Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin

[Fat Strat]

That the majority of this discussion has relied on the talking points heard on TV and radio today or digressed into typical political argument is somewhat discouraging.

++

[tenniseleven]

is there really anything objective about politics, though?

people, myself included, are too one-sided, or too blindsided..

if things were objective this country probably wouldn't be so polarized...

[Richie Allen]

is there really anything objective about politics, though?

people, myself included, are too one-sided, or too blindsided..

if things were objective this country probably wouldn't be so polarized...

It would be a lot better if we did examine these issues more objectively. The abortion issue is a perfect example. Never has there been more insane treatment of an issue. Killing doctors. Accusations of murder and baby killers. There's a group out there that actually cheers for the idea of abortions taking place. All completely insane.

Barrack, for the first time that I remember (from a politician) has said that surely there is some middle ground where we can both concede a little a find a "solution" that both sides can take some credit for. No, not everyone will be happy but that's not possible so let's not even worry about it. But a lot more people can be satisfied and, at the same time, we can possibly eliminate a lot of unwanted pregnancies, unwanted abortions, and move one of these divisive social issues to the back burner.

No one should be "for abortions." That's not to say they shouldn't be an option. But where is the debate about the solution to prevent what's causing the need to consider an abortion or not. Is there a solution in place for teenagers to be forced to be educated further after a first abortion so that the chances of a second and third and fourth will be decreased. I have to sit through a day-long class when I exceed the speed limit by 10 MPH. Seems like there should be some similar training for someone that aborts their child. But when do we ever get that far into the debate?

[tenniseleven]

middle ground would be nice, but compromise is hard to find...

abortion is a perfect example, but you do have two sides that are having trouble finding a compromise....

it's obvious that abstinence isn't the answer, yet you still have people who think it should be...forcing it on others...
abortion itself is also not the answer as I would think any sensible person would be against it...

I'm against abortion, I just think that it's the lesser of two evils, considering that the other side of the equation has people who shouldn't be having kids struggling to raise a child that will have an extremely tough time making it out of poverty or being a socially responsible person not having any parents that care for them...

there has to be a middle ground between these two extremes....birth control seems reasonable, but even McCain is against insurance companies paying for birth control, while they pay for the pill that helps people that God doesn't want procreating (since they can't physically do it without the pill) create more children...

[Richie Allen]

middle ground would be nice, but compromise is hard to find...

abortion is a perfect example, but you do have two sides that are having trouble finding a compromise....

it's obvious that abstinence isn't the answer, yet you still have people who think it should be...forcing it on others...
abortion itself is also not the answer as I would think any sensible person would be against it...

I'm against abortion, I just think that it's the lesser of two evils, considering that the other side of the equation has people who shouldn't be having kids struggling to raise a child that will have an extremely tough time making it out of poverty or being a socially responsible person not having any parents that care for them...

there has to be a middle ground between these two extremes....birth control seems reasonable, but even McCain is against insurance companies paying for birth control, while they pay for the pill that helps people that God doesn't want procreating (since they can't physically do it without the pill) create more children...

Your points are all accurate and a good example as to why (I would argue) ALL of these issues are complex ones that deserve greater debate, as well as education of the American people. Instead, journalists are more concerned with simply pinning down a politician as to whether they are pro-life or pro-choice and whether they intend to uphold or overturn Roe v Wade.

[ghostrunner]

A few thoughts:

1. I hope the experience issue is dead, and here's why:

- The idea that the office of the President should be solely held by lawyers who went on to serve 30 years in the Senate or 4-8 years as governor has it's roots in...well, nowhere - aside from bad tradition. It's supposed to be a government of by and for the people. I would hope that means teachers, auto workers, policemen, engineers, soldiers, doctors, and lawyers can occupy higher offices if their fellow citizens think they are worthy. Smart, capable people come from everywhere. Almost no governor has foreign policy experience, and almost no Senator has executive experience. Obama and Palin deserve slack here. Some players get called up from the farm team early if they have special abilities. Decision making ability is what matters. Obama has made admirable decisions about what to do with his talent, and Palin has apparently done a lot in two short years to reverse some cronyism and corruption in Alaska. The boldness of her decisions does a lot to make up for the number of them.

- The size or importance of the state is irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. Joe Biden is from Delaware, which has about 200,000 more people than Alaska. Bill Clinton was from Arkansas.

- Dan Quayle had about 12 years of experience when he became VP. Here's to experience.

(yes, the Republicans made an issue of this over Obama. So what? It suited them, and now it doesn't. It suited Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden to call Obama inexperienced and now it doesn't. We're not nominating saints here. These are flawed people. Highly flawed in some ways, to crave this job as badly as they do. They also have some good intentions, some smarts, and probably want to do what they think is right on some level. They've made moral and ethical compromises and will continue to do so. Barack Obama mischaracterized Hillary's healthcare plan in his literature.)

2. This is a good pick for McCain, desperate or not. You could characterize Romney as desperate, or Huckabee. The fact is that McCain has very much pleased his base, while picking someone the average voter (who isn't following this everyday) can relate to. He may pick up a few women and Democrats in the process. The Democrats should be concerned. You can sniff at the pick all you like, but voters will like it and that's what McCain is trying to accomplish. She's going to excite Republicans in the same way Obama excites Democrats.

3. Palin helping businesses at the cost of the environment - there's almost no large business that doesn't harm the environment or exploit resources. Things have to come from somewhere. The south side of Indianapolis is full of businesses that pollute to varying extents. Much of the country has moved to service oriented industries, because they have that luxury and manufacturing has gone overseas. Alaska is a pretty state, but it's difficult to get to and there isn't that much tourism. What they do have is trees, rivers, oil, and wildlife. The economy depends on all those things to some extent. To expect any governor there to be successful and not cater to businesses is unrealistic. Every current Senator and congressman from Alaska is a Republican. A lot of Democrats loved Mike Gravel in the debates this year - check out his environmental record in Alaska.

[BW23]

State Senate President Lyda Green said she thought it was a joke when someone called her at 6 a.m. to tell her the news.

"She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president? said Green, a Republican from Palin's hometown of Wasilla. "Look at what she's done to this state. What would she do to the nation?"

Green, who has feuded with Palin, brought up the big oil tax increase Palin pushed through last year. She also pointed to the award of a $500 million state subsidy to a Canadian firm to pursue a natural gas pipeline that's far from guaranteed.

House Speaker John Harris, a Republican from Valdez, was also astonished at the news. He didn't want to get into the issue of her qualifications.

"She's old enough," Harris said. "She's a U.S. citizen."

http://www.adn.com/news/politics/story/510249.html

Keep digging up us much negative stuff as you can. You might convince someone. Seriously.

Anybody who says if their daughter was raped and impregnated, that she'd refuse her to get an abortion, no matter what she wanted to do, is absolutely bat [expletive] crazy. I don't need to convince everyone. Everyone will be convinced thoroughly by November.

Wait a second..

She's bat crazy because she doesn't want to kill a child?

Makes sense I guess...wow

I mean I understand that you're pro choice, and I understand that that's a horrible situation, but, why couldn't they put the child up for adoption after it was born? The kid won't know how he/she was conceived, and he/she may go on to do great things..

Sorry, but I really don't think refusing to play God is acting bat crazy

Sorry, but I think when your teenage daughter is raped and impregnated, that someone should be allowed to have a choice in what they want to do with their situation. How can you deny a person those rights? This doesn't just have to do with HER not wanting to have her daughter to have an abortion if raped, this is her not wanting ANYONE to have an abortion if they're raped and impregnated.

I really don't think that refusing people the right to make their own decisions about their own bodies is right. And if anything, I think that's playing God.

I'm with JG on this one. And Palin.

And I always love that bit about making decisions about "their own bodies". We're talking about the life of another human being. It's not like she hurt her arm.

[Numbers]

Somehow, we've been able to debate for hours over whether or not someone we know virtually nothing about was a smart choice for vice president...and we've been able to come to very few conclusions that everyone can agree on.

It's just a sounding board.

Seriously, there are a couple of conservatives on here that I have deep admiration for that I would love to ask a question of, but I don't know how to phrase and I don't even know if it's possible to explain over a bulletin board. But really there are two in particular that I think I would love to spend an evening talking these things over with - I think I would be a better person for it.

I agree with this. There is just so much that is lost in impersonal forms of communication, because it's not really conversation most of the time. While we're crafting a response to prove our point, this thread may have already moved ahead 3 pages. We, or at least I, am much more prone to hyperbole when we're not looking each other in the eye. I'm not saying that dialog can't be reached in this format, because it obviously can, it's just harder.

[Richie Allen]

I agree with this. There is just so much that is lost in impersonal forms of communication, because it's not really conversation most of the time. While we're crafting a response to prove our point, this thread may have already moved ahead 3 pages. We, or at least I, am much more prone to hyperbole when we're not looking each other in the eye. I'm not saying that dialog can't be reached in this format, because it obviously can, it's just harder.

Well, one of the most frustrating forums that I (used to) visit was one that would rack up 50 to 60 pages in a matter of an hour or two and the only time someone would respond to another post was when they took issue with it. It was like 20 to 30 people just "talking" to hear themselves speak.

[clement]

Catching up, just a few comments to add.

A candidate's experience is certainly one of the things that is legitimate to question and take into account, whether we're talking about Obama or Palin. Then it's up to each voter to ascertain whether or not a particular person's experience is sufficient to allay concerns they might have.

What is curious in this particular pick is that McCain has for the past 2 months been hammering Obama on his lack of experience more than anything else. So he has framed his whole campaign not just on his own experience, but on creating a fear in voters of what might happen if we put an underqualified person in the position of President of the most powerful nation in the world, during these very dangerous and challenging times.

So after making this argument, he chooses someone who is so obviously open to these questions, and far moreso than Obama is. Sure you can play up the fact that she's an executive or that Alaska has a lot of area or is close to Russia, but Palin herself has made many statements that not only highlight, but she actually seems to celebrate her ignorance about things as varied as Iraq to what a vice president actually does.

I realize that with candidates like Bush and now McCain, the people running the campaigns of the Republican party have effectively created an anti-intellectual mood in the electorate, that somehow a person who can sit on the front porch and have a beer with you and have a down-homey chat about hunting or the weather is more worthy of a vote than someone who is intellectual and smart, which is now framed as being "elitist" (same was done with Kerry).

One thing that has been said a few times by some of the more conservative board members is that they prefer smaller government. I can appreciate that, and in fact, I'd be surprised if anyone wants to have bigger government and wants to pay more taxes. But Republican administrations have not actually delivered smaller governments than their Democratic counterparts (they have however delivered less fiscally responsible governemments - and I'm not just talking about GWB here, though he is a very good example of it - Reagan was pretty much the same). The disagreement that we have is over what you want government to do and not do, but not the size of government.

McCain, like every Republican candidate in recent memory, is running on this mirage as well. A (fiscal) conservative columnist highlights his agreement with McCain's pro-business, small government, lower taxes rhetoric, but that the actual economic plan he is putting forth will not deliver on any of those ideals.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazi ... 0_3947.php