| re: Jim's Blog/ Mrs. Palin | |
|
Posted by: |
soonerdawg 04:28 pm UTC 09/12/08 |
| In reply to: | re: Jim's Blog/ Mrs. Palin - Leesa 11:42 pm UTC 09/11/08 |
| Obama has succeeded in making a lot of people believe that he is America's saviour. If abortion is someone's primary motivation, then obviously you would want to vote for one of the most liberal candidates of our time -- he is against protecting children who are born after a botched abortion for God's sake! His tax plan is nothing but pandering to the American people and would be dangerous to our economy if passed. Raising taxes on businesses will only increase the prices we pay for the services those businesses offer and could lead them to cut jobs. His policy of talking with the leaders of rogue nations without precondition is naive -- do we trust the sincerity and integrity of the leaders of countries such as Iran and North Korea? Has Obama proven to have the moxy to continue to apply the pressure needed to keep these regimes from acquiring nuclear weapons? Barack Obama is a man with a dream and it is time that he woke up. He is not ready to lead or keep our country safe. McCain/Palin '08 > I agree with soonerdawg to a point. Jim does have a soild > concept of the Republicans this time around. Palin is the > latest distraction meant to confuse and scramble the > Democrats and Independants. You get these fanatical, > nonsensical PUMA women that believe everything that's > uttered has to be a sexist slight since Hillary's no > longer in the finals and their disinfranchisement is > thusly justified and could well be swayed by something as > superficial as gender. Never mind that Palin is polar > opposite to everything Hillary had stood or worked for. > Don't get me wrong, I can't stand Hillary--I could never > get past the 'cootie factor'. But there comes a time when > the truth has to be faced: > > 1) There are 2 candidates and one will win. > > 2) Voting for anyone else is stupid as hell--you aren't > making a point, at best you're helping the lesser of the > evils win by default if you're lucky. Thank you Nader for > 2000... > > 3) No politician is perfect. Not how the game is played > and won. > > 4) There is so damned much at stake this time around, > namely the need for new Supreme Court justices not far > off. The Republicans get in with their 'values', you can > kiss off Roe vs Wade standing and a good chance > creationism will actually be entertained in public > schools. There's the potential to make the last 8 years > look like a walk in the fucking park. > > 5) A president's job is that of decision maker coupled > with good judgement. McCain is another Karl Rove > puppet--hell his own campaign has stated that the > 'candidate doesn't speak for the campaign'! > > 6) Obama is not perfect, but he's not a bad gamble, all > things considered, and he's a HELL of alot better than the > alternative--the ONE alternative. If you don't vote FOR > Obama at least vote against McCain and his Pain--and > that's only done by voting FOR Obama. > > Bob Barr's a joke. And it won't be a funny one when we > start losing the civil liberties we take for granted now. > Vote for him and you're as ridiculous as the damned > Republicans with no room to bitch when they get in. > There's too much to lose this time. > > LeesaJ > > > I read the blog and must say that while I was entertained, > > it made very little sense, so I have to disagree with your > > point that Jim makes sense when he talks politics. It was > > like reading a literary tantrum by a six-year-old. You ask > > whether McCain should be respected because of his war > > record -- I ask if Obama should be respected by his own > > lack of a record. By the way, yes, McCain should be > > respected for his wartime service, but that doesn't mean > > he is qualified for President. He served honorably and > > deserves that recognition. > > > > > I urge everyone to take the time to read Jim's latest blog > > > about the Republicans. He makes great sense whenever he > > > discusses politics. Because I agree with a lot of what Jim > > > says, I am sorry to report that the British press has gone > > > potty for Mrs. Palin. The Times is a serious newspaper and > > > they gave two pages to three political critics, so that > > > readers could compare their expert opinions about her > > > convention speech. All three critics thought she gave a > > > wonderful speech. They didn't necessarily agree with all > > > her points but they were not judging her beliefs, if you > > > see what I mean. Then another page in the same issue was > > > given to a lady from America who wrote that the liberals > > > who made fun of Mrs. Palin's clothes and general attitude > > > are seriously out of touch with the average American. Mrs. > > > Palin was completely unknown in the UK and now she is > > > famous. More than McCain. It's like McCain is the VP > > > candidate. One of the political critics said the pitbull - > > > hockey mom - lipstick remark was the best line a > > > politician has come up with for decades. I am vegetarian, > > > so I don't like the picture of her with the dead moose > > > that she killed but she has really started something. > > > There is no getting away from it. But what about McCain? > > > How did a war hero go from Mr. Impressive to a shy old man > > > who can't forcefully make a point? Should one respect him > > > for his military record? That and Mrs. Palin seem to be > > > the two things that might get him elected. I worry that > > > they are going to pick up the working class voters who > > > were going to vote for Hillary. I am disappointed that Mr. > > > Obama didn't pick her as his running mate but I guess that > > > would have been too complicated. Oh well, at least I can > > > admire Jim's blog. > > > | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Jim's Blog/ Mrs. Palin - Leesa 11:42 pm UTC 09/11/08 |
| Next: | re: Jim's Blog/ Mrs. Palin - Pudding 07:51 pm UTC 09/12/08 |
| Thread: |
|