaries on another site..though i often got blasted for it cause the alaskan guys on the site didnt want to loose her :D ....and the repubs aint loosing many votes cause of her.....to think that is grasping at straws.........besides she is the VP candidate....love how Obama supporters tear into HER when Obama is running against McCain.....thats interesting......she is as much of an "unknown" as Obama was when he started campaigning.........where is the issue?
 
  • #117
All together now!



hhhhuuuuuuuuuaaaaAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!

keep it up...........not against abortion as a choice.......i think its the wrong choice but i aint necessarily against someone taking at as a way out even though i could never.....however im all for unconstitutional laws being taken off the books......have said before in this thread that im a HUGE supporter of the power being in the states hands....why would it surprise you im against Roe v Wade? i dont see it as any different from medical marijuana as an issue....put it to a vote in the individual states........
 
  • #118
Obama burst onto the scene four years ago by giving a stirring speech at the Democratic National Convention. Give it a watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awQkJNVsgKM

From that moment on, I knew he'd be our next President. Until a few days ago, 70% had never heard of Palin. I'm a news junkie, and her name had never come up from any of the pundits. I actually think she's not a bad person - she has some myopic and skewed views that are the product of being in the middle of nowhere among religious evangelicals, but she seems like a real person. But not VP material, not even close. This isn't so much about Palin as it is about McCain and his judgment. He very well may die in office, so his VP candidate is very, very important. And he's picked someone woefully unequipped to handle it. And it sure reads like a cynical attempt to get women to vote for him.

And just so we're clear - it's Palin's position, and the GOP position, that abortion should be illegal, period. Not a state's issue, ILLEGAL.

And Rattler, the data is clear - provide kids sex education and contraception, and the teen pregnancy rates go down. Do abstinence-only education, and the rate goes up. It's really a no-brainer, but these are people who let religious/political dogma get in the way of reality, which is also shown in their policy on teaching creationism. They reject science, and are hostile to inquiry and reality in favor of crazy dogma. Again, these things have real-life consequences. It's time to go back to the political wing that takes reality seriously.

Capslock
 
  • #119
ah, excelent, so like the medical marijuana issue, we can allow a pro-life federal government shut down abortion clinics on a whim as we're seeing the DEA shut down dispenseries in LA. absolutely wonderful.

So a decision to expand free choice is unconstitutional? Granted, absolute freedom is evocative of anarchy, but if we have the chance to regulate things like abortion or medical marijuana responsibly then can we please, PLEASE stop inventing criminals for the sake of philosophical and moral bias?

On an unrelated note, why do you feel it is necessary to punctuate with 5-12 periods? Just curious.
 
  • #120
dude i also believe the feds have no business in drug control.....thats another state issue just like there are "dry" counties.....nothing in the constitution says individuals are not allowed to smoke flower buds from a bush......the feds have no flipping business trying to regulate it....the states do....the feds dont, trhe feds only pertain to matters of NATIONAL securityand the making sure the constitution and bill of rights are enforced....thats it....they shouldnt be in the drug control business when a good portion of the population views it as a non issue........havent yah figured out yet that im unhappy with our current guberment lock, stock and barrel? if yah havent your pretty dense

as for all the periods.......something i have always done........get used to it......your the first to bring it up and ive been here for almost 5 years.....

Caps.....still say sex ed is a parent issue, not a school issue.......the "teen pregnancy problem" is a modern invention....100 years ago you were out of the house and likely married at 16-18......physiologically we have not changed in the last 100 years......mentally we have gone backwards.....most all can be attributed to government run schools raising kids so their parents dont have to.....more and more schools are less about education and more about being a babysitter for the parents.....my sisters, bother and i all knew the alphabet(as in recognizing letters, not singing the "alphabet song" ) by the time we were 4 and were reading some by the time we hit kindergarten........now a days its easy to find a 2nd grader that cant read hardly at all.....why is that? lack of parental involvement for the most part.....

sex ed is 100% on the heads of [parents, not schools, dont give a rats arse how a parent tackles it....yes i know some ways work more than others but it aint my place to raise their kid.......
 
Back
Top